A Response to Wolfart’s “Religious Literacy”: Some Considerations and Reservations
This text addresses three related aspects of Wolfart’s article on religious literacy: the critique of assumptions on the outcome of increased religious literacy, questions about the purpose of religious education, and the suggestion that religious studies are ex-theological. Although the predictabil...
| Κύριος συγγραφέας: | |
|---|---|
| Τύπος μέσου: | Ηλεκτρονική πηγή Άρθρο |
| Γλώσσα: | Αγγλικά |
| Έλεγχος διαθεσιμότητας: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Φόρτωση...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Έκδοση: |
Brill
2022
|
| Στο/Στη: |
Method & theory in the study of religion
Έτος: 2022, Τόμος: 34, Τεύχος: 5, Σελίδες: 453-464 |
| Τυποποιημένες (ακολουθίες) λέξεων-κλειδιών: | B
Θρησκεία
/ Γνώση
/ Θρησκευτική παιδαγωγική
/ Θρησκειολογία
/ Θεολογία (μοτίβο)
/ Φιλοσοφία της εκπαίδευσης
|
| Σημειογραφίες IxTheo: | ΑΑ Θρησκειολογία AH Θρησκευτική Παιδαγωγική |
| Άλλες λέξεις-κλειδιά: | B
Religious Education
B Educational Philosophy B ex-theology B Σχόλιο B Gert J.J. Biesta B Religious Literacy |
| Διαθέσιμο Online: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Σύνοψη: | This text addresses three related aspects of Wolfart’s article on religious literacy: the critique of assumptions on the outcome of increased religious literacy, questions about the purpose of religious education, and the suggestion that religious studies are ex-theological. Although the predictability of the results of certain classroom activities presents a fundamental problem, I argue that the tentative and generic abilities highlighted in the religious literacy discourse may function as a starting point to elaborate on a better definition of religious literacy in religious studies. Moreover, based on Biesta’s educational philosophy, I argue that the religious literacy discourse is about learnification in rhetorical disguise as value-based education. Instead, I suggest that the purpose of religious education should be (re)considered from Biesta’s three dimensions of qualification, socialization, and subjectification. Finally, I problematize Wolfart’s suggestion that religious studies are ex-theological and conclude that, although there are a theological dimension and a genealogy to be observed in the religious literacy discourse, other kinds of scholarly aspects are also worth exploring further. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1570-0682 |
| Αναφορά: | Kommentar zu "‘Religious Literacy’: Some Considerations and Reservations (2022)"
|
| Περιλαμβάνει: | Enthalten in: Method & theory in the study of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15700682-bja10079 |