Many problems in pinpointing the issue have arisen just because of the unclear terminology. For instance, M. B. Hamilton shows us six examples of how secularization can be understood. Just to illustrate the topic, the secularization can be viewed in example as a ‘disengagement of society from religion’, fact that ‘The world loses its sacred character as man and nature become the object of rational-casual explanation and manipulation in which the supernatural plays no part’ or a ‘movement from a ‘sacred’ to a “secular’ society in the sense of abandonment of any commitment to traditional values and practices’ etc. (1995, p. 166-167) Because of this misunderstandings, it is not certain whether secularization even occurs. Arguments belonging to this kind involves, for instance, a claim that we have a false view about the past times (they were no more religious than nowadays because only minority of people – elite – were really believing people) and religion is as unpopular as it used to was (Martin, 1978). However, it should be mentioned that people arguing so miss out something important by rejecting to accept this term. It can be easily seen that there are measurable ongoing processes considering a constant loss of interest in religion in European societies (in surveys 13.5% of British people are members of the Church of England, while in Poland – around 90% are members of Roman Catholic Church). For that reason it is hard not to make an assumption that there is such a thing as secularization of the society.
Focusing on the methods of measuring this unclear process, some different ways of doing that can be mentioned. Steve Bruce argues that it should be done in most empirical way it is possible. For him, ‘we are concerned with the changing popularity and place of certain beliefs and types of behaviour’ and ‘we are not in the business of judging the quality of those beliefs and actions or the sincerity of those who adhere to them’ (1996, p. 25-26).What he means by this is that secularization can be considered for example in terms of statistically measurable behaviours (like per cent of mass attendance). The second idea comes from Wilson. He focuses on how religion is important in society by defining secularization as ‘the process whereby religious thinking, practice and institutions lose social significance’ (1966, p.14). Here can be mentioned data considering religious influence in politics. It is obviously much harder to measure and there is an ongoing discussion how to do it. Davie shows us the most uncertain but also most direct (it measures religiosity, not the signs of it) form of looking into how religious people are, and that includes subjective dispositions. She also mentions the division between those measurements that are taking into account feelings or personal thoughts (i.e. how much people know about their religion) and which are about orthodoxy (i.e. how people participate) (2000).
As it has been already said, in Nietzsche's point of view, God has been killed by people. But how have they done that? Generally speaking, by changing the mentality. There are some problems for contemporary religion that modern world makes it to face. The most basic one is this: How can religion exist without a God. Nietzsche would probably agree that there is no incoherence in that. He noticed that people do not need God because in our times religion is very little about God himself. There has been a turn from the religion focused on God to the religion focused on the human being. And that is the basis for the one of the problems mentioned. Although Nietzsche lived in 19th century, what he said would precisely characterize the so-called New Age religions. People tend to pay more attention to their present lives than those after death. They need to feel better, be happier, but also to believe in something. And there are New Age religions to answer those needs. Not only they are much less organised, but also involves freely choosing activities one wishes to perform. The same can be said about a consumer culture and its influence on the religions which effects in them being divided into elements one can choose from. It is also much more comfortable to do what one sees as appropriate than what one has to do. Because of this a consumer culture can also be a challenge for contemporary religion. The last problem for that has to be mentioned is science. They have always been competing with each other for which of the sides is right. However, there has been a raise of science recently and because of that it is rather impossible for the situation similar to the Galileo’s to happen again nowadays, which would suggest that religion has indeed a weaker position in Western society than it had in 16th century.
As long as data taking society into account is under the consideration, it seems that it indeed confirms the thesis that we do live a secular society. However, most of the people declare that they believe in something supernatural (regardless of what it is) and thus it cannot be said that religion is in complete decline. It just has moved to the personal level and every one of us decides on their own how important it is for themselves. Still, if we are answering the question whether God is dead, and as it has been stated above it refers to the overall society, we are likely to say: Yes, God is (still?) dead.
References
Nietzsche, F. 1974, The Gay Science; with a prelude in rhymes and an appendix of songs. New York: Vintage Books.
Nietzsche, F. 1896. Thus Spoke Zarathustra: a book for all and none. London.
Hamilton, M. B. 1995. ‘Secularisation’, p. 165-182, The Sociology of Religion. London: Routledge.
Wilson, B. 1966. Religion in Secular Society. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Martin, D. A. 1978. A General Theory of Secularization. Oxford: Blackwell.
Bruce, S. 1996. Religion in The Modern World: From Cathedrals to Cults. New York: Oxford University Press.
Davie, G. 2000. Religion in Modern Europe: A Memory Mutates. New York: Oxford University Press.
