New Age and Environment: New Forms of Spirituality and Lifestyle in the Context of Secularization?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

It is a pity that the actual empirical results are only announced for further publication, this weakens the power and innovativeness of the article.

The term "secularization" should be explicated more precisely. In line 188 and 395 the exact meaning of that is not clear to me.

Also the distinction in lines 58-59 is not clear enough. An additional sentence about that topic could be helpful.

In Lines 395-396 and 400 the sentences are corrupted an have to be corrected.

May be  further helpful reference could be found in the publications of Irene Becci and her team in Sitzerland, as German-speaking countries are not included by the mentioning of ecovillages.

Author Response

We want to thank the reviewer for their valuable feedback and suggestions. First of all, regarding the explanation of secularization in line 188, we choose to erase the sentence because we do not develop the multiple dimensions of secularization, so it makes no sense to open the debate on whether adherence to ecological values by traditional religious institutions is or is not part of the process of internal secularization. In lines 394-395, we clarify our meaning of the term. Regarding the distinction made in lines 58-60, we rewrite and add ideas that help us understand our concept. About the corrupted sentences, we corrected them. Finally, despite not integrating Irene Becci in this article, the suggestion will be considered for future works. After the request and a passage in the author's work, we verified essential contributions to the development of the investigation. I highlight her research interests and methodological applications, a literature review of terms that we will address in the future, such as “greening of religion,”; “spiritualization of ecology,” “eco-spirituality,” and “spiritual activism,”; framework of the Swiss case; Theoretical ability to bridge the gap to the issue of ecovillages.

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper offers an interesting analysis of the relationship between religion and ecology, manifested in a series of diverse forms of New Age spirituality, as an expression of the dynamic tension that exists between the secular and religious worlds. The sociological conjecture of the general theory of secularization which could be briefly laid thus: the more modern a society is the more secular and the less religious it becomes, has been refuted in practice by the emergence of a range of new forms of spirituality. I will, however, raise a number of issues that should be reviewed by the authors.

In the first place, the term desecularization is mentioned several times at the beginning of the work without first defining it. In the book edited by P. L. Berger: The Desecularization of the World, 1999, one can find foundations to address this issue.

Secondly, the enumeration of point 5.1. does not make sense because there is no 5.2 or 5.3. to give it continuity, therefore, it should be removed and leave the general statement Religion and Ecology.

Thirdly, on page 6 where the two searches for holism are analyzed, I think there is room to analyze a third holistic search of great sociological repercussion that today would represent Bruno Latour with his Facing Gaia (2017) and Harmut Rosa: Resonanz (2017), where they analyze the inevitability of a new orientation towards the world within a new worldview.

Otherwise, I consider the work publishable.

Author Response

We want to thank the reviewer for their insightful comments and suggestions. Regarding the first comment about desecularization, we opted to add some information to clarify the concept. Two new bibliographies were added to the article because of that. In addition, to improve the understanding of the topic, we made some changes in the sentences between lines 44 and 48. In continuation of the suggestions, point 5.1 has been deleted. Finally, on page 6, regarding the two influential holistic forms of the New Age, we integrate Bruno Latour (line 290), as suggested by Dutreuil (line 281). We kept only the two currents and clarified them as the most influential for the New Age (line 280).

Regarding Hartmut Rosa, we do not use it because despite the author's proposal being interesting, it was impossible to develop the relationship between “resonance” and the New Age. What we add on line 280 mitigates this. Two new bibliographies were added because of these corrections.

Reviewer 3 Report

The text shows excellent knowledge about the ideas it raises, the bibliography is correct (although there is a gap of the last five years), and the subject is of great interest.

That said, I want to make the following observations that could serve to improve the article:

a. Reference is made to Portugal. However, the choice of country is not justified, and in the image in the text, Spain stands out and not Portugal.

b. No relation is made to new technologies and their use to promote ecovillages. It should be named or taken into account.

c. Lastly, no reference is made to the conversion process or, in the words of Berger and Luckamm quoted as "Alternation." It would be interesting to name it and advance the possibility of asking about the second generation.

Another aspect to consider is that there is no reference to Covid-19 or post-pandemic; It is an issue that should be pointed out because of the controversy regarding vaccines concerning specific environmental movements.

In summary: it is an exciting, necessary article and shows a great effort regarding reading selection and connection of authors and their theories. 

 

Author Response

We want to thank the reviewer for their thoughtful comments and suggestions. We clarify the first comments regarding the Portuguese case by adding some information (line 120). About the relations of new technologies to promote ecovillages, we add some information in line 322. Regarding the integration of contributions by Luckmann and Berger, we took into account and added some text on the concept suggested about ecovillages (Line 314). Finally, regarding the comment on covid 19, although we recognize the importance of the topic in the context of our investigation, the consequences of the pandemic still need to be worked on by the authors. The theme will be developed in future research. Furthermore, the ecovillages responses to covid-19 vaccination vary depending on community choices (namely whether alternative healing approaches are chosen) and individual preferences. Being a complex theme with multiple facets, we decided not to address only the controversy regarding the rejection of vaccine administration.