Has the Cognitive Science of Religion (Re)defined “Religion”?

J 2014

Has the Cognitive Science of Religion (Re)defined “Religion”?

FRANEK, Juraj

Základní údaje

Originální název

Has the Cognitive Science of Religion (Re)defined “Religion”?

Autoři

FRANEK, Juraj (703 Slovensko, garant, domácí)

Vydání

Religio : revue pro religionistiku, Brno, Česká společnost pro religionistiku, 2014, 1210-3640

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Článek v odborném periodiku

Obor

60300 6.3 Philosophy, Ethics and Religion

Stát vydavatele

Česká republika

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Odkazy

Digital Library of the Faculty of Arts, Masaryk University

Kód RIV

RIV/00216224:14210/14:00076596

Organizační jednotka

Filozofická fakulta

Klíčová slova anglicky

cognitive science of religion; definition of religion; cognitive revolution; essentialism; nominalism; realism; language games; family resemblances; social constructionism

Štítky

rivok

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno

Změněno: 18. 2. 2015 10:16, Mgr. Vendula Hromádková

Anotace

V originále

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the stance of the cognitive science of religion (CSR) with respect to the problem of the definition of religion. Firstly, I defend the necessity of an approximate definition of religion due to the fact that (a) definitions are microtheories and (b) there is considerable social demand for a comprehensive definition of religion because of the inclusion of the concept in the majority of contemporary legal systems. Secondly, I present a representative sample of statements about the nature of religion put forward by scholars working within the cognitive tradition, which reveals considerable convergence on what the CSR thinks religion is about and justifies the concept of a "cognitive definition of religion". Thirdly, in a brief historical sketch, I try to identify two opposite tendencies in historical attempts at defining religion and their respective philosophical backgrounds: Essentialist definitions perpetuate the venerable Western tradition harking back to Plato's Euthyphro, while recent non-essentialist definitions draw on the work of late Wittgenstein (in what I term "power-innocent" social constructionism) and Nietzsche, Foucault and Bourdieu (in what I term "power-based" social constructionism), respectively. Lastly, against the background of an essentialist vs. non-essentialist dialectic, I consider the definition of religion provided by the CSR, which, while prima facie almost indistinguishable from Tylor's doctrine of animism, is based philosophically on Kant and Chomsky (and therefore at odds with the prevalent practice of social constructionism) and capable of providing much more cogent justification for a universalistic approach to religion than any of its essentialist predecessors.

Návaznosti

MUNI/A/0860/2013, interní kód MU

Název: Interdisciplinární výzkum starých indoevropských jazyků, jejich literatur a příslušných kultur (Akronym: Staré jazyky a literatury)

Investor: Masarykova univerzita, Interdisciplinární výzkum starých indoevropských jazyků, jejich literatur a příslušných kultur, DO R. 2020_Kategorie A - Specifický výzkum - Studentské výzkumné projekty

Citovat

FRANEK, Juraj. Has the Cognitive Science of Religion (Re)defined “Religion”? Religio : revue pro religionistiku. Brno: Česká společnost pro religionistiku, 2014, roč. 22, č. 1, s. 3-27. ISSN 1210-3640.

@article{1199232,
   author = {Franek, Juraj},
   article_location = {Brno},
   article_number = {1},
   keywords = {cognitive science of religion; definition of religion; cognitive revolution; essentialism; nominalism; realism; language games; family resemblances; social constructionism},
   language = {eng},
   issn = {1210-3640},
   journal = {Religio : revue pro religionistiku},
   title = {Has the Cognitive Science of Religion (Re)defined “Religion”?},
   url = {http://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/130352},
   volume = {22},
   year = {2014}
}

TY  - JOUR
ID  - 1199232
AU  - Franek, Juraj
PY  - 2014
TI  - Has the Cognitive Science of Religion (Re)defined “Religion”?
JF  - Religio : revue pro religionistiku
VL  - 22
IS  - 1
SP  - 3-27
EP  - 3-27
PB  - Česká společnost pro religionistiku
SN  - 12103640
KW  - cognitive science of religion
KW  - definition of religion
KW  - cognitive revolution
KW  - essentialism
KW  - nominalism
KW  - realism
KW  - language games
KW  - family resemblances
KW  - social constructionism
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/130352
L2  - http://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/130352
N2  - The purpose of this article is to evaluate the stance of the cognitive science of religion (CSR) with respect to the problem of the definition of religion. Firstly, I defend the necessity of an approximate definition of religion due to the fact that (a) definitions are microtheories and (b) there is considerable social demand for a comprehensive definition of religion because of the inclusion of the concept in the majority of contemporary legal systems. Secondly, I present a representative sample of statements about the nature of religion put forward by scholars working within the cognitive tradition, which reveals considerable convergence on what the CSR thinks religion is about and justifies the concept of a "cognitive definition of religion". Thirdly, in a brief historical sketch, I try to identify two opposite tendencies in historical attempts at defining religion and their respective philosophical backgrounds: Essentialist definitions perpetuate the venerable Western tradition harking back to Plato's Euthyphro, while recent non-essentialist definitions draw on the work of late Wittgenstein (in what I term "power-innocent" social constructionism) and Nietzsche, Foucault and Bourdieu (in what I term "power-based" social constructionism), respectively. Lastly, against the background of an essentialist vs. non-essentialist dialectic, I consider the definition of religion provided by the CSR, which, while prima facie almost indistinguishable from Tylor's doctrine of animism, is based philosophically on Kant and Chomsky (and therefore at odds with the prevalent practice of social constructionism) and capable of providing much more cogent justification for a universalistic approach to religion than any of its essentialist predecessors.
ER  -

FRANEK, Juraj. Has the Cognitive Science of Religion (Re)defined “Religion”? \textit{Religio : revue pro religionistiku}. Brno: Česká společnost pro religionistiku, 2014, roč.~22, č.~1, s.~3-27. ISSN~1210-3640.

Podrobný výpis o publikaci