Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Pluralism
andthe
Crisis
of Meaning
The Orientationof ModernMan
PeterL. Berger
ThomasLuckmann
Bertelsmann
FoundationPublishers
Gtersloh1995
cIP-Fiihcns!!liJD!
01995tsedelsmrtrd
hridanon
Edio. Dr
.itersloh
ndtrr Ktrhlmrnn
B,elercld
Contents
lletner lYeidenleld
Preface
PeterL. Betger,TbomasLuchmann
Modernity,pluralismandthe crisisof meaningwhat basichumanneedsof oricntation
m u sbt es a t i s f i e d l
............9
1. The foundationsof the meaningfulness
o f h n ml ai fne
............9
2. The meaningfuhre*
ol .ocialrelrtion<hips.
the concurrence
of meaningandthe
g e n e rcaol n d i t i of on rsc r i s eo sf n r e a n i n .g. . . . . . . . . . 1 8
3 . M o d e r n i at yn dt h ec r i s iosf m e a n i n g
4 . T h el o s os f t h et a k e n - f o r - g r a n t e d
......28
........40
5. Flabituatedmeaningandcrisesof rneaning . . . . . . . . . . 49
6. How societies
dealwith criscsof meaning:
illusionsandpossibilities
7 .O u t l o o k
57
.......64
The authors
71
The project
73
3
Preface
nomy andscience.
Interactionbetweentheselevelsand communities
is beingregulatedby intermediaryinstitutions,mediacommunication and moralizingstatements
in everydaylife. It will needfurther
enquiryto establishdefinitcknowledgeon which institutionsareeffectivein this respectandhow they performtheir task.The resultof
such a study can be evidenceon the possibilityto counteracr
centripetaltendencies
in society.
Prof.Dr. Verner \eidenfeld
Memberof the Boardof the
Bertelsmann
Foundation
1. The foundations
ofhumanlife
ofthe meaningfulness
It is not apparentwhethertalk aboutthe crisisof meaningin today's
world really corresponds
to a new form of disorientationin the life
of modernpcopLe.
Could it be that wc are merelyhearingthe Latest
repetitionof an old lament?Is ir the complaint*'hich cxpresses
the
feeLingof distresswhich has againand againafflictedhumanity in
the faceof a worid becomeunstcady?Is this thc old lament,that
hurnanlife ls a life to*'ardsdcath?ls this the voiceof doubt,that this
life couldfind its meaningin a transcendent
history of salvationlOr
is this despcrationaboutthe lack of sucha meaningl\Vc are distant
in time from thc book of the Ecclcsiastes
('everythingis noughtl
everything
is in vainl")but not distantfrom the spiritof thc Chroni
cle of BishopC)tto von Frcisingwritten more than 850 ycarsago:
"ln alL,wc are so depressed
by thc mcmory of thingspast,the pres'
surc of thc presentand the fearof futurevicissitudes
that we accept
the sentenceof deaththat is in rrsand rnay becometired of lifc itself."It is evenfurther and all thc sanlenot so far betwecnthe conceptionsof human fate in history from Thucydidesto Alben
Camus.
On t,hat basisaremodern(andpost-modern)
criticsof presentday
societyand culture convincedthat the crisisof our tirnesis fundamentally different from aLlpast mkeries?Theseobservershardly
startfrom the assumption
that thcrehasbeena radicalchangein the
humancondition,the conditiohumana.Ratherthey seemto suspect
a new socialconstitutior of the meaningof human life in modernity, which hasthrown meaning,and with it humanlife, into a his'
torically uniquecrisis.SuchspecLations
are powerfully suggestive
and may appearconvincing,that doesnot mean,however,that they
will actually stand up to cmpiricaLinvestigation.Contemporary
sociologicalanalysistendsfar too easily!o assumethe existence
of
somethinglike meaningand meaningfulness
as fiotive of human
actionandasa backdropagainstwhich the moderncrisisof meaning
is apparcnt.It is, therefore,necessary
to beginwith sonreanthropologicalpreliminaries.They shallseekto identify the generalconditions and basicstructuresof mexningfulhuman life. Only in this
way is it possibleto improveour understanding
of chengesin particularstructures
of meaning.
Meaningis constitutedin humanconsciousness:
in the conscious
nessof the individual,who is individuatedin a body and who has
beensocializedasa person.Consciousness,
individuation,the specificity of the body, societyand the historico'socialconstitutionof
pcrsonalidentity are charactristics
of our species,the phylo- and
ontogenesis
of which need not be considered-Flowever,we will
proviclea short sketchof the generaL
performances
of consciousness
from which the multi-layeredmeaningfulness
of experience
and action in humanlife is built up.
Conscior.rsncss
takenin itself is nothing;it is alwaysconsciousness
ofsomething.It existsonly in so far asit directsits attntiontowerds
an object,towerdsa goal.This intentionalobjectis constitutedby
the varioussyntheticachievements
of consciousness
and appearsin
qherher
structure.
its gcner;l
it bc perception.
memoryor imagi
nation:aroundthe core,the theme' of the intentionalobject,
extendsa thematicfield that is delimitedby an open horizon.This
10
and take it to my lovcd one!").In this processmultiple types("A1pine flower","lovedone') are integratecl
into a processual
scheme
('pick n and takeit to') and fusedinto a more complex,but still
everydayunit of meening.If finrlly this project is not simply put
into action becauseit confiicts with a morally founded maxim
("don't pick itl rare flowerl"), then a decisionis arrived at and a
higherlevelmeaningis constitutedthroughthe scquential
evaiuation
values
of
andintcrcsts.
'l
his examplealreadyindicatesthe doublemeaningof 'acting"and
"action".Th meaning
of the currentact is constitutedprospectively. A completcdactionis meaningfulin retrospect.Action is guided
by a viewto a prcconceived
aim.Thisdesign
is a utopiain whichthe
actor anticipatesa future stete,assesscs
its desirabilityand urgency
and considersthe stepswhich will bring it about - insofaras the
process
is not fanriliarthroughearliersimilaractionsand hasnot
bccomea habit.'Iherneaning
ofthc acions,"in the acr",is constitutedby their rclationto the goal.The completed
acion, wherher
successful
or not but alsothe actionprojectedascomplete- can
be comparedto other actions,can be undersroodasthe fulfillment
of maxims,can be explainedand justifiedesrhe executionof laws,
canbc excused
asdefyinga norm,canbedeniedto othersandin the
limit alsoto oneself.l he doublemeaning
andthe complexstructure
of meaningare characteristic
of all action but in day-to-dayroutine
!he chxracteristics
may appearblurred.
Socialaction,of course,sharesrhis structureof meaningbut acquiresadditionalcharacteristic
dimensions:it can be indirect or direct,it can be mutualor unilateral.Socialactioncan be directedtowardsother pcoplepresentor absent,deador unborn.It canseekto
address
them in their individuality,or associaltypesof differentdegreesof anonynrity,or nrerclyassocialcategories.
It can be directed
towardsobtaininga response
or nor - theremay,or may not be,an
answer.It can bc intendedasuniqueor may aim to achieveregular
repetitionor to be prolongedthrough time. The complexmeaning
l2
ll
'lhe
and action,
subjective"solutions'for problenrsof experience
"primary"
thc
objcctificationsof rreeningrvhich becameintersuLrjcctivcly retrievablethrough conrrnunication
with othcrsare social_
"paths"\ir'hichhave varied enormously
ly processed
on different
"secondary'processes
acrosshistory. In institutionaLlycontrollerl
asin
otherthingsarediscarded
muchis ignoredastoo insignificant;
appropriateor even dangerous.A part of the objectificationsof
are nerely storedaway,dlose
nrcanig drawn on for processing
*'hich arejudgedto be adequate
right
are givena form of ordcr,
or
lhc hier
vhilc certainelements
ac<lirethe funcrionof examples.
thuscreated nraybe closearchiesof knowledgeandvaluesystems
- as in the premodernworld - or may develop
Iy intcrconnccted
inrlcpcndentlyof one anodrer.llurthermore, those elemcntsof
nrcaningand systemsof rneaningwhich are retainedare cut into a
There have
shapesuitablefor transmissionto futurc generations.
for this function in all but the rnostsimplesocieties.
bccnspeciaLists
canonitrainedexpertstakc on thc functionof censorship,
SpeciaLly
zation,systenatization
andpedagogy.
