Conceptualizing Religion

Responses

Dados Bibliográficos

ID12202367
AutoresBenson Saler (1Brandeis University, autor correspondente)
Ano2000
Volume12
Fascículo1-4
Páginas323-338
Data de publicação2000-01-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoMethod & Theory in the Study of Religion (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0943-3058 • E-ISSN: 1570-0682
EditoraBrill (PUBLISHER • NL)
DOI10.1163/157006800x00238
OpenAlexW1964538794
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas2
Referências citadas8

I am very grateful to the commentators for the time and effort that they expended on my book. I do not imagine that it was easy to read. For over and beyond any unclarities generated by my prose, the perspective on categories celebrated in Conceptualizing Religion constitutes a departure from what most of us, from childhood on, have learned to accept as workable and conventional (if not actually mandated by a rational accommodation to the order of the world). To the extent that a certain disparity in viewpoints distances me from some of my readers, it imposes difficulties in following my argument. I appreciate the fact that the commentators have taken the book seriously enough to engage it. I respond to each of the commentators below, in alphabetical order

Accommodation · Aesthetics · Argument (complex analysis · Art · Economics · Epistemology · Order (exchange · Perspective (graphical · Sociology · Viewpoints · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Computer Science · Philosophy · Psychology · Religion and Society Interactions · Study and Philosophy of Religion