Comparison and the Ubiquity of Resemblance

Bibliographic Data

ID8206727
AuthorsDavid Decosimo (0000-0003-2064-7779, corresponding author)
Year2010
Volume78
Issue1
Pages226-258
Publication date2010-03-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of the American Academy of Religion (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0002-7189 • E-ISSN: 1477-4585
PublisherOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/jaarel/lfp089
OpenAlexW2005029166
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited6

Since at least the nineteenth century and arguably centuries earlier, comparison has figured prominently in the study of religion. It continues to do so today, especially in the subfield of comparative religious ethics (“CRE”). This article considers the implications for comparative work more broadly and CRE in particular if we take seriously Nelson Goodman's insight that “similarity is relative, variable and context-dependent ... [and that] every two things have some property in common.” Specifically, the article first contends that embracing Goodman's insight helps identify a variety of problems that are relatively common in comparative work and are rooted in the challenges posed by the ubiquity and relativity of resemblance. Secondly, the article shows how Goodman can help make our work better by underlining the necessity of a clear purpose for our comparisons, and it illustrates the point by considering an exemplary recent work of CRE. Thirdly, it shows that Goodman's point demands that we welcome a wide diversity of approaches and goals in comparative work. The article concludes with a suggestion about what might hold the subfield of CRE together.

Context (archaeology) · Diversity (politics) · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Property (philosophy) · Similarity (geometry) · Sociology · Variety (cybernetics) · Work (physics) · Anthropology · Computer Science · History · Philosophy · Religion and Society Interactions · Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology · Study and Philosophy of Religion

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub