The disputed legacy of Ninian Smart and phenomenological religious education: a critical response to Kevin O’Grady

Abstract

The aim of this article is to respond to Kevin O’Grady’s critique (in BJRE, 27, 2005, pp. 227–37) of my interpretation and assessment of Ninian Smart’s contribution to religious education. I begin by dealing with a range of issues that lend themselves to fairly summary discussion and then address two further aspects of his critique in more detail. First, the nature of the influence of the phenomenology of religion over phenomenological religious education is considered within the context of recent critical discussions of the fundamental assumptions of religious phenomenology. Secondly, O’Grady’s positive account of the continuing relevance of Smart’s thought to the issue of hermeneutics in religious education is both qualified by attention to its limitations and complemented by reference to the work of the French hermeneutical philosopher, Paul Ricoeur.