Beyond Methodological Axioms

Since nearly the field’s birth, religious studies has been plagued by the question of how to deal with claims concerning the supernatural. Strategies for addressing the issue typically take the form of one or another methodological axiom, typically either methodological atheism or methodological agn...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Blum, Jason N. 1977- (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Oxford University Press 2021
In: Journal of the American Academy of Religion
Year: 2021, Volume: 89, Issue: 2, Pages: 437-468
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 176298993X
003 DE-627
005 20210715161126.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 210715s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1093/jaarel/lfab055  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)176298993X 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP176298993X 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 0  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)1036142043  |0 (DE-627)749708859  |0 (DE-576)383667933  |4 aut  |a Blum, Jason N.  |d 1977- 
109 |a Blum, Jason N. 1977-  |a Blum, Jason 1977- 
245 1 0 |a Beyond Methodological Axioms 
264 1 |c 2021 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Since nearly the field’s birth, religious studies has been plagued by the question of how to deal with claims concerning the supernatural. Strategies for addressing the issue typically take the form of one or another methodological axiom, typically either methodological atheism or methodological agnosticism. Although each axiom answers legitimate concerns about how to address supernatural claims, each is also vulnerable to substantial objections. I therefore argue that these approaches to solving religious studies’ central methodological dilemma is flawed. Eschewing the search for methodological axioms, I advocate that we return to a basic standard of academic work: public evidence. When paired with a distinction between the analytical tasks of interpretation and explanation, this approach resolves the central problems that have vexed both methodological atheism and methodological agnosticism, avoiding the theoretical pitfalls generated by each while providing the necessary guidance and discipline for research on religion. 
601 |a Methodologie 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |a American Academy of Religion  |t Journal of the American Academy of Religion  |d Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1967  |g 89(2021), 2, Seite 437-468  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)338767819  |w (DE-600)2064642-2  |w (DE-576)10686971X  |x 1477-4585  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:89  |g year:2021  |g number:2  |g pages:437-468 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/lfab055  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 3952380814 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 176298993X 
LOK |0 005 20210715141156 
LOK |0 008 210715||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixzo 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
SUB |a REL