| Abstract
|
:
|
This paper is a response to Patrick Hart’s article ‘Theory, method, and madness in religious studies’ and further interrogates the terms “theory” and “method,” the relationship between them, and their application to the study of religion, particularly at a pedagogical level, where there is some confusion about what is referred to by these terms. This paper argues that theory and method should be included explicitly in religious studies programs and research to show how scholarship has been produced. This paper is a response to Patrick Hart’s article ‘Theory, method, and madness in religious studies’ and further interrogates the terms “theory” and “method,” the relationship between them, and their application to the study of religion, particularly at a pedagogical level, where there is some confusion about what is referred to by these terms. This paper argues that theory and method should be included explicitly in religious studies programs and research to show how scholarship has been produced.
|