This analysis aims to elucidate those characteristics which distinguish a definition as servant of its author’s needs. Following these opening remarks, the discussion will include a collection of various, cross-disciplinary definitions of religion, in which I will identify important characteristics of each definition using terminology and theory supplied by both abovementioned authors.
Thiselton’s entry, “religion, religious experience,” from the 2005 volume, A Concise Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Religion. įor such a discussion to occur, I find it necessary to first look at Alister McGrath’s work on the task of defining religion from the fourth edition of his textbook Christian Theology: An Introduction in conjunction with Anthony C. Due to the nature of the task of defining religion, namely that the definition can be and often is constructed to serve the definer’s purposes rather than the greater need for a definition of religion, a universally applicable, metaphysical definition of religion is needed. Following this argument is its corollary. Initially inspired by classroom discussions as to the nature of religion and spurred on by my work with the first chapter of Clifford Geertz’s 1973 book The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays for that class, this paper uses various definitions of religion to argue that the task of defining religion, regardless of the accuracy of the proposed definition, can be greatly impaired by the definer’s potential use of the definition. The focus of this work is on the latter of these potential questions.
Regardless of cultural or geographic location, the plethora of religious traditions – some of which claim exclusive access to the “Truth” – has lead to questions of the legitimacy of such claims the interrelatedness of the various traditions the seemingly inescapable impact on and role in the society in which the religious system can be found the understanding of the term religion in the face of such diversity in truth claims, beliefs, and practices. T he proliferation of religious systems in the modern world is plainly identifiable. Using various definitions of religion to argue that the task of defining religion, regardless of the accuracy of the proposed definition, can be greatly impaired by the definer’s potential use of the definition, this paper contends that a universally applicable, metaphysical definition of religion is needed. Thomas Webster, MDiv candidate, Southern Methodist UniversityĪbstract: The proliferation of religious systems in the modern world is plainly identifiable. The Need for and Construction of a Metaphysical Definition of Religion
0 kommentar(er)