As the overallresulrof all of theseactivitiesthereeflergesthe specific historicalstructureof thc social reservoirof meaning.This
structurcis characterized
by the proportion betweenthat which is
anrl
acccssible
to all membersof the societyas generalknr-'wledge
js
knowledgeto which cccss limited.The portion of
that specialist
thc reservoiro{ meaningwhich is gencralknowledgeforms the kernel of everydaycommon scnsewrth which the individualhas to
'lhis
copc rvith the natural xnd sociel environmentof the time.
portion doesnot havean o"erarchingsystematicstructure.Neverit is not withoutstructure:
it contains
areas
of neaningwhich
thclcss
and
mapthe regionsof day to day realitythet haveto be managed
-hich plumsextraordinary
reality.Somc
anothcrregionof meaning
of
structure
than
of theseareasof rneaningacquirea grcatcrdcgree
those limjted to the practicalroutines of everydaylife through
imports fron systemsof specialknc'wlcdgc.The everydayof mod'imports': massmedia
ern socicticsis increasinglyshrpcclby such
of mean_
coDtrolof the productionof mcaningandthe transmission
otherthn
haveexisted
in almostall socicties
ing.Suchinstitutions
the
earlymo'
societies
of
thc archaic.In dre old high culturcs,in the
dcrn period and latcr (e.g. in todaysIran) rcLigiousmoral instittr
tions havebcencloscLytied to thc apparatusof domination They
at both the productionand distri'
coLrldaim relativelysuccessfully
If however
hierarchyof meaning.
butionof a relativclyconsistent
meaning
of
social
bothof production
anddistribution
theconditions
consequcnces
approximatcro an opcn market,this hasconsidcrable
'nreaning
of
for the
budget'.In that casea nunrbcrof suPPliers
with
is
confronted
favor
c,f
a
public
that
mcaningcompctcfor the
the clifficultyof choosingthe nrostsuitablemeaningfrom the wcalth
Wc shallrenrrnto thislater.
of me:nings
available.
meaning
havethetaskof storingandmakinga"ailable
Institutions
for the actionsof the individualboth in particularsituationsand for
en e[tire conductof lifc. This functionof institutionsis howevercs
scntiallyrelatedto tire rolc of dre individualasa consumerbut also
f i o n l * e ' o . , r r r . : p r o d uc, r o f l r c a n i n 6 .
sosimplcLnboth archaic
This relationship
canbe comparatively
cieticsand in mosttraditionalhigh cultures.In suchcivilizationsthe
withoutmajor
of actions
is integratcd
mcaning
of indivrrhraLsphcres
ruptures*ith thc o"erall meaningof life conductandthis is itselfrc
of
fcrredto a rclativelycoherentvaluesystcm.The conrmunication
rneaningis joincd to thc control of the productionof mcanirg.Ildu
cation or direct incloctrinationsccksto ensurethat the lndividual
only thinks and doeswhat conforns to the basicnorms of thc soof everythingthat is pubLicly
cicty. And thc corrtroland censorship
said,taughtor preachcdaimsto preventthe diffusionof dissidcnt
is auoided
or eliminated
competition
opinion.lnternalandexternal
l he |re:rningo{ actionsandlife conductis
(not alwayssucccssfullyl).
the rcrule brndingon all. For examPle,
irlposedasa unquestioncd
lationshipof marricd couplesand the relationshipof parentsto
Parentsand childrengenerally
childrcnis defincdunambiguously.
conform;devianccis clearlydefincdasdcviancefrom thc norn.
17
2. Thc meaningfulness
of socialrelationships,
the concurrenceof meaningand the general
conditionsfor crisesof meaning
Sociallyobjcctifiedandprocesscd
stocksof meaningare "preserved"
in historicalreservoirsof mcaningand "administered"by institutions.The actionsof the individualareshapedby objectivemeaning
suppliedfrom socialstocksof knorvledgeandcommunicated
by the
pressurefor compliancewhich emanates
from institutions.In this
process,
objectificdmeaningis constantlyin interactionwith subjectively constitutcdmeaningand individualprojects{or acion. IIowever,nreaningcan alsobe ascribed- one might evensay,aboveall
- to the intcr'subjcctivestructureof socialrelationsin which thc
individualac* andlives.
From the very beginninga child is incorporatedinto sociaLrelationships:with its parentsand with other significantpersons.These
relationships
deveiopin regular,dircct and reciprocalactions.Strictl8
ly, an infant is not capableof action in the full meening of the word.
As an individuated organism i! has, however, the bodily and conwhich it employsin
inherentto thc human species
sciouscapacitics
its behaviortowards others.'Ihc actionsof others relativeto the
child are thcmseiveslargely dctennined by schemesof experience
and action that are drawn frotr s<xicty's reservoir of nrcaning l'he
chilcl progrcssivelylearns to comprchcnd the actions of its counterparts and to understandthcir meaning.Thus jt is able to understand
their actions as typical actions in thc light of historically given PF
terns of expcrienceand action.The child placesitself in rclationto
developsits
socialstocksof meaning.In the proccssit progresslvely
personal iclcntity. As soon as it understandsthe meaning of its
actions,it alrc understandsthat in principle it is held rcsponsiblefor
its own actions.Ancl that is what constitutesthe essenceof personal
identity: subjcctive control of action for which one is objectivcly
responsible.
Let us inragincfor this basicsituationof the communicationof
meaning ts o variants drawn as stylized ideal types. Let us flrst assume rhat there is a 'alue system valid for all of society with which
the variors layers of the historical reservoir of meaning are well
coordinatcd. Let us furthcr assumcthat the parents and the other
important pcrsonalrclations o{ drc child have formed their pcrsonal
identities according to the patterns in the historical reservoir of
meaning. ln such a casethe bchavior of the child is mirrored contruently in thc actionsof the others.lf it knocksa plateoff the tablc
then it wlll not be rewarded by a smiLefrom one parent and pun
ished by thr: other with an angry glancc. Under such conditions the
identity of thc child will develop normally without special diffi'
"crises
of meaning" - in the smc manncr as the
culties - ler alonc
identity of the parents was forrned: in concordancewith the biographical catcgoriesand the value systcm of society's reservoir of
meaning.
For our sccondcaselet us assume,on the contrary, thxt there is no
generally binding value syste'n, no adapted reservoir of meaning
t9
2l
strength can be endangcredlater Lry persistent,systematlcLrlconsrstency in the rcflection of its actionsin the actionsof others
F u r l . . r n r r r . , w e h a ' e . e c nr h r r r r r r d c,re r t an i r c u n . r , r nc,. i n t e r _
subjecrivecriscs of meaning may occur. For different forms of
community of life different typicaLmcasuresof coherenceare to be
expected- and thesediffcr from society to society and from period
to period. 1hc condition for a crisis of meaning is that the mcnbers
of a particular life-community acceptunqestioningly thc degreeof
coincidenccof neaning expectetlof them, but are unableto match
"is'
'should"
and
between
it. ^s was alreadystatcd,this discrcpancy
a life community insistthat
appearsparticularlyoften lf the idcals<-rf
r r < h o u 1Id' e. r. u n ' p l e r .c o n r m u n r ruvl n r c ; n i n g .
ivc crr'c. ol meaningoicrrren nra-e in
li 'ubjc.ti' < andrnter-'ubje.,
a society so th:rt thcy develop into a gcneral social problem, then
one will hauc to seekthe causenot in the subjectitself nor in the
given inter-subjectivity of human existence.It is rather to be expected that the causesarc !o be found in thc socil structure itself
Let us, therefore,cnquirewhich partlcularstructuresof a historical
society counteract the dcvelopment of crisesof nre:rningand which
encouragcsuch a development. More precisely:what are the structural conditions for a sufficient dcgree of coincidcnce in inter-subjective reflectionssuch that rhe foundation for the formation of per'
sonal idcntity *ith constant merlrngis givenl \(hen do these processescreate subjective criscs ol mcaningl And which structural
coincidcnceof
conditionspromote and which hindcr the sufFicient
n f l r f Fc o m m u n i l i et(e ' r \ t ; n rI u
' o c r a rl e l . r r ' r n r t h rrr. h e l o u n d . r t ' " o
crisis?
\(e will attempt to answerthescquestionsin concretetcrms in the
light of thc historical developmcnt of nodcrn society. Flowever, we
wish to prcccdc this attempt with a fcw abstract,gencral considerx
tions. For it is possible- despitethe prxctically endlcssmultiPlicit/
and importance of differcnces between societies- to identify with respectto our qr.lestionabout the structural conditions for the
23
cnrergcnce
of crisisof meaning- trvo basictypesof socialstructure
acrossall cpoches'l
he first type not particularlysusceptible
to crisesof merningare
socicties
which havea singleandgenerallybindingvaluesysterninto
which the differentlayersand rcalmsof rncaningarewell intcgrxrcd:
from cveryclayschemes
of expericnceand action to the superordinate categoriesof lifc conduct and crisis managerncntdirected
tovards extraordinaryrealiries.l he totaLstockof meaningis stored
andmanaged
in socialinstrtutions.
