On references to the transcendent in the scientific study of religion: A qualified idealist proposal (original) (raw)
Related papers
ARTICLE: Naming or defining? On the necessity of reduction in religious studies
Culture and Religion, 2004
Although debate continues over the place of reductionist and non-reductionist approaches within the academic study of religion, much of the debate falters due to a failure to appreciate the necessity of 'understanding' for the effectiveness of 'explaining' cultural phenomena. This article addresses this very problem, reassessing the role of the insider within a methodological reductionist approach within religious studies. Assessing the delimitation of critical analysis to 'knowable knowledge' construction, teasing out theoretical problems with verification, and recognising the role of data construction in first-order description prior to second-order theorisation, this article will argue that the insider's perspective is indeed an essential aspect of the critical analytical approach. Unlike phenomenological or irreductive approaches, however, the insider's perspective is limited to the stage of data construction ('understanding'). At the secondary level of theorisation, the relative relations bringing together data within an analytical study takes precedence ('explanation'). Thus, within a methodological reductionist approach (distinguished from ontological reductionism), there can be no explanation without understanding. [Abstract from published article]
Religion, 1987
This two-volume reference work is presented as a `sequel' to J. Waardenburg's Classical Approaches to the Study of Religion published as volumes I and II in this same Mouton series (Reason and Religion). The work is meant to complement thè story' of the academic study of religion in its development up to 1945 implicit in the selections of representative scholars in the field gathered together by Waardenburg. The substance of these volumes does not, however, comprise select passages from key authors in `religious studies', that being virtually impossible given the extensive development of the field since 1945. Nor do these volumes present a unified historical narrative of that `further development' of religious studies. Rather, they contain the reflections of a `team' of scholars, each summarizing the character of the study of religion within the framework of various sub-disciplines, so to speak, that constitute that study. It is the aim of the editor (and most of the authors, it appears) not only to indicate the variety of legitimate research interests in religious studies, but also to show how that variety of approaches interrelate, or, at least, can be integrated so as to constitute a kind of unified theory of the nature of the study of religion. It soon becomes evident to the reader, however-and reluctantly admitted by the editorthat even with this two-volume assault on the problem there is no single paradigm for the study of religion even within sight let alone within our grasp. What unity does appear to exist derives more from the hopes expressed by the editor than from the substance of the essays. Volume I is focussed on `the humanities', i .e. on approaches to the study of religion that, as Whaling puts it in the introductions to the two volumes, transcend the positivism of the scientific approach to religious phenomena by means of the intuitive insight `that the study of religion has to do with man' (I : 25, 26 ; II : 12). In the introduction to the first volume, Whaling attempts to highlight, the contrasts between the classical and contemporary periods in the study of religion and enunciates some general methodological claims that seem to constitute a set of assumptions for all the authors. Five essays follow which cover the historical and phenomenological approaches to the study of religion (U. King), the comparative study of religion (F. Whaling), the study of religious texts and myth (K. Bolle), the scientific study of religion in its plurality (N. Smart), and the global context of the contemporary study of religions (F. Whaling). U. King's essay is more than merely descriptive. It is a polemical essay that argues for a historical and phenomenological study of religions that is more than a narrow, empirical approach to the phenomenon. Such an `empirical positivism', as she calls it, jeopardizes the autonomy of `religious studies' and is, moreover, inadequate to its subject matter. Her review of the methodological debates amongst historians and phenomenologists over the last 40 years, however, is thorough and stimulating .
"The Enduring Temptation of Scientistic Reductionism as the Secular Equivalent to Ontotheology and Religious Literalism," in Orthodox Christianity and Modern Science: Past, Present, and Future, edited by Kostas Tampakis & Haralambos Ventis. Brepols, 2022
In my paper, I shall endeavor to formulate a critical assessment of scientism as a peculiarly crude and unexpected instance of philosophical idealism parasitic to real science. My thesis runs counter to prevailing assumptions concerning the nature of the object of my critique and will thus require extensive qualification, given the obvious metaphysical basis and implications of idealism, on one hand, and the notoriously anti-metaphysical purposes of scientism, on the other, routinely identified with reason, objectivity, and progress – virtues considered alien to classical idealism. A significant aspect of my aim here will be to argue that scientism and ontotheology are, appearances to the contrary, two sides of the same ideological coin known as “reductionism,” and so must be equally rejected as feeble and, indeed, as deleterious ways of making sense of reality, including the ultimate reality referred to as God.
