plausibility structure

In Berger’s sense of the term, “plausibility structure”, every social institution has a specific structure and its structure works properly.
All parts are in the proper place, they have own function, they work together and keep the structure as a system alive. One structure, or you can read it one social institution may be is not plausible for some observers but it is not important. They are just observes. The mean point is that the structure is plausible for participants or, say, players. Top example is religion. Unbelievers think that religion and faith, especially in the modern world is completely nonsense and useless particularly when they confront whit unanswered questions or contradictory parts of a religion.
However, many religions continue to exist even in era of modernity.
The problem of “plausibility structure” is not the problem of observer and player. The problem is in fact the problem of player.
In the era of modernity and because of the plurality of institutions, roles and status, every social actor has in his everyday life many shifting between different roles in different institutions.
Every institution has own plausibility, and it is very possible that plausibility of one structure is partly or completely implausible from perspective of other plausibility structures.
In this field, a player confuses that where is the goal.
Contradiction between logic of different structures makes the play very difficult for contemporary man.
This is the problem of religion in the modern world and countries that are undergoing modernization: contradiction between plausibility of religious structure and plausibility of scientific structure.