Because
the schemes
of actionobjcctifiedand mademandatoryin
social institutions are directedtowards a common value system
superordinate
to the specificnreaningit is assured
in this type of socicty that the institutionssustainthc order of mcaningin basicconcordancewith practicallife. lhcy do this directly and,so to speak,
in dctail,by imprinting thenlsclves
or1thc meaningof many day to
day actions;thcy do this,so to spcak,in the largeby identifyingbiographicalcategories
of meaningwith communitiesof life, in particular thoses4richareentrusted
wirh forrningthe personal
identityof
. L r l d r cB
n r o r u r ni ngr on r e n r b cor f. . o c i c r y .
Differcntsocieties
correspond
to this basictypeto differentextents.
Archaicsocieties
correspondlrost truely to this type. The complcx,
ancicnthigh culturesare slightlylessclosc,but essential
characeristics of this type are to be found cvenin the premodernsocieries
of
modern times. Like all other societiesthesesocietieshave nrany
organizational
problemsandtheir membershaveeverylife problem
inraginable:
in dealingwith nature,work, domination,life and
death.Naturallythereare alsoqucslonsof meaningfor the individual.But thesecomparatively
stable,often evenstaticsocicries
communicatean order of meaningwhich is consistentto a large
extent through congruentprocesscs
of sociaiizationand thc irxtitutionalizationof action.Thcseproccsses
are locatedin meaningfully rclatedlife communitiesancldiffcrcnt socialspaces.
This basic
type may be simplifiedas an ideal type, howeversocieticswhose
structureevenapproximates
to this type provideno groundfor the
24
tiple, courpctingsystems.Because
evenin this casereligiorrsinstitutionstransmitthe higherordcrcategories
capable
of givingmeaning
to the entircconductof Life,but evenwithout competition
from
othcr valucsystensthesec:tetoriesmay not be madcbindingand
may not be inposed on the conductof people.Overall,the institutions of tilis type of societyno longercarry a well-orderedsrockof
meaningand value consistendyand bindingly into thc practiceof
life.
A socicty is rnthinkable entirely without common valuesand
sharedinterpretations
of reality.Vhat is the natureof valuesin
sucha type of society,obvrouslytendingtowardsthe modern,and
wherc are they to be found) It is certainthat the scheDres
of action
institutionalizedin the differentfunctionalsphereshavea binding
anclobjcctivemeaningfor thoseactingin them.In the organization
of action within a singlespherethere is definitelya communityof
meaning.1'harhoweveris not much by way of commonalties.
The
objectivemeaningof institutionalizedschemesof :rctionis instrumentallyorientatedtowardsthe functionof this area.Apart from its
generalizable
aspectas instrumentallyrariofialthis institutionalized
schemeof action cannot be transferredbetweensphercsand it
certainly cannot be integrated into superordinateschenresof
meaning.lhe objectivemeaningof acrioncannorin itself be integratedinto ctegoriesrefrringto rhe subjectand simultaneously
directcdtowardsa superordinate
valuesystem.Only rcligiousand
'quasi'
religiousinstitutionscommunicate
categories
of meaning
with sucha claimro generality.This claimis howeverrefutedby the
objcctive
meaning
of the schemes
of actionof the other "big"insti'lhese
tutions.
meaningsdirecr t[e adion of the individualin most
arcasof daily lifc, whether rhey conform ro the superordinate
meaningsof schemes
of life cornnrunicared,
for cxampleby religious
institutions,or not. The clai to integrateones own life into a
superordinatcvalue systemcan be realizedessentiallyonly in a
spherenot touchedby the othcr 'big'institutions,
in a spheresocialiydefinedasthe privatesphere'.
26
in the
in a societyis contained
A minimumof sharedmeanings
"firnctic,ning
of functions',ie. the
givento the
teneralagrccment
agreementthat in eachareaof action condud shouldbe directed
towards instrumcntallyrational requircments.Ancl this minimal
that in the Private
is sccuredby the generlccePtance
consensus
reservesof individual existenccand comnlunitiesof life separate
meaningsof Lifemay be pursucd,distinctfrom thoseof other indi
vidualsand groups.This minimum may be cxceedcdeven in this
"big" institutions
typc of societics.First, it is remarkablethat the
bind their spccific meanings- beyond the rationality of the
organizationof actionwithin thenr to generalvalucs,suchasfor
"drc
in thisway
interest".
I-xceeding
the mininlLrm
example general
ol
while
the
schemes
may fulfill abo"e all legitimatelypurposes
action thenxclvcsmay remain untouched.Furthermore,secondly,
andcomrnunities
of meaningmay attenPtto difcct their
individr.rals
'big' institution
action evcn within a sphereadnrinistcredby a
"values' going beyond its instrumentally
towards supcrordinate
rationalobjectivcmeaning.llowevcr, this canoccuronly in conflict
with the specificinstrumentalrationality.
'fhe
valuesfor
attenrptsby institutionsto connctto suPerordinatc
valueand
vapid
fonnLriac
may
prodrrcc
only
lcgitimatorypurposes
orientatedconductof life may bc limited to the reserveof the private.This would add to the conditionsfor the spreadof subjective
However,this alsocreates,
anrlinter-subjectivc
crisesof nrcaning.
the precondrtionsfor somethingclse,nanely the
simultaneously,
of valuesystems
of differentvaluesystemsanclfragments
coexistence
of quite different
in the sanresocietyand thus the parallelexistence
communitiesof meaning.The statewhich resultsfronr thsepreconditionscan be calledpluralism.If it itself becomesa suPerordi
natevaluefor a socictywe may speakof modernplLrralism
27
questionable
whctherfundamentalist
attemptsin rhe countriesofthe
so calledThird Vorld will be more successlul
regardless
of the intensiry rvuh *'hrch overarchingand universallybinding stocksof
meaningaredefended
today.
It hasbeennotcd that suchconditionspronrotethe spreadof subjectiveand intcr-subjective
crisesof meaning.ut while someconditionsaccelerate
suchcrisesthereare otherswhich hinderthem.The
palc superordinate
valuesof modernpluralismdo not havethis
power.They nrayhaveother usefuleffectsin that they promotethe
peacefulcoexistence
of diffcrent forms of life and value systems.
lhey are,howevcr,not suitableto dircctly counteractthe spreadof
crisesof meaning.They tell the inclividualhow to behavetowards
other peopleand groupswho differ in their view of life. They do
not, however,tell one how one shouldleadonc'slife when the unquestioned
validity of the traditionalorder is shaken.That may be
achievedby diffcrentmeans.As the degreeto which sociallyvalid
conditioningof sharedinterpretationsol reality decreases
different
communitiesof life candevelopincreasingly
into quasi-autononrous
comnunitiesof meaning.insofarasthesecommunitiesproverhemselvesrelativelystablethey may preservetheir nrembersfrom crises
of meaning.Stabilityis particularlyimportantfor the role playedby
suchlife communitiesin the coherentformationof personalidentity
of children grorvingup in them, who may thereby be protected
from subjective
crisesof meaning.
Concretecommunities
of life as
qasr'autonomous
conmunitiesof nreaning,andnrorestable,"pure"
conrmurniticsof like minded peoplc (Gesinnungsgemeinschaften)
counteractthe pa demicspreadof crisesof meaning.However,they
cannottranscend
the preconditions
which prornotethe spreadoF
cnscsof meaninganchoredstructurally in modern society.Iiurthemore, to rcpeatthis point, communitiesof ljfe nr which the dis,
crepncybetweenthe expectcdand factualcommunityof mcaning
is too greatcan themselves
becomethe trigger for inter-subjective
crises
ofmeaning.
This dialecticalrelationshipbctweenthe lossof meaningand the
30
andits
the erosionof nrcaning
nev creation
of nreaning
or between
'lhis
of
religion.
can
most
be
observed
in
the
case
rebuilding
clcarly
pattern
is, in any case,thr: mostimportantform of a comprehensive
rich
in
mean_
of experiencc
and values,systematically
structurcdand
ing. For the largestpart of humanhistory a societywasunthinkable
without a single rcligion encompassing
everythingand everyone
'lhc
verc
nanrrallyalso nry own gods;my
godsof nry ancestors
godswerenaturallyaLsothe godsof all the membersof my tribe or
wcre like this. Acrosslong periods
ry town. Most archaicsocieties
of time high culnrreswith rnany differentiatedsocialinstitutions
his or
the individual,
wcrelikethisaswcll.Thenthisunitybetween
in
the
orhighest
authority
hersocietyandthegods,embodying
thc
dcr of vaiue,rvasshakenin diffcrcntpiacesand at diflerenttypesby
religiousschisms.This happenedlong beforethe beginningof modernity,asfor exarnplein the exodusof lsraelfrom the unifiedsym
bolic order of the MiddleEast,or evenmore radicallyin the separaantiquity.
tion of Christianityfrom the symbolicorder of classical
After suchschisnrs
therewere rcpeatedattemptsto restorea super
ordinatesysremof oreaningon a new basis,perhapsof a smaller
scope("subculture'insteadof culturc)- asin the unity of the tribe
of Israclwith its God or in the constantsearchfor thc unity of the
Christianchurch.
Vith the conceptof Christendomin the Europeanmiddleagesan
anemptwasmadeto irring togetherall the peoplein a certrin space
of power under a single,common and superordinatesystemol
meaning,and to h,-,ldthcm there.\Vc know that this attemPtwas
neverentircly successful.
\ithin Christendomnrinoritiespreserved
their specialsymbolicsysterls-Jews, heretics,cultsderivingfrom a
paganpart.At ti'res thc symbolicunity of Christendomwasbroke
up from without(lslam)or from within (GreekOrthodoxy,AlbinIt wasmostseverelyshakcnby the Rcformation-The congensians).
of thn quakewerenot intended,for the reformerswanted
sequences
to restoreand prcscrvea uni{iedChristendomon r ncw basis.The
schismof thc church foiled this attempt at thc Europeanlevel.
l1
communiticsof convictiontranscending
spacc(e.g. through comprchcnsiveideologies)
and from drcsestocksof meaningthe shared
nreanings
of smallercoolmunitiesmxy be derived.Despitethis pos
sibility the overalldeuelopmcntcngenders,
aboveall, a greatdegree
of insecurity;both in the orientationof individualactionsand the
entiredirection
of l;fe.
from
Nevertheless,
it 'ould bemislcading
to drawtheconclusion,
crisesof
this alone,that nrodernsocieties
sufferfrom comprehensive
rneaning.Therearestill peoplewho cvenundertheseconditionsare
ableto establisha meaningfulrelationshipbetweenthe experiences
of thcir own livesandthe variousinterpretivepossibilities
offcredto
them and who are thereforeable to conducttheir lives relatively
meaningfully.Furthertrore,there are the institntions,sub-cultures
values
and communitiesof convictiol wirich transporttranscendent
and stocksof mcaninginto concretesocialrelationshipsand life
conrmunities
of modernsocicty
andsupportrhenrthere.The succcss
beyondthcse"islands
of meaning"is duc to a legalization
of the
"old
rules of social iife and its
fashionednrorality", lurthermore
through the formal moralizationof certainmore or lessprofessionalizcdsphercsof action-Legalizationmeansthat the functionaLsystem is rcgulatcdby abstractnonns,fixed in writing and bindingon
ali membersof a society.Moralizationis an attemptto solveconcrcte cthical qucstionsthat appearin individualspheresof action.
|or example,in the USA academicdisciplinessuch as "mcdical
etirics' or "business
ethics' havecmerged.Legalizationignoresthe
differentvaluesystenrsof thosc affected.The nroralizationof professionalspheresdoeswithout a conrprehensive
order of meaning.
Iloth creatcthc conditionsin which peoplemanagetheir daily lives
withouta comprehensive
andshared
nroralrty.
Sucha societycanbe comparcdrvith a systemof traffic rules.One
of theserrrles
stopson red and driveson grcenand the maintenance
is in the intcrestof all participants.
One canthereforenormallyrely
on peopleabidingby the ruleswithout the rulesthemselves
being
one
can
legitinratedin deepmoral tcnns. If the rulesare inlringed,
33
t5
in consciousness.)
Observers
of the Europeanreligiousscene(incLLrding one of the two authorsof this study) have for a long time
pointed out that declericalization
shouLdlot be confusedwith the
dlesis
lossof religion.In any casethe convcntionalsecularizalion
rapidlylosescredibilityassoo asoue leaves\Western
Europc.
A particularirritant for this theory is the stateof religion in the
United States.American societycrn hardly be describedas unmodern.I Io*'ever,religionis forccfullyaliveandpresenttherc.And
this is trueboth at the institutional
leuelasq'ellasin the consciousnessanrl life conductof millionsof peoplc.There are fcw signsthat
by the sccularizathis situationis changingin thc dircctionsuggcsted
tion thesis.Outside l:,uropeand North America it is in any case
nonscnse.
The so calledl'hird Vorlcl is in fact shakenby thc onrush
of religiousrnovements.
The Islauricrereissxnce
hasattractedmost
\Vorldwide
one can
attentionbut it is far from bcingthe only case.
the moststriking
traccthc success
story of evangelical
Protestantism,
spreads
like
chapterof which is Evangelism.
l his new Protestantism
Asia, in
a prairie fire - in s-idestretchesof Eastand Southeastern
- in all counAfricasouthof the Sahara
and mostsurprisingly
trics of Latin America.Often it is preciselythoselayersof society
to reli
most touchedby modernizationwhich are most susceptible
giouscndrusiasm.
The troops of todaysreligiousmassmovcnrents
arc to bc found in the new citicsof the Third Vorld, not in thc traditionalvillages.Peopletraincd at tbe nrodernuniversiticsare olten
the lcading
cadres
ofthismovemcnt.
modernity hasonly
ln short: the Europeanmodel of secularized
limitedexportvalLre.
The mostinrportantfactorin the creationof
crisesof meaningin socictyas in dre lilc of the individualis probmodcrrrsecularity
ably not the supposedly
but modernpluralisnr.
in plu
Modcrnity meansa quantitativeaslvellasqualitativeincrease
'fhe
raliz:uion.
structuralcauses
of this fact arewell known: population growth and migrationand, associated
with this, urbanization;
pluralizationin the physical,dcrrogr:rphicsense;the market economy and inclustriaLization
which throw together people of the
mostdifferenthindsand forcethem to dealwith eachother reasonably peacefully;the rule of law and denrocracywhich provideinstitutional guarantces
for this peacefulcoexhtence.
The mediaof mass
communication
constantlyand empharicaLly
paradea pluraliryof
ways of life and thinking: both prlnted materialriding on massli,
teracyspreadacrossthe entirepopulationby compulsoryschooling
and the nes-estelectronicmedia.If the interactionsenabledby this
pluralizationare not restrictedby 'fenccs' of one kind or another,
rhis plurlismtakesfull effect,bringing with it one of its consequencesr
the "structural'crisisof meaning.
'lhe "fence
of the law" wasalrcadymentioned.RabbinicalJudaism
erectedthis fenceto distinguishpracticingJewsfrom their profane
surroundings.
It wasthis 'fence"which madepossiblethe survivalof
the Jewish community over many centuriesin a mainly hostile
Christianor Islamicsociety-One nlight alsosey:the "fenceof the
law" protectedthose peoplelivnrg within it from pluralism.This
protectioncollapsedwith the emancipationof the Jewsin wesrern
societiesand the people affcctedwere consequentlyparticularly
liableto crisesof meaning.It is not merehappenstance
lhat modern
thinkers
and
writers
hav
e
con
cern
ed
th
emselves
particularly
inJewish
tensivelywith suchcrisesof meaning.Converselyone can saythat
any group that wishesto protect itself from the consequences
of
pluralismmust erectits own 'fenceof the law'. As wasmentioned,
there havebeen instances
of pluralisurthroughouthistory, for in,
stxncein the large towns of late antiquity and probably at times
alongthe trade routesand the urban cenrersof Asia. The modern
processes
of pluralizationdistinguishthemselves
from their predccessors
not only by their immenseextent(muchwider circlesare
affectedby them),they are alsodistinguished
by their acceleration:
whiLsttheir effectsprogressively
extendto "new" countries,they do
not remain static,in alreadyhighly modernizedsocietiesthey are
accelerating.
Modern pluralismleadsto a thoroughrelativizationof systemsof
valuesand schemes
of intcrpretation.Put differently:the old value
38
'.
