Modest reflections on the ambiguous future of the study of religion(s)
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4373154 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Chae Young Kim (0000-0002-9258-7499, Sogang University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 83-89 |
| Publication date | 2020-01-02 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Religion (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0048-721X • E-ISSN: 1096-1151 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/0048721x.2019.1681104 |
| OpenAlex | W2982313032 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 3 |
Reflection on the future study of religion(s) poses three questions: What is the definition of religion? What should ‘study’ mean in the academic discourse about religion? And how about its future as an independent discipline within the humanities? The first question brings about a critique of the conceptual definition of religion and the true purpose of the study of religion(s) in wholistic human formation. The second suggests a departure from the monotone of a European and North American model of ‘study.’ And the third encourages self-conscious and tolerance of the ambiguous and ambivalent identity of the study and moving towards more active engagements in the era of the 4IR
Aesthetics · Ambivalence · Epistemology · Identity (music) · Sociology · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Philosophy · Psychology · Religion and Society Interactions · Social Psychology · Study and Philosophy of Religion
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,6 |
| Citation span | 2021 - 2025 (5) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |