Abstract
Abstract In this reply to the article “Can Critical Religion Play by Its Own Rules? Why There Must Be More Ways to Be ‘Critical’ in the Study of Religion” by Galen Watts and Sharday Mosurinjohn (2022), I take exception to the authors’ criticisms. I call attention to Watts’ and Mosurinjohn’s implication that critical religion enables racism, their imaginary construction of a methodological ‘school’ with rigid ‘rules,’ and their simplistic dismissal of Foucault’s approach to discourse analysis. I then suggest that the suspension of reified categories in Religious Studies opens up promising avenues for theory and research.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