'
systemsandschemes
of interpretationarc decenonizedThe resulting disorientationof the individual and of whole groupshas for
yearsbccnthe main themeof socixland culturalcriticism.Catego"anorrie'
ries suchas 'alienation"and
arc proposedto charctcrize
thc difficulty experienccd
by peopletrying to find their way in the
is
modcrnworld. fhe weakness
of suchcommonplaceconcePtions
weakness
is
Their
not that they exaggerate
the crisisof meaning.
aswell asdiffer
their blindncss
towardsthe capacity
of individuals
preserve
their own values
ent conrmunitiesof life and meaningto
and intcrpretations.Existentialphilosophy from Kicrkegaardto
Sartrchasdeveloped
the mostimprcssiveconceptionof the alienatcd
human being.Other versionsxrc to be found throughotrecent
\festcrn literanrre(oneneedmentiononly Kafka).However,it cannot bc doubtedthat this imagcof humanityappliesto only a small
portion of the populationin rnodernsocieties(thoughthis portion
may be in certinrespecrs
an importantone).Most peoplein these
societiesdo not vander around likc charactersin a Kafha novel.
They arenot plaguedby fearand arenot temptedto makedesperate
"condemnedto
lcapsof faith , nor do they co sider themselves
frcedonr'-One x-ay or anothcr,with or without religion,they cope
with their lives.It is importantto understand
how they mnagcthis.
But beforewe attempt!o pursuethis questionwe wish to return
oncc more to or.rrclain that pluralismis the causeof the crisisof
mcaningir modernity.We must cxaminemore closelythe signifi'
cancefor the stock of meaningend the processthrough which
meaningis lost, of the socialpsychologicalstatusof meaningand
knowlcdgeastaken'forgranted.
J9
psychologyof GeorgcI Icrbert Mcadc(to which the precedingdiscussionof the formation of pcrsonalidcntity is alsoindebted)one
can saythat the institutional"programmcs'are ' internaiized' ir individualconsciousness
anddircctthc indivldual'sacrionsnot asalicn
'Programmes"
but as the individual's
own mcanings.
are internal"primary
ized in multi-laycredproccsscs:
first in
sociliztion",in
which the Ioundationsare laid for the formationof personalidentityi then in "sccondxrysocializ-ation"
which directsthe individual
towardsthe rolcsof socialrcality,aboveall in the world of work.
The structurcsof societybccomcstructuresof consciousness.
Slave
and masterdo not mcrcly behavein conformity with their roles,
they think, feel and concciveof thcnxclvesin waysthat conformto
'I
their rolc behavior. hc srrbjectivc
world of the individualdoesnot
necessari)y
haveto coincidecomplctclys,ith sociallyobjectifiedreality - this is impossible.In the processof socializationthere are if
not realbreaksthen at leastsnrallcracks.In the fornrationof personality there can be at best an :pproxinrationto the completecongruenceof meanings.
A scanrless
transitionfrom primaryto sec
js thc cxceprioin nrostsocieties,
ondarysocialization
not the rule.
The individual has idiosyncratrcinrpulsesand daresro transfer
dreamsinto day to day life and to seekadventures
outsidethe programmesof socicty.Neverthclcss,even is can be spokenof as
''nonnatity'.
Deviations
from the institutional
programmes
anddivergences
from the society'shistoricalrescrvoirsof meaning(andre
servesof meaning)arerelativc)yrareand remainlimited to the indivrrlrul:and rhi' rncan'th:u rl .y Jo nor enrerinro communicarrve
processcs
anri that "censordlip"opcraresevenat the lowestlevel of
objectificationand conrmunicationof "dangerous"thoughrs.If
"censorship"
is unableto containthe deviationwithin the interior
life of the individualthcn specialinstitutionalprogrammesare appliedin the treatmentof the deviant.'lhis rrearmenthasboth an externaland an internalaspect.DxternalLy
tllc rangeof treatmentsextendsfrom the physicalliquidationof thosewho havedeviatedfrom
the true path to loving spiritualcarefor "lost sheep".One way or
42
- harmless
anotherthe deviantbchaviormustbc renderedharmless
for the executionof thc progrannre. fhe obstacleto the smooth
functioningof the machinerymustbe removed.The internalaspect
of this processof socialcontroLis the attemptto stop deviant
thought and to restorcthe previoLrs'mindless"acceptance
of nor
malrty.
Instinrtionsdraw thcir power from the naintcnanceol unqlrestioned vaLidity.An institutionis endangered
fronr the moment in
which the peopleLivingwithin it or with it beginto think aboutinstitutional roles, identities,schenresof interpretation,valuesand
ways of viewingthc worlcl.Conscrvativephilosophershavealways
senseddris;seniorpolicemcn know it from practicalexperiencc.
In
the normalcase"dangerous
thoughtcanbe reasonably
controiled.
'Ihere
is here
However,pluralismmakesthis controLmore difficult.
a cLearsociafpsychological
dialectic from liberationto burdensomefrccdom:it is extremelyhardto be forcedto leadonesown life
without beingableto hold on to' unquestioned
pattersof interpretationand normsof bchavior.This leadsto a clamorous
nostalgia
for the good oLd daysof unfreedom.Liberation is an xmbituous
thing. As GehLenputs it: freedomis born out of alienation- and
Modernliteraturc
isfull of examples
ofthis.Oneneedthinkonlyof
thc themeof "provincialism",
of thc biographical
dialectic
between
'paths
town and city, of thc many possiblc
to freedom' (Arthur
Schnitzlcr).MadameBovarysuffersin her narrow,provincialworld.
But if shehad had the chanceto moveto Parisshewould not have
remained
happyfor long.Alienatlonwouldhavebeenthe priceof
"roorlcher grcrter lre"dom. rhe l-,''clr. br"r cen,rrnlylrer
chilclrcnwould probably haveconceivedthe ideathat the old provincial world had its goodsidesafter all which at the time were so
takenfor grantcddratthey werenot noticedat ali. A physicalreturn
to that world is usuallyno longer possible.There is howeverno
shortagcof suggested
routesfor an internal return (religious,po'
litical, therapeutic),*.aysof healingthe pain of alienation.Projects
43
"old
aimed at restoring the good
world" almost always include the
suppressionor linitation of pluralism - and with good reason:
pluralism constantly suggcstsalternatives,alternativesforce people
to think, thinking undermincs the foundation of all versions of a
"good
oLdworld'; the assumptiono[ its unquestionedexistence.
Modernization inplies the radrcal transformatjon of all external
conditions of hunan existence.l he motor of this giant transformation, as has often been said, is drc science-based
technology of the
last centuries. In purely matcrial terms this dcvclopment hes
brought rvith it a huge expansion of the range of possibilities.
Vhereas in thc past a few technologies,passedon from generation
to generalion, wcre the foundation of material cxistence,there is
now an apparently endlessand constantly improving plurality of
technologicalsystems.Both individuals and huge organizationsface
the nccessityof choosing one or other option from amongst this
plurality. This conpulsion for choice extendsfronr trivial consumer
goods (which brand of tooth pastel) to basic technological alterna
tives (which raw nTaterialfor the motor vehicle industryl). The increasein the rangc of options also extendsto the social and intellcctual sphere. I Icrc, nodernization meam the change from an existence dctermined by fate to onc consistingof a long seriesof possible
choices.l:ate previously determined almost atl phasesof life, the individual movcd frorr phaseto phascaccordingto prcdeterminedpatterns, childhood, rites of passagc,employment, marriage,child rear
ing, ageing,illncss and death. Fate also determined the internal life
of the individual: feelings,interpret;rtions of the world, values and
personal identity. The gods were "already preselt" at birth, as was
the sequenceof social roles that followed. Put diffcrently: the range
of pregiven, unqucstioned assumptionsexrendcdto lhe largestpart
ofhuman existence.
