Abstract
Abstract This response to Stephen Young’s article begins with his use of the term doxa, drawn from Pierre Bourdieu. For Bourdieu doxa are the unspoken assumptions that undergird social hierarchy, assumptions that are only exposed during times of historical change. It is unclear if Young intends that the exposure of what he calls New Testament studies’ “protectionism” is a sign that the field has undergone such a change. The second part of the response is about the applicability of this kind of analysis to the study of Hinduism in North America, concluding that protectionism concerning the interpretation of the scriptural canon does not seem to be operative there. However, there is a more or less similar controversy about the study of Hinduism by outsiders.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
