Metodoloogia keerukusest ehk millest me räägime, kui me räägime religiooniuuringute metodoloogiast
Abstract
The Complexity of Methodology: in Other Words, What Are We Speaking about When We Speak about the Methodology of the Study of Religion?
This article aims to both give a thorough account of all the different ways ‘method(ology)’ has been understood in the study of religion as well as propose a three-level model how to make sense of this remarkable diversity. In the first half of the article it is shown how ‘method(ology)’ can mean for different researchers either a strict procedure, a general mode of research, a way of explaining one’s position as a scholar or occasionally even other things. The second half of the article intends to show how it would be good to view this complexity as a matter of different method(olog)ical dimensions. The first dimension of method is concerned with clearly definable practices that follow specific and explicitly determined rules. The second dimension of method(ology) deals with the general research approach one or another scholar has chosen to pursue to accomplish their goals. Lastly, the third dimension of the methodological debate concentrates on the question of the positioning of the scholar oneself. Overall, this article aims to highlight the diversity and complexity of the methodological debate in the study of religion and suggest a few ways how to better make sense of it all.
Downloads
References
Aldenderfer, Mark. 1998. ‘Quantitative Methods in Archaeology: A Review of Recent Trends and Developments’. Journal of Archaeological Research 6 (2): 91–120.
Allen, Douglas. 2005. ‘Phenomenology of Religion’. In The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion, 182–207. London; New York: Routledge.
Alton, Bruce. 1986. ‘Method and Reduction in the Study of Religion’. Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 15 (2): 153–64.
Alton, Bruce. 1989. ‘Before Method: Cognitive Aims in the Study of Religion’. Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 18 (4): 415–25.
Annus, Amar. 2014. ‘Seeing Otherwise: On the Rules of Comparison in Historical Humanities’. In Melammu. The Ancient World in an Age of Globalization, 359–72. Berlin: epubli. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:101:1-2014091213838.
Bernard, H. Russell. 2006. Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Lanham, New York, Toronto, Oxford: AltaMira Press.
Bleeker, C. J. 1954. ‘The Relation of the History of Religions to Kindred Religious Sciences’. Numen 1 (2): 141–59.
Bleeker, C. Jouco. 1959. ‘The Phenomenological Method’. Numen 6 (2): 96–111.
Bleeker, Claas Jouco. 1971. ‘Comparing the Religio-Historical and the Theological Method’. Numen 18 (1): 9–29.
Blum, J. N. 2012. ‘Retrieving Phenomenology of Religion as a Method for Religious Studies’. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 80 (4): 1025–48.
Blum, Jason. 2011. ‘Pragmatism and Naturalism in Religious Studies’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 23 (2): 83–102.
Bolle, Kees W. 1967. ‘History of Religions with a Hermeneutic Oriented toward Christian Theology?’ In The History of Religions: Essays on the Problem of Understanding, 89–118. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press.
Bradie, Michael. 2009. ‘What’s Wrong with Methodological Naturalism?’ Human Affairs 19 (2): 126–37.
Bulbulia, Joseph, and Edward Slingerland. 2012. ‘Religious Studies as a Life Science’. Numen 59 (5/6): 564–613.
Burtt, E. A. 1947. ‘The Problem of Theological Method: I’. The Journal of Religion 27 (1): 1–15.
Byrne, Peter. 1997. ‘The Study of Religion: Neutral, Scientific, or Neither?’ Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 9 (4): 339–51.
Cannon, Dale W. 1993. ‘Having Faith, Being Neutral, and Doing Justice: Toward a Paradigm of Responsibility in the Comparative Study of Religions’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 5 (2): 155–76.
Cannon, Dale W. 1994. ‘Seeking Truth through Doing Justice: A Reply to Michael Barnes’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 6 (2): 173–76.
Clark, Anthony. 1996. Seeing Beneath the Soil: Prospecting Methods in Arcaeology. New York: Routledge.
Cobb, John. 1953. ‘Theological Data and Method’. The Journal of Religion 33 (3): 212–23.
Dawes, Gregory W. 2011. ‘In Defense of Naturalism’. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 70 (3): 3–25.
Dhavamony, Mariasusai. 1976. ‘Phenomenology of Religion: Appellation and Methodology’. The Heythrop Journal 17 (1): 64–67.
Donovan, Peter. 1990. ‘Neutrality in Religious Studies’. Religious Studies 26 (1): 103–15.