Philosophy of religion and the scientific turn
Palgrave Communications
Traditionally, analytic philosophy of religion has focused almost solely on specifically philosophical questions about religion. These include the existence of God and divine attributes, religious language, and the justification of religious beliefs, just to mention a few. Recently, many scholars in the field have begun to engage more directly with scientific results. We suggest that this is a promising direction for philosophy of religion to take. Nevertheless, we want to warn philosophy of religion against the excessive focus on methodology that has preoccupied the "science and religion dialogue" in theology. Instead of attempting to formulate a general methodology for all possible engagements between philosophy of religion and the sciences, philosophers of religion would do well to focus on local and particular themes. Since there is no single method in philosophy and since scientific disciplines that have religious relevance vary in their methods as well, progress can be made only if philosophical tools are employed to analyse particular and clearly demarcated questions.
Religion, 2019
In this contribution, I argue that a stronger division of labor within the non-confessional academic study of religion/s would help the discipline to thrive. A further differentiation between Theory of Religion, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science is called for. I am convinced that this division would help scholars to cope with the permanent and fundamental challenges of the discipline, two of which are most noteworthy: the disputed epistemic status of the object ‘religion,’ and the question of normativity.
2. No Room for God? History, Science, Metaphysics, and the Study of Religion
History and Theory, 2008
Despite widespread beliefs to the contrary within the secular intellectual culture of the modern academy, scientific findings are not necessarily incompatible with religious truth claims. the latter include claims about the reality of God as understood in traditional christianity and the possibility of divinely worked miracles. Intellectual history, philosophy, and science's own self-understanding undermine the claim that science entails or need even tend toward atheism. By definition a radically transcendent creator-God is inaccessible to empirical investigation. Denials of the possibility or actual occurrence of miracles depend not on science itself, but on naturalist assumptions that derive originally from a univocal metaphysics with its historical roots in medieval nominalism, which in turn have deeply influenced philosophy and science since the seventeenth century. the metaphysical postulate of naturalism and its correlative empiricist epistemology constitute methodological self-limitations of science-only an unjustified move from postulate to assertion permits ideological scientism and atheism. It is entirely possible that religious claims consistent with the empirical findings of the natural and social sciences might be true. therefore historians of religion not only need not assume that atheism is true in their research, but they should not do so if they want to understand religious people on their own terms rather than to impose on them an undemonstrated and indemonstrable ideology. exhortations to critical thinking apply not only to religious views, but also to uncritically examined secular ideas and assumptions, however widespread or institutionally embedded.
Overcoming Reductionism. On "In-depth" Systems Analysis in the Political Science of Religion
Christianity - World - Politics, 2019
The starting point of the article is the observation made by Ernst Wolfgang Böckenförde, according to which political science perceives itself as an „atheistic science in its proper sense” and documents problematic consequences of this paradigm on the grounds of „political science of religion” (such as, for example, reducing religion to ideology and Churches to groups of interests). In this context the author poses a question whether the theory and the instrumentarium of the political science creates possibilities of non-reduction approach to religion. The article provides an answer to this question. In the first part, outlining changes in the understanding of political science, the author proves that political science, in its theoretical and methodological body leaves some space for what we currently define as „political science of religion”, as well as reveals the sources of special importance of the system paradigm for political research. The second part brings the analysis of the current interpretation of this paradigm and shows their role in consolidating the „religious cataract” of political science. In the third part, referring to Easton’s writing, the author presents the theoretical possibilities of „deepening” the system analysis as well as examples of research techniques and approaches, allowing us to analyze the role of religion in political processes in a non-reduction way. The article proves therefore that it is possible to analyze religion as a social phenomenon differing from politics not only from the theoretical, but also from methodological perspective (the so-called in-depth system analysis).
2019
This paper takes the social constructivist approach, formulated by Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann, as a starting point for an investigation into epistemology and theorizing in the contemporary study of religion. It discusses various strands of scholarship in dialogue with social constructivism and questions in particular the reductionism of radical constructivist positions. Exploring the boundaries of the classical social constructivist paradigm, the article argues that students of religion should consider the implication of social, historical, embodied and material structures in the production of knowledge about religion. For that purpose, it draws on various soft realist approaches to stress the importance of remaining attentive to positionality (reflecting on the sites from where we theorize) and contextuality (reflecting on the inter-relation of discourse and materiality) in theorizing “religion”. Finally, the article suggests that soft realist positions can be integrated in a slightly broadened social constructivist framework for the study of religion.
The Religious Notion of Epistemology
The aim of this article is to highlight the issue of religiousness from the epistemological perspective. This involves, on the one hand, a scientific approach, and on the other hand the relation between science and religion as the basis of the spirituality of the entire existence, by approaching the religious exposure at social level. If at the scientific level religion occupies a secondary place in terms of the object of research, at the social and anthropological level it plays a vital role by approaching the divine-human relationship of all human expressions in relation to the creation and the Creator.