Modernization fundamentalLychangedthis. Birth and deathare still
- only just - determined by fate. In parallel to the plurality of possible choiccs at a natcrial level multilayered processesof modernization open up x rarge of options at thc social and intellectuallevcl:
44
which job should I take up) Vhom shall I marry? Ifow shorrld I
bring up nry children? Even the gods can be sclectedfronr a range of
possible options. I can change my rcligious allcgiance,my citizenship, ny life style, my image of nrysclf and my sexual habitus. The
rangc of taken for-granted assumptionsshrinks to a relatively small
'l
economicfounda
core which is hard to define. hc technological
tions of this changcare at the levcl of the matcrial,but its socialdiaboveall, by pluralism.Pluralismnot only
nrcnsionsare intensified,
(job, hud;andor ivife,religion,party),it
rnakc
choices
pcrmitsone to
forces one to do so as the moclcrn range o[ consumer goods forccs
onc to choosc (Persil or ArieL, VV or Saab).One can no longcr
choosc not to choose:it has bccome in)possibleto close ones eyesto
the frct that a decision that onc nrirkescould also have been made
diffcrcndy. Two central instirutions of modern society Promote this
transition from rhe possibility of choice to the comPulsion to
choosc: the ruarket econorny and denrocracy.Both institr.ltionsare
foundcdon the aggregation
of individualchoice- and themselves
Thc ethosof dcmocracy
cncoragecont;ououschoiceand sclcctron.
humannght.
nrakcschoiceinto a fundamental
f ire taken-for-granredresidesin thc reaLmof unquestioned,securc
knowledge. lhe loss of the taken for-granted unsettlesthis realm: I
know lessand lcss.InsteadI have :r ralge of opinions. Someof thesc
opinious condcnscinto sornething that one night call bclief. Thesc
are opinions for vhich I an prcparcd to make sacrificesin the lirrrit,
even today, to sacrificemy lifc, but probably no longer unquestion'normal" life of so
ingly. It lics in the nature of thingsthat in the
cicty and the individualsuch linrit cascsare relativelyrare ln the
'nornral
processof modernizationi anr in any case no longer
forceclto decidev.hcther I am preparcd to wager my life for faith or
evcn nrcre opinions. Unqucstioncd, secureknor'ledge dissolvesinto
a no longer very compclLing aggrcgate of loosely connccted
Conopinions.Firm interpretations
of reaiity bccomehypotheses.
victions become matters of tastc. Conrmandments become sugges
45
tions.Thesechanges
in consciousness
crcatcthe impression
of a certain'flaress.
One can rmagincthe conscioLrsncss
of the individualas different
levclslayeredon top of eachothcr. In the "depths"(this term is not
r.rscd
herein thc |reudian scnscof depthpsychology)lie thoseinterprctationsdrat arc taken for granted.This is the sphereof unquestioned,certainknowlcdge.Alfrcd Schtitzcalleddris the levelof the
"world-taken
for-grantcd';Robcrt and Ilelen Lynd meant something of the samekind with their conceptof "of-course-statements".
The other pole,thc uppermostlcvcl of consciousness
(uppermostin
the senscof closestto thc "surfacc'),is the sphereof insecurity,that
which is not taken for grantcd,opinionswhich I am in principle
preparedto reviseor evcnretract.This sphcreis ruled by the motto
"chacrrn
son gut . In this layerrlodel, thc modernizationof consciousness
appears
as a lossof 'depth'.More engagingly
one can
view consciousness
as a huge coffeenraker the contentsof con
sciousnessof all types have evaporatedupwards, the residual
grounds
hassenously
shrunken,
thc coffcehasbecome
prertyrhin.
Thelossofthetakcn-for-granted
rvithallitssocial
andpsychological
- asonewouid expect- in the
consequerces
rs mostpronounced
sphereof religion. Modern pluralismhas undercutthe monopoly
enjoyedby religiousinstiturions.Vhether they like it or not the
religiousinstitutions:rc suppliersin a nrarketof religiousoptions.
The "church-goingpeoplc has drvindlcdto a mernbershipwhich
can in nany churchesbc countcd on the fingers of two hands.
Membershipin a particulxrchurch is no longcr taken for granted,
bur ratherdre resultof a delibcratechoice.Evcnthosewho decideto
renain with thc confessionof their parcnts are making such a
choice:they could, after all, havcchangedconfcssionor religionor
simply left the church altogethcr.This fundamentallychangesthe
socialpositionof the churchcs,whethertheir theologicalself-image
is willing to acknowledge
dris stateof aff:rirsor not. If they wish to
survive,churchesincreasnrgly
necdto considerthe wishesof their
membcrs.The church must provc irself in the free markct. The
'buy"
pcoplc x'ho
a particular faith become a group of consuners.
Regardlcssof how stubbornly the thcologiansrefuseto acknowledge
"the
it, the wisdom of thc old connercial nraxirn customer is always right'
has forced itself on the churchcs.They do not always
abidc by this maxirn, but often enoughthey do.
'l
hc churcheshaveincreasing
difficulty in hangingc'ntounmarketablc dogmasand practices.lhc sanreprocesschangesthe relation
ship of thc churchesto one anothcr.They can no longercount on
or to deelwith
thc statccitherto drive the flock into churchservices
their rivals. The pluralistic situxti<>llforces thc rival churchcs to get
aLong.Initially, this forced tolcr:rnce is grLrdging,later it is lcgitiruized theologically (it bccomcsoecunrenical).The American church
'dcnollinxhistorian Richard Niebuhr introducecl the corcept of
tions" which hc definedas follows:'A denominationis a church,
which has achnowlcdgcddre right of othcr chr.rrchesto exist." It is
"dcnon)rDation"
no accidentthat the term
originatedin thc USA fronr a societyrvhich can be secnas rhe p;oneerof modern pluralisnr. lhc increasingsimilarity of thc religioussiruationin othcr
modernsocicticsn ith rhe situationin the USA cannotbe explaincd
by a proccssof cultural Anericanization- as somc, for obvious
idcological reasons,wish to bclicve. The simiLarity is only superficially due to American inflLrences.I* real causeis the global sprcad
of nrodernpluralism.
'l
hLsshift hasi* correspondentrt the level of individual consciousncs. Religion also "evaporatcsrrpwards'; it loscsits statusas taken
'possibility",
for granted. This shift creatcs for faith the status of
'l
bascLlon the sentencc:
I do rot halc !o bclievevhat I know. his
religious possibility' is usually ovcrlooked when theologians
lanrcntthc trivializationof religion in modernity.Ilowever, such
drcologians
are not keento ednlit that they might wish to scea situation in which one could bc * Christian in the same taken'forgrantcd way in which one is man or woman, one hasbrown or blue
cycs and suffersfrom hay fevcr since birdr. This posibility of faith
mst howcvcr be plausible particularly to protestant theologians.
47
Protestantisnr,
fronr Lrrther's comprchensionof conscience(Ver
stndnisdesGe\\'lsscns)
to Kierkcgord's lcapof faith', hasbeenthe
modern religion par cxcelience.Ihcologianscould acknowledge
theseideaswith hopc ratherthal pessimisl.From thc socialscienti
fic perspectiveone nru$ howrvcr recotnize that modcrn society has
not scen a great accumulation of Kierkegaardirn "knighCs of fairh .
More typical is a typc of pcrson l,ith "Ohristian opinions" - a per
'
son who belongs sonrchow' to r church, but in a loose way, which
for theologiansmust be r.rnconlfortablyclosc to other realmsof consun]ption. People with 'rcligious opinions change their opinions
relatively easily evcn if they do not thcrcforc aLwayschange their
"denomrnatiou
membershipin a
. lraditional Christian churches,
particularly il F.uropc, stiLl h.rvc grcrt difficulty in accepting this
change.They, in fact, wLshto closctheir eyesto it. For examplc,the
Roman Catholic ChLrrchrefuscsto understandi*elf as a "denomination . Thosebranchesof Protcstantism
which stillunderstandthem
selvcsasappealingto thc populationat largehavesimilardifficulties.
The exceprionare disest:blishcd
churches,aboveall in the Anglosa-ronworld, *'hich have exisredin a pluralistic situation from the
The loss of depth in religious consciousness
can be traced (not co'l
incidentally) in the ^nerican languagc. he nost common exprcssion for belonging to a religion in thc United Statesis "religious
prcfcrence",asin 'my rcligiousprcfcrcnccis I-utheran";in German
this transLatesinto: "ich 7-jehees vor, l,uthcrancr zu sein". By comparison, the expressionstill comnrcn in Contincntal Europe is 'con,
"I
fession"anr of the Luthcran confession".The exprcssion'con
fession" refcrs to bearing witness, cven to the wilLingnessto make
the sacrjfice of a martyr. .lhe American cxprcssion, by contrast,
comesfrom thc realm of the languagcof consunption (and from the
realm of economic sciencc- "prcferences' and "prcferencescales"
detenninc the market for a commodity or a service).k implies a lack
of comnltment and refersto the possibilityof prcferringsomething
else in future. It is a historical irony of the current European situa
48
49
(both alreadypredifferentsorts,sexualandprofessional
counsellors
sent within schools),specialcourscsand seminarsfor adult educatrained(or ration, departrnents
of the welfarestate,psychologically
ther,halftrarned)
personnei
officcrs,andl:st but no! leasrthe mass
media.The piest and the old aunt may sometimessti1lbe heLpfuL.
But it is more probablethat 'modernpcople turn towardsthe new
institutionsof orientation.For this purposeone often doesnot even
haveto visit an office,an institutionor a practice.Simplyturning on
the television,one is facedwith a widc rangeof therapeuticprofrom
granrmes.
^lternatively one goesto thc bookshopandchooses
the shelvespackedwith Self-Helplitcraturethe volume that is best
tunedto onescrrentdifficulties,whcthcr they be in onesouter or
inner life.
