I had never heard the term "Liquid Religion" prior to reading this topic.
Upon reading the article/paper, I found the following ideas interesting:
1.) "Solid Religion versus Liquid Religion"
2.) "Religious authority has shifted from institutions and religious leaders to personal experience. In solid modernity the ideal is centred on belonging to an institution. This solid notion has been transformed in liquid religion, where consumption behaviours (or believing without belonging), are central."
3.) "People are now aware of a range of religious options, and thus abandon certain options knowingly. This results in eclecticism, here understood as reluctance to commit oneself to a specific tradition. Taira argues that the choices an individual makes within liquid religion are based on affectivity: if something gives a person good ‘vibes’, it is accepted as a part of their identity. Taira argues that affective relations are at the core of liquid religiosity (Taira 2006, 45–47). Authority has been transferred from religious leaders and institutions to the individual, where one’s own experiences and needs shape one’s religious life and beliefs."
4.) "It would also be valuable to build on this study by conducting qualitative interviews with Discordians on a much larger scale, in order to expand the data base for scholarly analysis of ‘parody religions’ (Chidester 2005) and their relationship with traditional religions."
I agree it would be great to expand this study to a larger, international group of Discordians, as the sample size utilized was small, and restricted to one country. Still, I found this article/paper to be insightful, and a worthwhile read.
