- Home
- A-Z Publications
- NTT Journal for Theology and the Study of Religion
- Previous Issues
- Volume 57, Issue 4, 2003
NTT Journal for Theology and the Study of Religion - Volume 57, Issue 4, 2003
Volume 57, Issue 4, 2003
-
-
Friedrich Max Müller en de studie van natuurlijke religie
More Less1Dil artikel is de geannoteerde versie van mijn bijdrage aan het symposium ‘Godsdienstgeschiedenis en de moderne wereld’, gehouden op 27 september 2002 ter gelegenheid van mijn afscheid van de Faculteit der Godgeleerheid en Godsdienstwetenschap van de Rijksuniversiteit te Groningen.
AbstractThis article deals with Friedrich Max Müller, one of the founding fathers of the comparative study of religion, and his views on natural religion. In order to meet the Victorian crisis of Christianity, he tried to develop an alternative in which the history of religion became the place of revelation. Müller saw a close relationship between the science of religion and the philosophy of religion. A careful study of the history of religions would lead, according to him, to a better understanding of religion and the real destiny of humankind, the realization of true humanity. With his theologically inspired vision of a religion of the future, Müller is also one of the predecessors of those scholars who are nowadays denoted as ‘religionists’ and who champion a theological and religious interpretation of religion.
-
-
-
Constructing Modernity by Writing Religious History
More Less*This article is my contribution to the symposium ‘Godsdienstgeschiedenis en de moderne wereld’, held on 27 September 2002 in honour of Dr. L.P. van den Bosch on the occasion of his retirement from the Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
AbstractThis paper presents a re-description of the rise of comparative religion between 1870 and 1920. It argues that the reconstructions of the past depended on a critical evaluation of the presence. Using comparative methods, scholars identified elements of ancient, oriental and tribal religions in their own culture – in the beginning as survivals, later as powerful manifestations of a culture not subdued by rationality. Their historical reconstructions implied different diagnoses of the modern world.
-
-
-
‘In hoc signo vinces’ De geschiedschrijving van de godsdienstwetenschap
More Less*Dit artikel is een uitgebreide versie van mijn bijdrage aan het symposium ‘Godsdienstgeschiedenis en de moderne wereld’, gehouden op 27 september 2002 ter gelegenheid van het afscheid van dr. L.P. van den Bosch van de Faculteit der Godgeleerheid en Godsdienstwetenschap van de Rijksuniversiteit te Groningen. Centraal stonden hier de volgende twee studies: Lourens P. van den Bosch, Friedrich Max Müller: A Life Devoted to the Humanities, Leiden 2001, en Hans G. Kippenberg, Die Entdeckung der Religionsgeschichte: Religionswissenschaft und Moderne, München 1997, vertaald als: Discovering Religious History in the Modern Age, Princeton 2002. In mijn bijdrage richt ik mij vooral op de visie van Kippenberg.
AbstractHow is the history of science of religion to be written? Various recent books on the history of the scholarly study of religion – prominent among them Hans G. Kippenberg’s Discovering Religious History in the Modern Age (Princeton 2002) – call for further reflection upon the historiography of the field. How to avoid the danger of writing its history in a teleological way, glorifying the present status quo? Is all research on religion to be included in the historiography, or do we have to limit ourselves to the more or less clearly demarcated ‘discipline’ ‘science/history of religion’? Can the narrative of the emergence of the field of the scholarly study of religion in the nineteenth century be related (exclusively) to processes of modernization? What is the role of institutions in the establishment of the field? These questions are dealt with in this tentative essay on – what I would prefer to call – the ‘construction’ of a field, which at the beginning of the twenty-first century is again a somewhat conflicted intellectual endeavour, drawing the attention of many people, who want to understand what is going on in the rapidly changing worlds of late modernity.
