2008/03/27 by F. Cho, Francisca Cho, R. K. Squier
Arts and Humanities · Psychology · #Psychedelics and Drug Studies #Religious Studies and Spiritual Practices #Study and Philosophy of Religion
paper · doi:10.1093/jaarel/lfn001
openalex publication_date 2008/03/27 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/16
A number of recent publications in the study of religion address the continuing question about the legitimacy and coherence of the concept of “religion.” This essay examines three particular critiques—(1) that “religion” is a Christian theological construct with questionable applications to non-Christian cultures, (2) that “religion” lacks coherence and empirical warrant as an analytical category, and (3) that the study of religion needs to be rendered more scientific through reductive theory and methods. These claims often take the natural sciences as the standard against which the study of religion is found lacking. Given the drastic nature of what these reflections on the study of religion imply or recommend, it is important to investigate whether or not such critiques are warranted. This essay argues that the study of science actually suggests more similarities than differences, and that the history and philosophy of science render the academic study of religion into a comparable “research tradition.”