Dubuisson, Daniel. 2016. ‘Critical Thinking and Comparative Analysis in Religious Studies’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 28 (1): 26–30.
Eliade, Mircea. 1959. ‘Methodological Remarks on the Study of Religious Symbolism’. In The History of Religions. Essays in Methodology, 86–107. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Eliade, Mircea. 1961. ‘History of Religions and a New Humanism’. History of Religions 1 (1): 1–8.
Freiberger, Oliver. 2011. ‘Der Vergleich Als Methode Und Konstitutiver Ansatz Der Religionswissenschaf’. In Religionen Erforschen: Kulturwissenschaftliche Methoden in Der Religionswissenschaft, 199–218. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Geertz, A. W., and R. T. McCutcheon. 2000. ‘The Role of Method and Theory in the IAHR’. Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 12 (1): 3–37.
Geller, Jay. 2005. ‘En Jeu: Lincoln Logs or Pick-up Sticks’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 17 (1): 18–26.
Gilhus, Ingvild Sælid. 1984. ‘The Phenomenology of Religion and Theories of Interpretation’. Temenos 20: 26–39.
Gilhus, Ingvild Sælid. 2011. ‘Hermeneutics’. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion, 275–84. London; New York: Routledge.
Gothóni, René. 2000. Attitudes and Interpretations in Comparative Religion. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
Grottanelli, C., and B. Lincoln. 1998. ‘A Brief Note on (Future) Research in the History of Religions’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 10 (3): 311–25.
Hanegraaff, Wouter J. 1995. ‘Empirical Method in the Study of Esotericism’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 7 (2): 99–129.
Hart, Patrick. 2016. ‘Theory, Method, and Madness in Religious Studies’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 28 (1): 3–25.
Harvey, Graham. 2011. ‘Field Research: Participant Observation’. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion, 217–44. London; New York: Routledge.
Hjelm, Titus. 2011. ‘Discourse Analysis’. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion, 134–50. London; New York: Routledge.
Hughes, Aaron W. 2013. ‘Theory and Method in the Study of Religion: Twenty-Five Years On’. In Theory and Method in the Study of Religion. Twenty Five Years On, 1–17. Leiden; Boston: Brill.
Hultkrantz, Åke. 1970. ‘The Phenomenology of Religion: Aims and Methods’. Temenos 6: 68–88.
James, George A. 1985. ‘Phenomenology and the Study of Religion: The Archaeology of an Approach’. The Journal of Religion 65 (3): 311–35.
Jensen, Jeppe Sinding. 1993. ‘Is a Phenomenology of Religion Possible? On the Ideas of a Human and Social Science of Religion’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 5 (2): 109–33.
Jensen, Jeppe Sinding. 2004. ‘Why Magic? It’s Just Comparison’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 16 (1): 45–60.
Jensen, Jeppe Sinding. 2011a. ‘Epistemology’. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion, 40–53. London; New York: Routledge.
Jensen, Jeppe Sinding. 2011b. ‘Framing Religious Narrative, Cognition and Culture Theoretically’. In Religious Narrative, Cognition, and Culture: Image and Word in the Mind of Narrative, 31–50. Sheffield, Oakville: Equinox.
Jensen, Jeppe Sinding. 2016. ‘Closing the Gaps—Some Notes on the Making of Perspectives’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 28 (4/5): 465–77.
Jonuks, Tõnno. 2005. ‘Archaeology of Religion – Possibilities and Prospects’. Estonian Journal of Archaeology 9 (1): 32–59.
King, Richard. 2013. ‘The Copernican Turn in the Study of Religion’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 25 (2): 137–59.
Krech, V. 2000. ‘From Historicism to Functionalism: The Rise of Scientific Approaches to Religions around 1900 and Their Socio-Cultural Context’. Numen 47 (3): 244–65.
Levine, Michael P. 1998. ‘A Cognitive Approach to Ritual: New Method or No Method at All?’ Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 10 (1): 30–60.
Lincoln, Bruce. 1996. ‘Theses on Method’. Theory in the Study of Religion 8 (3): 225–27. https://doi.org/10.1163/157006896X00323.
Lincoln, Bruce. 2005. ‘Responsa Miniscula’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 17 (1): 59–67.
Long, Charles H. 1967. ‘Prolegomenon to a Religious Hermeneutic’. History of Religions 6 (3): 254–64.
McCutcheon, Russell T. 1997. ‘A Default of Critical Intelligence? The Scholar of Religion as Public Intellectual’. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 65 (2): 443–68.
