"When the chips are down": a response to Ambasciano

The author comments on Leonardo Ambasciano's book An Unnatural History of Religions: Academia, Post-truth and the Quest for Scientific Knowledge (2019) and develops the line of its argument that a fideistic, sui generis, confessional History of Religions tradition continues due to the tacit sup...

全面介紹

Saved in:  
書目詳細資料
主要作者: Robertson, David G. 1975- (Author)
其他作者: Ambasciano, Leonardo (Bibliographic antecedent)
格式: 電子 Article
語言:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
載入...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
出版: Společnost [2020]
In: Religio
Year: 2020, 卷: 28, 發布: 1, Pages: [21]-30
Further subjects:B Critique
B British Academy
B Religious Studies
B critical religion
B Theology and Religious Studies
B Gnosticism
B history of religions
在線閱讀: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
實物特徵
總結:The author comments on Leonardo Ambasciano's book An Unnatural History of Religions: Academia, Post-truth and the Quest for Scientific Knowledge (2019) and develops the line of its argument that a fideistic, sui generis, confessional History of Religions tradition continues due to the tacit support from scholars, institutions and organisations. Gnosticism is presented as a case study, showing how it exemplifies core critiques of HoR, and is supported by the same scholars and institutions, particularly the IAHR. The author then considers the recent British Academy report into Theology and Religious Studies in the UK to argue that the HoR tradition in contemporary Religious Studies is not a "problem to be solved", but rather something at the very basis of the discipline. The argument is therefore made that there cannot be a truly scientific academic study of religion while RS exists.
ISSN:2336-4475
Reference:Kritik von "An unnatural history of religions (London : Bloomsbury Academic, 2020)"
Kommentar in "From Gnosticism to Agnotology (2020)"
Contains:Enthalten in: Religio
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.5817/Rel2020-1-2