Golf as a Religion: The Family Traits Approach

Please be advised. This page does not reproduce the story or article in full. The full story or article is contained inRoybob’s Book on Golf: The Hucks, A Golfer’s Divine Comedy, and a Religious Philosophy of Golf.

The Golf Gods: Towards a Religious Philosophy of Golf

Golf as a Religion: The Family Traits Approach

Introduction

Given the multifaceted nature of religion, many scholars have rejected the attempt to locate an essence of religion. They have insisted, rather, that we should think of a family of religion with several individual family members (religions) sharing many traits with the entire family but perhaps also exhibiting a few differences.

The family-traits approach to defining religion is derived from a twentieth-century philosopher named Ludwig Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein argued that there are many words, e.g. the word “game,” which cannot be precisely defined. One cannot define “game” as anything played for pleasure because many people, like professional golfers, work at their games for profit. One cannot find the essence of “game” to lie in social competition, for some games are individual activities. It does not seem that “game” can be defined by any single feature. Wittgenstein suggested that words like “game” would be better defined by listing a number of “family resemblances” rather than by attempting to locate a single essence.

Although Wittgenstein did not apply his theory to religion, many of his followers have. Rem B. Edwards, for example, has suggested a number of traits which he believes are involved in religion. In the Western traditions of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, for example, all of his family traits of religion are present (P), and so these Western traditions qualify as religions — appropriately so, since the word “religion” is Western in origin and usage. In Communism or Marxism, on the other hand, a significant number of family traits are absent (A), so they would qualify as only borderline religions. The idea of the family-traits approach is to determine whether or not an expression is religious on the basis of whether or not the expression has a majority of the family traits.

In Edwards’ view, as evidenced above in the far column, Golf exhibits almost none of the family traits of religion and, therefore, could not seriously be considered a religion. I wish to contend, against Edwards, that Golf does indeed share many of these traits and, therefore, can be considered a religion.

1. Belief in a supernatural intelligent being or beings

2. Belief in a superior intelligent being or beings

The supreme God of Golf, Becomingness-itself or Energy-itself, is “supernatural,” that is, “beyond the natural or ordinary.” Energy-itself is expressed in and through all that is but cannot be equated with anything that is. God or Reality-itself is not any particular person or object but, rather, the basis for all particularities. God lies beyond, or below, all that is.

The lesser gods and goddesses of golf may be regarded as “superior intelligent being or beings.” The gods and goddesses of the winds, the waters, the trees, and the soils lie beyond the golfer’s control and, in that sense, are superior beings. Further, whether or not this is actually the case, the powers of nature are also attributed with purpose or intelligence. They affect the golfer’s ball in a particular manner for a particular reason. For example, a golfer may have defied or offended the golf gods; thus, the gods sent his/her ball out of bounds. Golfers find reasons for the actions or reactions of the golf gods. 

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The full version of this story or article is contained inRoybob’s Book on Golf: The Hucks, A Golfer’s Divine Comedy, and a Religious Philosophy of Golf.