-
-
-
Methodologische en terminologische notities bij de opkomst van de godsdienstgeschiedenis in de achttiende en negentiende eeuw
More Less*Dit artikel is een iets uitgebreide en geannoteerde versie van mijn bijdrage, waarvan ik het orale karakter niet heb veranderd, aan het symposium ‘Godsdienstgeschiedenis en de moderne wereld’, gehouden op 27 september 2002 ter gelegenheid van het afscheid van Lourens van den Bosch van de Faculteit der Godgeleerheid en Godsdienstwetenschap van de Rijksuniversiteit te Groningen. Ik dank Arie Molendijk voor verwijzingen en het kritisch doorlezen van mijn tekst.
AbstractHans Kippenberg’s view of the rise of comparative religion as a response to the current processes of modernization is a highly fertile approach. Yet every gain also carries some losses. This contribution signals four of them and concentrates on (1) the lack of a proper historiographical introduction, (2) the absence of a discussion of the origin and/or significance of important notions, such as myth, ritual and sacrifice, (3) the absence of interest in the institutional side of the rise of comparative religion and (4) the lack of a discussion of the relationship between comparative religion and contemporary Christianity.1
-
-
-
Empirisme, Postmodernisme en Godsdienstwijsbegeerte De postmoderne kritiek op het empiristische denken en de consequenties voor de godsdienstwijsbegeerte
*Ik dank Luco van den Brom voor zijn commentaar op een eerdere versie van dit artikel (ter gelegenheid van zijn ‘response paper’ op de lezing die ik voor de Nederlandse Vereniging voor de Godsdienstwijsbegeerte in juni 2000 heb gehouden). Verder dank ik Marcel Sarot, Wilko van Holten, Taede Smedes en Henk-Jan Prosman voor hun grammaticale en inhoudelijke correcties en suggesties.
By D.-M. GrubeAbstractIn section 1 of this article, it is stated that an empiricist frame of reference limits the possibilities of theorising in religion in counterproductive ways. Empiricism has resulted in an ‘obsession with experience’ which philosophers of religion, such as Alston, overlook to the detriment of their own theorising. In section 2, the postmodernist (R. Rorty’s) criticism of empiricism and of realism is discussed. In section 3, an alternative to Rorty is suggested which shares his criticism of empiricism but provides the resources to accommodate stronger realist claims, viz. a coherentist holism (thesis 2). It is argued that such a holistic version of realism can accommodate the strong features of postmodernism, e.g. its criticism of empiricism, while being capable of avoiding its shortcomings, e.g. its antirealism.
-
Volumes & issues
-
Volume 78 (2024)
-
Volume 77 (2023)
-
Volume 76 (2022)
-
Volume 75 (2021)
-
Volume 74 (2020)
-
Volume 73 (2019)
-
Volume 72 (2018)
-
Volume 71 (2017)
-
Volume 70 (2016)
-
Volume 69 (2015)
-
Volume 68 (2014)
-
Volume 67 (2013)
-
Volume 66 (2012)
-
Volume 65 (2011)
-
Volume 64 (2010)
-
Volume 63 (2009)
-
Volume 62 (2008)
-
Volume 61 (2007)
-
Volume 60 (2006)
-
Volume 59 (2005)
-
Volume 58 (2004)
-
Volume 57 (2003)
-
Volume 56 (2002)
-
Volume 55 (2001)
-
Volume 54 (2000)
-
Volume 53 (1999)
-
Volume 52 (1998)
-
Volume 51 (1997)
-
Volume 50 (1996)
-
Volume 49 (1995)
-
Volume 48 (1994)
-
Volume 47 (1993)
-
Volume 46 (1992)
-
Volume 45 (1991)
-
Volume 44 (1990)
-
Volume 43 (1989)
-
Volume 42 (1988)
-
Volume 41 (1987)
-
Volume 40 (1986)
-
Volume 39 (1985)
-
Volume 38 (1984)
-
Volume 37 (1983)
-
Volume 36 (1982)
-
Volume 35 (1981)
-
Volume 34 (1980)
Most Read This Month
![Loading](/images/jp/spinner.gif)