Colloquium Response: More 'theory as explanation' anyone?
The problem for Study of Religions (SOR) in the academy is the dearth of successful theory-as-explanation in the field and the consequential domination of the public square by other voices namely theology, apologetics, humanist study that privileges belief and New Atheism. There is theory-as-critiqu...
| 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
2017
|
| Dans: |
Method & theory in the study of religion
Année: 2017, Volume: 29, Numéro: 1, Pages: 89-94 |
| Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés: | B
Explication
/ Théorie
/ Vérité
/ Critique
/ Science des religions
|
| RelBib Classification: | AA Sciences des religions AB Philosophie de la religion |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Explanation
theory
truth-claims
critique
|
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (Verlag) |
| Résumé: | The problem for Study of Religions (SOR) in the academy is the dearth of successful theory-as-explanation in the field and the consequential domination of the public square by other voices namely theology, apologetics, humanist study that privileges belief and New Atheism. There is theory-as-critique aplenty and it is applied to both religious truth claims and to explanatory theories about religion. Scholars of sor have the critical tools, methods, expertise and weight of scholarship to error check and to disprove naturalistic explanations but finding explanatory ground to stand on is very hard indeed. This piece argues that it is important to renew and revitalise the search for explanation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1570-0682 |
| Contient: | In: Method & theory in the study of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15700682-12341386 |