Abstract
Let me state from the start that I do not propose to say what the so-called ”true definition“ of ’religion‘ is. It is not the job of a philosopher to pretend that he can work verbal magic amid the labors of scientific inquiry. With philosopher Friedrick Waismann I am suspicious of the ”clarity neurosis“ and tend at times to agree with his rather excessive comment that ”clarity is the last refuge of those who have nothing to say“.1 Yet this is not to give aid and comfort to the inarticulate mumbo jumbo which substitutes awe for inquiry. My preliminary point is very simple: Either a prolonged obsession with precise definitions or a perpetual disregard for precise definitions can clog up the flow of scientific and experimental endeavors. I believe that scientists tend either to turn to philosophers or to do philosophical analysis themselves as the need arises. If some of those busy at work in the scientific study of religion find the following analysis useful to their work, then I shall be content in having served as a member of a team of troubleshooters who help satisfy the need to establish a measure of order and orientation so that scientific inquiry may flow more smoothly and efficiently.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Notes
Friedrich Waismann, “How I See Philosophy”, in: A. J. Ayer (ed.), Logical Positivism (New York: The Free Press, 1959), pp. 360–361.
Cf. Clifford Geertz, Islam Observed (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968), p. 96.
Cf. Gordon C. Clark, Karl Barth’s Theological Method (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1963), pp. 25–30, 32.
Cf. Gordon Clark, Religion, Reason and Revelation (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1961), p. 27.
J. Müton Yinger, The Scientific Study of Religion (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1970), p. 531.
Cf. William C. Sheppherd, “Religion and Social Science”, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 11:3 (September, 1972), pp. 230–239.
Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics II/l, trans. T. H. L. Parker et al. (Edinburg: T. & T. Clark, 1957), p. 449.
Cf. John Morrison Moore, Theories of Religious Experience, With Special Reference to James, Otto, and Bergson (New York: Round Table Press, Inc., 1938), pp. 73–74.
Cf. Amitai Etzioni, The Active Society: A Theory of Societal and Political Processes (New York: The Free Press, 1968), pp. 624–628.
George Mosse, The Crisis of German Ideology: Intellectual Origins of the Third Reich (New York: The Universal Library, Grosset and Dunlap, 1964), pp. 308–310.
Luther P. Gerlach and Virginia H. Hine, “Five Factors Critical to the Growth and Spread of a Modern Religious Movement”, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 7:1 (Spring, 1968), pp. 23–40.
Cf. Frederick J. Streng, “Studying Religion: Possibilities and Limitations of Different Definitions”, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 40:2 (June, 1972), pp. 219–237.
References
Barth, Karl, 1957: Church Dogmatics. IL 1. Translation by T. H. L. Parker, et al. Edingburg: T. & T. Clark.
Clark, Gordon, 1961: Religion, Reason and Revelation. Philadelphia: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.
Clark, Gordon, 1963: Karl Earth’s Theological Method. Philadelphia: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.
Etzioni, Amitai, 1968: The Active Society: A Theory of Societal and Political Processes. New York: The Free Press.
Geertz, Clifford, 1968: Islam Observed. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Gerlach, Luther P. and Hine, Virginia H., 1968: “Five factors crucial to the growth and spread of a modern religious movement.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 7:1 (Spring): 23–40.
Moore, John Morrison, 1938: Theories of Religious Experience: With Special Reference to James, Otto, and Bergson. New York: Round Table Press, Inc.
Mosse, George L., 1964: The Crisis of German Ideology: Intellectual Origins of the Third Reich. New York: The Universal Library. Grosset and Dunlap.
Shepherd, William C., 1972: “Religion and social science: conflict or conciliation”. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 11:3 (September): 230–239.
Streng, Frederick J., 1972: “Studying religion: possibilities and limitations of different definitions.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion. 40:2 (June): 219–237.
Waismann, Friedrich, 1959: “How I see philosophy”. Pp. 345–380 in A. J. Ayer (ed.). Logical Positivism. New York: The Free Press.
Yinger, J. Milton, 1970: The Scientific Study of Religion. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1975 Westdeutscher Verlag GmbH, Opladen
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Barnhart, J.E. (1975). Is One’s Definition of ’Religion‘ always Circular?. In: Beiträge zur Wissenssoziologie, Beiträge zur Religionssoziologie / Contributions to the Sociology of Knowledge Contributions to the Sociology of Religion. Internationales Jahrbuch für Wissens- und Religionssoziologie / International Yearbook of Knowledge and Religion, vol 9. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-84128-5_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-84128-5_7
Publisher Name: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-531-11257-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-322-84128-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive