Home
Creators
Search Recent Missing Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Dispatch #1 from my weekly reading (Patreon)

Published:
2020-12-23 07:00:01
Imported:
2026-06

Content

Why the academic study of religion?

I've been trying to read a lot more these days. I've deleted a few social media apps from my phone to try to reclaim some time in my day to read at least one book per week and one article per day. And as I've been reading, I've come across all sorts of cool insights that I'd like to share in occasional Patreon posts. 

Here's a quote from the scholar of religion Dr. Donald Wiebe that stuck out to me from his 1988 article: "Why the Academic Study of Religion?" 

"At the simplest logical level the student of religion functions somewhat like the scientific naturalist with a concern 'to collect', describe and classify the phenomena observed. (Being aware all the while, of course, that a mere accumulation of data does not in itself constitute a science)...The academic study of religion is, then, a positive science and not a religious or metaphysical enterprise in that it concerns itself with religion as a public fact and not a divine mystery."

This quote stands out to me for two reasons. First, his aside that "a mere accumulation of data does not in itself constitute a science." I sometimes worry that RFB is merely an "accumulation of data." I always strive to add some level of theorizing or deeper analysis to even basic videos like "What is Hanukkah," but sometimes the videos do come across as mere description. I'm going to challenge myself going into 2021 to always have an analytical aspect to the topics I cover. 

The second thing that jumped out to me in this article is how he distinguishes between two modes of studying religion: treating religion as a "public fact" (that is to say, an empirical set of human behaviors open to scientific analysis) and treating religion as a personal "divine mystery." I obviously subscribe to the former and not the latter mode. If religion can only be understood by private religious experience, then it is beyond the faculties of the human sciences. Wiebe argues such a stance would lead to "radical relativism" that precludes the "possibility of a scientific study of religion." What can you know about "faith" if "faith" is "only known by faith and the direct encounter of 'the Ultimate?'" The whole enterprise of the academic study of religion is predicated upon the assumption that religion can be understood scientifically using the tools of sociology, anthropology, history, cognitive science, etc. etc.. 

~Andrew

Comments

T.R. Salsman

This is one of the places where the longer series format can shine. I didn't even know what the cult of Mithras was before I watched the video, so I wouldn't have been able to understand a mostly analytic video. But with the Shinto series there's been more breathing room to talk about significance and what the history, practice, (lack of?) identity, etc. of Shinto means for actual people in 2020. So this might just get solved by focusing on longer series. You could also make some of the one-off videos longer, similar to some videos from Al-Muqaddimah and Esoterica, though I imagine that's more work and the longer length might scare off casual viewers.

Daniel Mata

From a non-academic viewpoint, I believe that we would be best served if you treated us as students, rather than colleagues. Explaining esoteric meanings and ideas in exoteric expressions are more likely to be absorbed by the mind.