This discussion brings together a number of aspiring academics to reflect on some of the issues brought up in a recent podcast in a friendly and hilarious manner. The question cuts to the core of what academics who study religion are doing… are they taking care of religion? Are they antagonising it? What should they be doing? And judging by the various long tangents through which discussion meanders, the question certainly sparked our interest.
Editors Note: To contextualise this piece, you may also wish to read Naomi Goldenberg’s post on the Critical Religion blog, entitled Gender and the Vestigial State of Religion.
Prof. Goldenberg’s interview raises as many questions as it answers, in a good way. It seems to square the circle. She puts the
Nuancing the Qual-Quan Divide:The Vitality of Research Methods in the Academic Study of Religion
By Yasaman S. Munro, Wilfrid Laurier University
Published by the Religious Studies Project on 4 July 2012 in response to the Religious Studies Project Interview with David Voas on
There is an important message embedded in Marion Bowman’s notion of “vernacular religion”–that when we plant our feet firmly on the ground, amidst the fray of religious life, we are confronted with the unmistakable heterogeneity of both belief and practice. As living people “do religion” on the ground it may
By David G. M. Wilson, Edinburgh.
Published by the Religious Studies Project on 20 June 2012 in response to the Religious Studies Project Interview with Titus Hjelm on “Marxist Approaches to the Study of Religion” (18 June 2012).
Titus Hjelm and Marxist Approaches to the Study of Religion
I begin this response to Titus Hjelm’s discussion of
The Faith-Spangled Banner: Changes in American attitudes and belief in all directions
By Lindsey Arielle Askin, Durham University
Published by the Religious Studies Project on 13 June 2012 in response to the Religious Studies Project Interview with Ariela Keysar on “What does ‘belief’ mean to Americans?” (11 June 2012).
In contemplating a
The Spirit of the Matter: a Neo-Tylorian Response to Timothy Fitzgerald
By Liam Sutherland, University of Edinburgh
Published by the Religious Studies Project on 6 June 2012 in response to the Religious Studies Project Interview with Timothy Fitzgerald on ‘Religion’ and Mystification (4 June 2012).
In the interview regarding ‘religion, non-religion and
In Saecula Saeculorum: Reflecting on the Age/Aeon in light of the Cappadocian Fathers
By Mario Baghos, St Andrew’s Greek Orthodox Theological College and University of Sydney
Published by the Religious Studies Project, on 23 May 2012 in response to the Religious Studies Project
Ninian Smart was a proponent of the idea that Religious Studies should be “poly-methodical”; but should Religious Studies as a discipline incorporate theories and methodologies from multiple other disciplines, such as sociology, anthropology or history? When RS departments have run on an interdisciplinary basis, have they been successful?
Engaging gender as an important category of analysis in the study of religion is to interrogate, destabilise, and interrupt the ‘business-as-usual’ of the conceptual and organisational assumptions often employed in our highly dynamic yet historically and oft-times structurally androcentric discipline. In the words of Judith Butler (1990: vii), one could
In the interview with Professor Eileen Barker, three broad themes are brought up. First, the definitions of ’new religious movement’ and ’cult’ are given a brief consideration. After this, Barker introduces the Inform network and its activities in distributing information and making the results of scientific research concerning new religious
Anzac and Awe: Religion, Violence, and the Media in Australia
By Zoe Alderton, University of Sydney
Published by the Religious Studies Project, on 9 May 2012 in response to the Religious Studies Project Interview with Jolyon Mitchell on Religion, Media and Violence (7 May 2012).
Jolyon Mitchell is Professor of Communications, Arts
“My own field of research is digital religion, an area with a particularly troubled relationship to history. Scholars and commentators interested in digital culture and its significance for religion have struggled to distinguish what is truly new from what has come before, and continue to search for helpful ways to talk about change.”
In another roundtable gathering, conversation ranges from the strengths and weaknesses of such data, whether there is more to the social sciences than quantitative methods, and the place of the social sciences within a multi-disciplinary Religious Studies field. Can we trust social sciences when we study religion? Is a social scientific approach the future of religious studies? What is an alternative to a social scientific approach?
Bron Taylor, Professor of Religion and Nature at the University of Florida, and editor-in-chief of the Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature (2008), may be the best interpreter of environmentalism as a religious project working today. His latest book, Dark Green Religion: Nature Spirituality and the Planetary Future