首页> 外文期刊>Religion >Religious history as religious studies
【24h】

Religious history as religious studies

机译:宗教史作为宗教研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

What is the relationship between religious studies and religious history? Academic historical thinking emerged in part to repudiate ecclesiastical traditions of history, making the difference between religious history and histories of religion a question of denominational rivalry more than a difference in sect. Scholars working in the academic study of religion and the academic study of history have increased self-consciousness of this contingency but have not developed an account for the consequence of history as the primary mode for our thinking. As a result, scholars of religion frequently fall silent in the wake of postcolonial critiques of religious subjects, believing their work is adequately buttressed when this history (the history of the relationship between colonial oppression and religious classification) is acknowledged. Yet this is only the beginning of our work. Religious history cannot evade the methodological challenges of religious studies precisely because to identify an object as religious is to begin an inquiry into the subject of religion itself. Using the example of the year 1893, the author seeks to demonstrate how scholars of history might justify their subjects as religious, and how scholars of religion might consider their concept of history.View full textDownload full textKeywords1893, academic study of religion, colonialism, comparison, history, method, religious history, World's Parliament of ReligionsRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0048721X.2012.681878
机译:宗教研究与宗教历史之间有什么关系?学术历史思想的出现部分是为了抵制教会的历史传统,这使宗教史和宗教史之间的差异成为宗派竞争的问题,而不是宗派差异。在宗教学术研究和历史学术研究中工作的学者增强了这种偶然性的自我意识,但没有对历史的结果作为我们思考的主要方式进行解释。结果,宗教学者在对殖民者进行后殖民批评之后经常保持沉默,他们认为,只要承认这一历史(殖民压迫与宗教分类之间的关系的历史),他们的工作就可以得到充分支持。但这仅仅是我们工作的开始。宗教历史不能逃避宗教研究的方法论挑战,这恰恰是因为将一个客体识别为宗教就是开始对宗教本身进行探讨。笔者以1893年为例,试图证明历史学者如何证明其学科为宗教,以及宗教学者如何考虑其历史概念。查看全文下载全文关键词1893,宗教学术研究,殖民主义,比较,历史,方法,宗教史,世界宗教议会相关var addthis_config = {ui_cobrand:“泰勒和弗朗西斯在线”,service_compact:“ citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多” ,pubid:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0048721X.2012.681878

著录项

  • 来源
    《Religion》 |2012年第3期|p.383-394|共12页
  • 作者

    Kathryn Loftona*;

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号