The Eclipse of Morality: A Riposte to Lane, Wildman, & Shults’ “Paying the Piper” Commentary

The present contribution is a riposte to Lane, Wildman, and Shults’ commentary on my MTSR article “He Who Pays the Piper Calls the Tune” (Ambasciano 2022). I offer an epistemological and historical criticism of some of their most relevant claims, along with the identification and deconstruction of s...

Descrizione completa

Salvato in:  
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autore principale: Ambasciano, Leonardo (Autore)
Tipo di documento: Elettronico Articolo
Lingua:Inglese
Verificare la disponibilità: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Caricamento...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Pubblicazione: Brill 2023
In: Method & theory in the study of religion
Anno: 2023, Volume: 35, Fascicolo: 1, Pagine: 87-107
(sequenze di) soggetti normati:B Dati di massa / Digital humanities / Metodo / Kognitive Religionswissenschaft / Etica della scienza
Notazioni IxTheo:AA Scienze religiose
AE Psicologia delle religioni
NCJ Etica della scienza
ZG Scienza dei media; Digitalità; Scienza della comunicazione
Altre parole chiave:B CSR 2.0
B Commento
B cognitive and evolutionary science of religion
B Cognitive Historiography
B method & theory in the qualitative study of history, culture, and religion(s)
Accesso online: Accesso probabilmente gratuito
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Descrizione
Riepilogo:The present contribution is a riposte to Lane, Wildman, and Shults’ commentary on my MTSR article “He Who Pays the Piper Calls the Tune” (Ambasciano 2022). I offer an epistemological and historical criticism of some of their most relevant claims, along with the identification and deconstruction of some of the biases and fallacies behind their commentary. I also highlight – once again – the historiographical neglect and some of the most questionable approaches and unresolved issues in the current CSR 2.0 modus operandi. Along with the ethical and financial impact of private donors with political and religious agendas in the field, such controversial topics call for immediate action from peers and associations to avoid the further drain of money, resources, and personnel in a time of increasing financial austerity. A computational science incapable of confronting and resolving such basic issues is not a computational science at all – it’s mere tech-evangelism.
ISSN:1570-0682
Riferimento:Kommentar zu "Paying the Piper: History, Humanities, and the Scientific Study of Religion (2023)"
Comprende:Enthalten in: Method & theory in the study of religion
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/15700682-bja10082