Abstract
ABSTRACT The term ‘critical’ has become ubiquitous in academia these days. It is always a term of praise, but, for many in the academic study of religion, being critical also provides a marker that distinguishes the kind of scholarship that belongs in the academy from the non-academic approaches that do not belong there. Over the past few hundred years, however, the term has been used to identify very different virtues. In this paper, I distinguish five broad senses of the term. I explain what is distinctive about each one, and I identify tensions generated between them. I close with my own proposal that one can combine all five senses of critique in a single coherent academic field, and that this integrated vision would be the best approach for the academic study of religion.
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.