Müller, F. Max. 1882. Introduction to the Science of Religion. London: Longmans, Green, and Co.
Oviedo, Lluis. 2016. ‘Preface: Research Approaches to the Study of Religion’. Studia Humana 5 (4): 3–4.
Oxtoby, Willard Gurdon. 1968. ‘Religionswissenschaft Revisited’. In Religions in Antiquity. Essays in Memory of Erwin Ramsdell Goodenough, 590–608. Leiden: Brill.
Pummer, Reinhard. 1972. ‘Religionswissenschaft or Religiology?’ Numen 19 (2–3): 91–127.
Pummer, Reinhard. 1975. ‘Recent Publications on the Methodology of the Science of Religion’. Numen 22 (3): 161–82.
Purzycki, Benjamin Grant. 2013. ‘Toward a Cognitive Ecology of Religious Concepts: An Example from the Tyva Republic’. Journal for the Cognitive Science of Religion 1 (1): 99–120.
Purzycki, Benjamin Grant, and Tayana Arakchaa. 2013. ‘Ritual Behavior and Trust in the Tyva Republic’. Current Anthropology 54 (3): 381–88.
Pye, Michael. 1999. ‘Methodological Integration in the Study of Religion’. In Approaching Religion: Based on Papers Read at the Symposium on Methodology in the Study of Religions Held at Åbo, Finland, on the 4th-7th August 1997. Åbo: Donner Institute for Research in Religious and Cultural History.
Raja, Rubina, and Jörg Rüpke. 2015. ‘Archaeology of Religion, Material Religion, and the Ancient World’. In A Companion to the Archaeology of Religion in the Ancient World, 1–25. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
Ringgren, Helmer. 1970. ‘Die Objektivität Der Religionswissenschaft’. Temenos 6: 119–29.
Roscoe, Paul. 2006. ‘The Comparative Method’. In Blackwell Companion to the Study of Religion, 25–46. Oxford: Blackwell. http://www.myilibrary.com?id=74272&ref=toc.
Rudolph, Kurt. 1981. ‘Basic Positions of Religionswissenschaft’. Religion 11 (2): 97–107.
Rüpke, Jörg. 2011. ‘History’. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion, 285–309. London; New York: Routledge.
Ryba, Thomas. 1999. ‘Why Revisit the Phenomenology of Religion?’ Temenos 35–36: 155–82.
Sakaranaho, Tuula. 2010. ‘Finnish Studies on Islam: Themes and Approaches’. Temenos 46 (2): 215–49.
Schilbrack, Kevin. 2005. ‘Bruce Lincoln’s Philosophy’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 17 (1): 44–58.
Schimmel, Annemarie. 1960. ‘Summary of the Discussion’. Numen 48 (2).
Schüler, Sebastian. 2014a. ‘Naturalistische Religionstheorien Aus Sicht Der Religionswissenschaft’. Zeitschrift Für Religionswissenschaft 22 (1): 1–4.
Schüler, Sebastian. 2014b. ‘Zwischen Naturalismus Und Sozialkonstruktivismus: Kognitive, Körperliche, Emotionale Und Soziale Dimensionen von Religion’. Zeitschrift Für Religionswissenschaft 22 (1): 5–36.
Sharma, Arvind. 1991. ‘Humanistic versus Social-Scientific Approaches to Religion’. Zygon 26 (4): 541–46.
Sharpe, Eric J. 1971. ‘Some Problems of Method in the Study of Religion’. Religion 1 (1): 1–14.
Sharpe, Eric J. 1983. Understanding Religion. London: Duckworth.
Sharpe, Eric J. 1988. ‘Religious Studies, the Humanities, and the History of Ideas’. Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal 71 (2–3): 245–58.
Sharpe, Eric J. 2003. Comparative Religion: A History. London: Duckworth.
Slingerland, Edward, and Joseph Bulbulia. 2011. ‘Introductory Essay: Evolutionary Science and the Study of Religion’. Religion 41 (3): 307–28.
Smart, Ninian. 1973. The Science of Religion & the Sociology of Knowledge. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Smart, Ninian. 1978. The Phenomenon of Religion. London; Oxford: Mowbrays.
Smith, J. Z. 2001. ‘A Twice-Told Tale: The History of the History of Religions’ History’. Numen 48 (2): 131–46.
Smith, Jonathan Z. 1971. ‘Adde Parvum Parvo Magnus Acervus Erit’. History of Religions 11 (1): 67–90.
Smith, Jonathan Z. 1988. Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, Jonathan Z. 1998. ‘Religion, Religions, Religious’. In Critical Terms for Religious Studies. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press. http://www.credoreference.com/book/uchicagors.
Smith, Jonathan Z. 2017. ‘Religioon, Religioonid, Religioossus’. Translated by Indrek Peedu. Akadeemia, no. 10: 1854–78.
Smith, Morton. 1968. ‘Historical Method in the Study of Religion’. History and Theory 8 (8): 8–16.
Smith, Wilfred Cantwell. 1975. ‘Methodology and the Study of Religion: Some Misgivings’. In Methodological Issues in Religious Studies, 1–30. Chico, Ca.: New Horizons Press. http://books.google.com/books?id=j0jXAAAAMAAJ.
Smith, Wilfred Cantwell. 1991. The Meaning and End of Religion. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Soler, Montserrat. 2012. ‘Costly Signaling, Ritual and Cooperation: Evidence from Candomblé, an Afro-Brazilian Religion’. Evolution and Human Behavior 33 (4): 346–56.
Spickard, James V. 2011. ‘Phenomenology’. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion, 333–45. London; New York: Routledge.
Stausberg, Michael. 2011. ‘Comparison’. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion, 21–39. London; New York: Routledge.
Stausberg, Michael, and Steven Engler. 2011a. ‘Introduction. Research Methods in the Study of Religions’. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion. London; New York: Routledge.
Stausberg, Michael, and Steven Engler. 2011b. The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion. London; New York: Routledge.
Stiver, Dan R. 2003. ‘Theological Method’. In The Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology, 170–85. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stuckrad, Kocku von. 2003. ‘Discursive Study of Religion: From States of the Mind to Communication and Action’. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 15 (3): 255–71.
Szocik, Konrad. 2015. ‘Research Approaches in the Study of Religion’. Studia Humana 4 (1): 26–35.
Taira, Teemu. 2013. ‘Making Space for Discursive Study in Religious Studies’. Religion 43 (1): 26–45.
Tamm, Marek, ed. 2011. ‘Humanitaarteaduste Metodoloogia Minevik Ja Tulevik’. In Humanitaarteaduste Metodoloogia: Uusi Väljavaateid. Gigantum Humeris. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Tamm, Marek, ed. 2016. Kuidas Uurida Kultuuri? Kultuuriteaduste Metodoloogia. Gigantum Humeris. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Thomassen, Einar. 1999. ‘Is Philology Relevant?’ In Approaching Religion: Based on Papers Read at the Symposium on Methodology in the Study of Religions Held at Åbo, Finland, on the 4th-7th August 1997, 243–52. Åbo: Donner Institute for Research in Religious and Cultural History.
Thomassen, Einar. 2011. ‘Philology’. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion, 346–54. London; New York: Routledge.
Tillich, Paul. 1947. ‘The Problem of Theological Method: II’. The Journal of Religion 27 (1): 16–26.
Tuckett, Jonathan. 2016. ‘Clarifying Phenomenologies in the Study of Religion: Separating Kristensen and van Der Leeuw from Otto and Eliade’. Religion 46 (1): 75–101.
Waardenburg, Jacques. 1997. ‘The Emergence of Science of Religion: Explanatory Theory and Hermeneutics’. Religio 5 (2): 107–16.
Wach, Joachim. 1924. Religionswissenschaft: Prolegomena Zu Ihrer Wissenschaftstheoretischen Grundlegung. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs.
Wach, Joachim. 1969. ‘Introduction: The Meaning and Task of the History of Religions (Religionswissenschaft)’. In The History of Religions: Essays on the Problem of Understanding, 1–19. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press.
Werblowsky, R. J. Zwi. 1975. ‘On Studying Comparative Religion’. Religious Studies 11 (2): 145–56.
Wiebe, Don. 1976. ‘Explanation and Theological Method’. Zygon 11 (1): 35–49.
Wiebe, Donald. 1978. ‘Is a Science of Religion Possible?’ Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 7 (1): 5–17.
Wiebe, Donald. 1981. Religion and Truth: Towards an Alternative Paradigm for the Study of Religion. The Hague; Paris; New York: Mouton.
Wiebe, Donald. 1989. ‘Explaining Religion: The Intellectual Ethos’. Religion 19 (4): 305–9.
