Abstract
The present article examines the pervasiveness of non-scientific/anti-scientific hermeneutical perspectives in the study of religion in anthropology, tracing their foundations to the works of Mircea Eliade and Clifford Geertz. