Response to Patrick Hart
This paper is a response to Patrick Hart’s article ‘Theory, method, and madness in religious studies’ and further interrogates the terms “theory” and “method,” the relationship between them, and their application to the study of religion, particularly at a pedagogical level, where there is some conf...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Brill
2016
|
| Dans: |
Method & theory in the study of religion
Année: 2016, Volume: 28, Numéro: 1, Pages: 31-34 |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Theory
method
religious studies
theology
|
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (Verlag) |
| Résumé: | This paper is a response to Patrick Hart’s article ‘Theory, method, and madness in religious studies’ and further interrogates the terms “theory” and “method,” the relationship between them, and their application to the study of religion, particularly at a pedagogical level, where there is some confusion about what is referred to by these terms. This paper argues that theory and method should be included explicitly in religious studies programs and research to show how scholarship has been produced. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1570-0682 |
| Contient: | In: Method & theory in the study of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15700682-12341347 |