One Answer

  1. Category: if you ask a good question, you'll get a good answer.

    The term modality of the sacred was coined, as far as I know, by the Romanian historian of religions, anthropologist Mircea Eliade. To begin with, let's break down this concept. Actually, it consists of two parts: modality and sacred. Let's deal with the first one.

    Modality in linguistics means perception. Any text or utterance includes two parts: content and evaluation. In other words, in the statement “a brick fell on your head” there is a factual side (you were really told this or it happened) and your perception of it (why it fell, whether the victim was guilty or a bad person).�

    The term sacred in sociology and other sciences – in a broad sense – means everything that has to do with religion, the divine. It opposes the profane. Sociologists define the sacred in different ways. In particular, Durkheim, the founder of the French school, wrote about the sacred as a taboo, reflecting social reality. The sacred (read sacred) cannot be touched, comprehended, rationalized, or questioned. Society was based on religious prohibitions. In the process of developing science, technology, and philosophy, we began to “disenchant” the world. We understand the system of social norms, we have the right, we no longer need the sacralization of some things in order to follow the rules.

    Thus, the modality of the sacred is our perception of the sacred, one of the innumerable varieties of the sacred experience experienced or experienced by a person. A divine revelation or ritual (such as baptism or the Eucharist) can cause us delight, disgust, persistent rejection or misunderstanding, and sometimes even fear. I will not give examples, so as not to run into an article about insulting feelings. In addition, Eliade says that through understanding the modality of the sacred, we can imagine the context of the era, study society.

Leave a Reply