رکورد قبلیرکورد بعدی

" Reconstructing “Religion” from the Bottom Up "


Document Type : AL
Record Number : 1079222
Doc. No : LA122851
Call No : ‭10.1163/15685276-12341439‬
Language of Document : English
Main Entry : Wouter J. Hanegraaff
Title & Author : Reconstructing “Religion” from the Bottom Up [Article]\ Wouter J. Hanegraaff
Publication Statement : Leiden: Brill
Title of Periodical : Numen
Date : 2016
Volume/ Issue Number : 63/5-6
Page No : 576–605
Abstract : This article claims to uncover the core problematics that have made the debate on defining and conceptualizing “religion” so difficult and argues that this makes it possible to move beyond radical deconstruction towards reconstructing the concept for scholarly purposes. The argument has four main steps. Step 1 consists of establishing the nature of the entity “religion” as a reified imaginative formation. Step 2 consists of identifying the basic dilemma with which scholars have been struggling: the fact that, on the one hand, definitions and conceptualizations do not seem to work unless they stay sufficiently close to commonly held prototypes, while yet, on the other hand, those prototypes are grounded in monotheistic, more specifically Christian, even more specifically Protestant, theological biases about “true” religion. The first line of argument leads to crypto-theological definitions and conceptualizations, the second to a radical deconstruction of the very concept of “religion.” Step 3 resolves the dilemma by identifying an unexamined assumption, or problematic “blind spot,” that the two lines of argument have in common: they both think that “religion” stands against “the secular.” However, the historical record shows that these two defined themselves not just against one another but, simultaneously, against a third domain (referred to by such terms as “magic” or “superstition”). The structure is therefore not dualistic but triadic. Step 4 consists of replacing common assumptions about how “religion” emerged in the early modern period by an interpretation that explains not just its emergence but its logical necessity, at that time, for dealing with the crisis of comparison caused by colonialist expansion. “Religion” emerged as the tertium comparationis — or, in technically more precise language, the “pre-comparative tertium” — that enabled comparison between familiar (monotheist, Christian, Protestant) forms of belief and modes of worship and unfamiliar ones (associated with “pagan” superstition or magic). If we restore the term to its original function, this allows us to reconstruct “religion” as a scholarly concept that not just avoids but prevents any slippage back to Christian theology or ethnocentric bias. This article claims to uncover the core problematics that have made the debate on defining and conceptualizing “religion” so difficult and argues that this makes it possible to move beyond radical deconstruction towards reconstructing the concept for scholarly purposes. The argument has four main steps. Step 1 consists of establishing the nature of the entity “religion” as a reified imaginative formation. Step 2 consists of identifying the basic dilemma with which scholars have been struggling: the fact that, on the one hand, definitions and conceptualizations do not seem to work unless they stay sufficiently close to commonly held prototypes, while yet, on the other hand, those prototypes are grounded in monotheistic, more specifically Christian, even more specifically Protestant, theological biases about “true” religion. The first line of argument leads to crypto-theological definitions and conceptualizations, the second to a radical deconstruction of the very concept of “religion.” Step 3 resolves the dilemma by identifying an unexamined assumption, or problematic “blind spot,” that the two lines of argument have in common: they both think that “religion” stands against “the secular.” However, the historical record shows that these two defined themselves not just against one another but, simultaneously, against a third domain (referred to by such terms as “magic” or “superstition”). The structure is therefore not dualistic but triadic. Step 4 consists of replacing common assumptions about how “religion” emerged in the early modern period by an interpretation that explains not just its emergence but its logical necessity, at that time, for dealing with the crisis of comparison caused by colonialist expansion. “Religion” emerged as the tertium comparationis — or, in technically more precise language, the “pre-comparative tertium” — that enabled comparison between familiar (monotheist, Christian, Protestant) forms of belief and modes of worship and unfamiliar ones (associated with “pagan” superstition or magic). If we restore the term to its original function, this allows us to reconstruct “religion” as a scholarly concept that not just avoids but prevents any slippage back to Christian theology or ethnocentric bias.
Descriptor : comparison
Descriptor : concept of religion
Descriptor : deconstruction
Descriptor : definition of religion
Descriptor : imagination
Descriptor : magic
Descriptor : prototypes
Descriptor : reification
Descriptor : superstition
Descriptor : tertium comparationis
Location & Call number : ‭10.1163/15685276-12341439‬
کپی لینک

پیشنهاد خرید
پیوستها
عنوان :
نام فایل :
نوع عام محتوا :
نوع ماده :
فرمت :
سایز :
عرض :
طول :
10.1163-15685276-12341439_31568.pdf
10.1163-15685276-12341439.pdf
مقاله لاتین
متن
application/pdf
696.62 KB
85
85
نظرسنجی
نظرسنجی منابع دیجیتال

1 - آیا از کیفیت منابع دیجیتال راضی هستید؟