‘What’s in a name?’: The case for ‘Study of Religions’

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This article makes the case for adopting ‘Study of Religions’ as a single common disciplinary name for cross-cultural, comparative and theoretical studies of ‘religion/s’. I argue that the grammatical and substantive format of this name adequately addresses disciplinary requirements and resolves a longstanding debate in the field. It also supplies a distinctive, recognizable international brand. While poststructuralist and deconstructionist work in the field has been stimulating, it has not fostered positive disciplinary identification. Adoption of a single name will promote centripetal drive and theoretical coherence which is where the most effective work in the Study of Religions has been done since the 1960s – and continues.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)129-136
Number of pages8
JournalReligion
Volume50
Issue number1
Early online date10 Nov 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 31 Jan 2020

Keywords

  • poststructuralism
  • post-1960s
  • discipline
  • paradigm
  • religious studies
  • study of religions

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of '‘What’s in a name?’: The case for ‘Study of Religions’'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this