Modest reflections on the ambiguous future of the study of religion(s)
Reflection on the future study of religion(s) poses three questions: What is the definition of religion? What should study' mean in the academic discourse about religion? And how about its future as an independent discipline within the humanities? The first question brings about a critique of...
| Autres titres: | Futures |
|---|---|
| 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: |
Routledge
[2020]
|
| Dans: |
Religion
Année: 2020, Volume: 50, Numéro: 1, Pages: 83-89 |
| Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés: | B
Science des religions
/ Religion
/ Définition
/ Méthode
/ Ambigüité
|
| RelBib Classification: | AA Sciences des religions |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Définition
B Identity B 4IR B The study of religion(s) |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (Resolving-System) |
| Résumé: | Reflection on the future study of religion(s) poses three questions: What is the definition of religion? What should study' mean in the academic discourse about religion? And how about its future as an independent discipline within the humanities? The first question brings about a critique of the conceptual definition of religion and the true purpose of the study of religion(s) in wholistic human formation. The second suggests a departure from the monotone of a European and North American model of study.' And the third encourages self-conscious and tolerance of the ambiguous and ambivalent identity of the study and moving towards more active engagements in the era of the 4IR. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1096-1151 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/0048721X.2019.1681104 |