James Spickard

The rational choice approach to religion ( RCAR ) applies neoclassical economic principles to religion to create models of religious behavior. It presents both those principles and the resulting models as universal. Most critics of that approach have challenged those models’ empirical predictions. In contrast, this article develops an ‘upstream’ critique of the theory by examining the problems with its chosen approach in economics itself. The history of that discipline shows that the utility-maximizing figure of Homo economicus is a modern construct, as is the notion of a self-correcting free market. Both are contextual and ideological, not universal. Early 20th-century sociologists already provided a comprehensive and radical rebuttal of these ideas – a critique that was a major source of the early sociology of religion. Recent alternative approaches by economists show that neoclassical formalism even fails to account for basic economic phenomena. Models built on this formalism – such as RCAR – thus cannot be naively imported to explain religious action. This does not mean that the sociology of religion should avoid economics tout court . Some non-formalist economic approaches show much more promise.