ABSTRACT
A clear distinction between conviction and belief has never been central to the academic study of religion. Nevertheless, it could serve as an analytical tool for understanding conflicts about religion in modern democracies, both on an individual and a societal level. This chapter explores the role of conviction in religion, starting from the hypothesis that religious belief is labeled as conviction in situations of individual crisis or exceptionality as well as collective critique or praise. Looking at religious beliefs as convictions allows us to explore how they are classified as particularly “bad” or “good” religion. From a global historical perspective, recent studies have demonstrated that an understanding of beliefs—as subjectively held propositions—as central to religion is a key aspect of the establishment of the modern global concept of religion and “world religions”-discourse since the 19th century. Simultaneously, the similarly globalized concept of “religious freedom” implies that private, individual belief is the preferred and modern form through which religion should be expressed in democratic societies. I argue for conviction as pointing to a process-oriented perspective on degrees of persuasion in religion and suggest some analytical outcomes of this approach by looking at literature from fundamentalism and (de)conversion studies.