A word on the mcdiaof massconrnrunication
from publishingto
tclcvision:ashasoften and rightly beensaidtheseinstitutionsplay a
kcy rolc in modernmcaningfulorientation- or more preciselyin
the communicationof meaning.lhey mediatebetweencollective
for
and individualexperience
by providingtypicalinterprerations
problemswhicharedcfincdastypical.Vhateverotherinstitutions
the media
providcby way of intcrprcttions
of realityand values,
selectandpeckage
theseproducts,transformthem in the processand
decideon the form of dissemination.
Modernsocietyhasa nunber ofspecialized
insritutionsfor the production and communicationof nrcaning.Even though an adequate
typologyof theseinstitutionsandnn enalysisof their modeof operation would be helpful,socialscicntistshaveonly tentativelybegun
to deal -ith this problem. lly way of a first approximationone
could distinguishbetwecnthoscinstittrtionswhich offer their inter
pretivcscrviceson an opcn nrarkct(e.g. psychotherapy)
and those
institutionswhich cater to a smaller,often strictly closedcommunity of mcaningandspirit(sccts,
with strictly
cultsandcommunes
definedstylesof life). The distinctioninto new and old institutions
hasits uscs.There are old institutions(the
of meaning-production
mos! important are the churchct who continueto cultivatetheir
51
'Ihis
therapeuticstate.
however,leadsto considerations
observation,
which lie beyondthe themeof this essay.
One candcscribeall theseinstitutionselsoin Arnold Gehlen'sterminology as "secondaryinstitutions".lly this is mcant that these
institutionsno longer,asin the past,standat the centreof society"in
they
asthe churchoncedid
thc nriddleof the village. Instead,
functions.A further
pcrfonn limited and often highly specialized
distinctionmay bc uscfulin this contcxt:on the one sidewe find institruionswhich cnableindividualsto transporttheir pcrsonalvaiues
from privatc lifc into differentsphcresof societyand to applythem
in sLrcha way as to nrakcthem a forcc shapingthe rest of society.
On the othersidcthereare institutions
whichtrcat the individual
merclyas a more or lesspassive
objectof their symbolicserviccs.
Only the first mcntionedare 'intcrrnediaryinstitutions' as they
have been known to sociologysinceDurkheim. lhcy are "intermediary"in thc sense
that they rucdiate
betwcenthe individuelnd
in society.Through
the pattcrnsof cxperience
andactionestablished
instirurlons,
thcsc
indi"idualpcopleactivelycorltributcto the productionandprocessing
of the socialstockof meaning.It is the effect
of theseinstitutionsthat the existingstock of mcining is not experiencedas rthoritatively given and prescribcdlrut as an repertoire of possibilitiesthat has bcen shapedby the individual
membersof socictyandwhich is opcnfor further chauSes.
-l'he
insti
distinction
betseenintcrnrcdiary
andnon-rnternrcdiary
tutionscennotbc madein the abstract.It hasto bc madethroughthe
cmpiricialanalysisof the concretcmodeof operationof a sphereof
group,evenan
action.A local parishcommunity,a psychotherapist
agencyof the wclfarestatcmay be a true, mediatingstructurein the
midstof the pcoplc associated
wilh it. l hc samefornr of institution
rlay, however,alsoappearasimposed,asa force alienor evenhos
with it. Both
tile to the iife world of thosc indivLduals
associatecl
"secolclary",
forms are
both conrnrunicate
meaning-I Iowever,only
in the first mentionedfornr arc thcy suitablcto softenthe negative
"anomie")or cvento over("alicnation",
aspects
of moclernization
53
of meaningandvaluethat oricntatcs
actionandunderpins
idcntity.
Neverthcless,
modern socicticstlo not "normally" experiencethe
drarnaticspreadof criscsof mcaning.Both subjcctiveand intersubjectivccrisesof meaningoccur much more cornmonlyin such
societies,however they do not conclcnseinto a generalcrisis of
'I'his
meaningaffectingal1 of society.
characteristiccondition of
'nornrality"
in modern societicsDtay bc termed a latent crisis of
mcaning.The reasonsfor this condition are the various factors
which act xgainstthc conscqnences
of nrodcrnpluralisnrmost liable
to producecrisesof mcaning.In our opinion thc mostinportant of
thesefactorsis a basicstockof intermediaryinstitutions.Theseinsti,
'Uriorr...rvc ro generLrem"*rrrng'.rnJr" .rrpportexisring
meanings
in the livesof individu:rls
andin the cohesion
of communities.
They
providepeoplcwith orientationcvcn whensocietyas a whole no
longer supportsan overarchingordcr of meaningand values,but
insteadactsasa kind of rcgulatinginstancefor thc differenrsystens
'lhose
of value.
ruleswhich arc valld for all of socieryservero
enablethe coexistcnce
and neccssary
cooperation
of differentcommunltres
of nreaning,
withoutinrposing
on thema comnonorderof
values.
Vc thereforesuggcstdre hypothesisdtat as long as the immune
systenrof intermediaryinstitutionsrer:rainseffective,"normal" modern societies
will not sufferthe pandenricspreadof crisesof mean,
ing. As long as thrs condition holds, the crisis-of-rneaning
virus
which is at home in the organismof all modern socictieswill be
suppressed.
Howcver,if the immunesystemis sufficientlyweakened
by othcr influences,
thcre is nothing to stopthe spreadof the virus.
(Characteristically,
it is the statewhich hclpsto weakeninrermcdi
ary institutions- asa form of corlpetition?)This hypothesisseems
plausibleto us,howcvcrsimplificdits formulation,but it, of course,
rcquirescarefulcmpiricalinvcstigation.
In the lastsectionwe return
to this.
56
illusionsand possibilities
"decay
of clture", the loss of meaningin
Complaintsabout the
moderniry",the' alicnationof hunranityin latecapitalism',the'inflation of mc:rningin masssociety",'the disorientationof peoplcin
thc irodern rvorld" and suchlike arc hardly new. Theokrgians,philosophcrs, sociol;gists, quitc apart fronr non academjcmoral entrepreneurs fronr far right to farleft havc been making thcse com
Under different ideological
pLaintslor r nl.rmberof Benerations.
signsall inuginable renredieshave bccn advertiscdfor thesc illnesses
of the
of the individualand society,from dre nroral strcngthening
individLralto the revolutionary transformation of the entire poiiti"diag'
cal econonric system.C)ur doubts about the most cxaggcrated
noses"c,f thc cultural conrlition were hintcd at in the introductory
"therapies"
section. Lct us add here that q."erceard the proposed
optionswhich
with equalskepticism borh the radical-collectivist
are in the r:nd always totalitarirn as *eli as radical individualism
which is in thc cnd a solipsism.
'Lo
seewhethcr a core of truth is to be found behind the ex:rggcrations and whedrer thc diagnosisrrrs only in the seriousnessof the
specificallynrodcrn crisis, we havc attempted to describcthe organisn in its healthy state.Ve first refcrrcd to the meaningfulness<-,facand the way in which
tion and life constimtiveof the humanspecies
it is conditionecl by social processcsand structures.In a sccond step
we could then clefinethe historicaLchangeswhich definc the specifically nodcrn construction, conrrnunication and sccuring of the
rncaning of life ud acrion nr nrodcrnity. Before formuLating our
"thcrapeutic'
suggestions,we will
own, co]nparatircly modest
"
d
r
;
g
n
.
r
.
i'
.
b r i c f l y . u , r ' , r r , r i , . r l -r ,c . u . , , l o r r r
evenif
ofgeneratingn)eaning,
Allsocictiesareinvolvedin proccsses
they hxvc not de"elc,pedspccializedinstitutions for the prodction
of neaning. In any case,thcy control the processthrough which
57
59
/- (rutlook
65
tiols of value into norrns of :rctionsand maxinr, step lor step down
to the level of ordinary, cvcrlday action.
The analysisof systcnrsof valuc and meaning in rnodern societies
hasto overcomeparticuiardifficultics.We have seenthrt it is not
possibleto speak in modern socictiesof a single and generally binding order of values.k may be true that beyondthe legalizedsystenl
of behavioralnorns there are still clcnlentsof a generalmorality.
However, qithout careful research it is not easy to decide -hat
these might consist of and whetlrer togcther they make up a framework of establishedmorality. lt ccrtainly seernsthat there are a
multiplicity of moralities, distributed acrossdifferent communities
of lifc ancl faith, which can bc iclcntified in the form of "partial catechisms"and particularistic idcological programmes.To what extcnt
these diffcrent moralitics - we spcak here not o{ the ethics of par
ticular functional sphercs(medical ethics,businessethicsetc.), which
*c h rve ;lready di'cu*.d - r.rre clcrrrenr.in c,rmmon rr an open
qucstion, to vhich the existing researchhas not given a satisfactory
answer.Even if rherewere no such comnron elements:it doesnot
follon' that people in modern socicticsdo not orientate their action
antl conduct of life towards supcrordinatevalues,valueswhich havc
validity in their communities of Iife anct faith. Lven those acting
"immorally"
will generally conform to the prevailing morality by
attempting to hide or make excoscsfor their breach of the noflIs
(hypocrisy is hotrage paid by vice to virtue).
In any case,individuals in modern society have to overcornc both
insecurity of meaning and uncertainty in moral jusrification. First,
thcy cannot assumethat t hat they consider good and right is considcred good and right by others; sccond,individuals do not always
knov what is good and right
cvcn for themselves.
The insti,
tutionshavetheir instrumentallyrationalorganizationwhlch objectively dctermines action and pcrhaps some kind of specific cthics.
(lommunities of life vith diffcrcnr stocksof meaning are not divided
from onc another by high protcctive walls and communities of faith
run, so to spcak,crisscrossacrosssociety.Furdrermore, through thc
66
67
69
The authors
Pcter L. Berger
llronr 195556 ResearchDircctor, Acadenry of the Protestant
Church, Bad Bo1l, Germany; fron 195658 ?rofessor at thc
\(oman's College,University of Nordr Carolina; frorn 195863
Director at the Institute of ChLrrchand Community, Hartford
TheologicalInstilutc of Church anrl Conrmunity,Hartford TheologicalSenrinary;frarn 19637aProfessorat thc GraduateFaculty,
Professor
Ncw Schoolfor SocialResearch,
Ncw York; from 1920-79
at thc l{utgersUniversity; from 1979-81Prolessorat the Boston
Collegc;sincc1981Professor
at the DostonUniversity;since1985
I)irector of the Institutefor the Snrdyof EconomicCul!re,Boston
University.
Publicrtions:
1963;The Social
Invitationto Sociology:A LlumarristicPerspectivc,
Constructionof Reality (with TironrasLuckmann),1966;The Se'
crcdCanopy:Elements
of a Sociological
lheory ofReligion,1967iA
of thc SuRtrmorof ngels:ModernSocictyandthe Rcdiscovery
and Conpernatural,1969;The IlomelessMind; Modernization
sciousncss(with Brigitte Berger and Hansfried Kellner), 1973;
Pyramidsof Sacrifice:Pc,liticalUthics and Social Change,19l5;
'thc
Heretical Imperative, 1979; Sociolc,gyReinterpreted(with
I Iansfried Kellner); The l(ar Over the Family (with Brigitte
Bergcr),
Rev<.rlution,
1986;A FarGLory,1992.
1983;The Capitalist
7l
ThomasLucknann
I:ro r 195860 Professor
Department
of Anat the I IobartCoLlege,
Professorat
thropologyandSociology,Gencva,N.Y.; from 1960-65
the GraduateFaculty, Departnrcntof Sociology,New Schoolfor
Social Rescarch,New York; lrom 196365 Co-Director of thc
N.l.M.H. Fellos'shipl'rogram; from 1965-/0?rofessorfor SocioloMan'
gy andDirector of the Departrncntof Sociology,from 1966-68
aging Director of the Departmcnt of Sociologyat the Johann\f olfgangGoethe-University,
FrankfLrrt/Main;since1970Professor
of Sociology,Univcrsityof Konstanz.
Publications:
The SocialConstructionof l{eality (with PeterL. Berger),1966;The
InvisibleReligion, 1970; Ihc Structurcsof the Life-\orld I (with
1975;LebeDsAlfred schtz),1973,II, 1984isociologyof Language,
wclt und Gesellschaft,
1980;TheorieclessozialenHandelns,1992.
72
The project
The Bertekmann lourulation ts targeted to be an operative, concepnrallynorking foundation.lt is obliged by its statutesand its
mandatcto promoteinnovation,raisencw idcasto the levelof prac
'l
tice, help to identifysolruionsto pressingproblemsof our time. he
projectsare beingconccptualizcd
and inrtiatedby thc foundationitse1f.Startingfronr thc dcfinitionof the problem to the practicalimplementationthe foundationruns its projectsin closecooperation
l,ith competentpartnersin acadcnric,
stateand privateinstitutions.
Followint rhis intcntion the Berrelsn)annFoundation has initiated
the project Cuhrral Orientation.h wrll rnakeefforts to elaborateso
Irrtions and conccpts in repll to thc crisesof modern societieswhich
can be summariz-cdas a decline of orientation. It will be one of the
questionsdecisivcfor our firture how we can overcome these crises
related to the transition of values nLl the loss of patterns of
mcaning.
Certainties of oricntation are erodrng, identities are being ques
tioned- Thc increasingvelocity of social dcvelopmenr gives rise to
this tendcncy by an intensifiecl changc of familiar structures and
experience-bascd
ccrtainties.Traclitional k'rowledge, which is being
passedon from one generationto thc next by the church, the state,
'.hool. or funrlic.. bc.orn.. .rrrrJatcJir rn evertrowing pr.e.
'fhe
of orientationare beingsupplemented
traditionalinstitutrons
by recentlycnrcrgcdones.Conflictsbctrvccncompetingorienta
"market",different
tions on thc supplyside are rcsolvcdat the
definitionsof one'slivesmay Lrcincompatible.Functionalelitesare
being calledupon to contributc their shareto dre stabilizationof
socialfunrre. Effectiveorientationhas to masterthe challengeof
reconcilingindividuallymeaningfulconceptsfor life and necessities
to maintainthe cohesionof socicty.
The BertelsmannFoundation is ainrilg at responsesto three
crucixlquestions:
- \fhat canbc an cxplanationof this dcclincof orientation?
- $(hichinstiutions contributeto coherentandstableoricntations?
- How cana solutionto dre oricntationcrisisbe designed)
"cultural
As a first stepin thc field of projectson
orientation"the
'The
volum on
lossof oricntation the cohesioncrisisin modern
of
society"(in Germanlanguage
only)wasreleascd
to opena series
publications.The next phaseconsistcdof a serieso{ expertisesof
which the presentsnrdyby Pctcr L. Ilergerand ThomasLuckmann
was completedin the first instancc.\farnfried Detding (Munich)
will presenthis conceptof thc immediatesocialenvironmentand
orientationin cornmLrnication
with ncighborsin a few monthstime.
Other sub-projec*consistof a study by Gerhard Schmidtchen
(Universityof Zurich) on oricntationin intra-firm communication,
an expertiseby Martin Grciffcnhegen(Universityof Snrttgart)on
politicallegitimationand thc liuritsof strtecontrol and an investigatiofl of the episte[rological
conclitionsof orientationunder conditions of an increased
complexityof knowlcdgeand informationby
cerhard Schulze(Universityof anrberg).
The Bertelsnann
Foundation
publishes
this volumein the intention to providea forum for a dcbateon the future of modernsociety
andperspectives
of developnlent.
74
identilies
arcbeing
acnninties
oforicntrtionarceroding.
qucslioned.Thc incrcasingvelocit)'ofsocial devclopmentSrvcs
risc to this tendencyby Dintcnsifiedchxngcoffamiliar struclurcs
ocrtaintics.liaditional knowledgc,which
andexpcricnce-bascd
is bcing passedon fronr onegencrationto the ncxt bythc church.
thc statc.schoolsor fanrilics.becomcsouldalcdrn an evergrolring pace.-fhelradrlionlinstitulionsol orientationarebcing
supplcmcnted
by rcccntlyemergedones.ConllictsbciYeen
compctingorientationon thc supplysidee rcsolvedat the
"mlrrkcl",diflerentdefinitionsofonc's Livesmay be incompatible
funclionaLelitesrrc beil1gcalleduponto oontribulctheir shareto
thc shbilizationoi sociirllirture.Eilectivc orientationhas
to nrastcrthe challcngcol'rcconcilingindividuallymeaningll
to mainlaintbc cohesiono1'
conceptsfor lile and neccssities
PctcrL. tsergerand I homasLuclmann countmongthe causes
ofnodemizatjon,
lor thc modemcrisisofmcaningprocesses
pluraiismand particularlywilh rcgard1oliuropeansocrctlcssecularization.
As a pfoblcm solvingstratcgy,the authorssuggcst
ihcir conceptofintcrmedialeinstitulionswhich cdjate bclwccn
thc individualand socicly.
BertelsmannF oundationPublishers