Three Ideological Traditions and the Psychology of Religion

This response contends that Vergote limits the psychology of religion to a study of the behavioral correlates of religiosity. Ignored in this approach is the belief core common to all religions. Further, this approach proscribes the ability of psychologists to make judgments about religious claims o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The international journal for the psychology of religion
1. VerfasserIn: Beit-Hallahmi, Benjamin 1943- (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Veröffentlicht: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group [1993]
In: The international journal for the psychology of religion
Jahr: 1993, Band: 3, Heft: 2, Seiten: 95-96
Online Zugang: Volltext (Resolving-System)
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This response contends that Vergote limits the psychology of religion to a study of the behavioral correlates of religiosity. Ignored in this approach is the belief core common to all religions. Further, this approach proscribes the ability of psychologists to make judgments about religious claims or to explain religion in any manner. Vergote's approach appears to be apologetic and, thereby, problematic.
ISSN:1532-7582
Bezug:Kritik von "What the Psychology of Religion Is and What it Is Not (1993)"
Kritik in "Debate Concerning the Psychology of Religion (1995)"
Enthält:Enthalten in: The international journal for the psychology of religion
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1207/s15327582ijpr0302_3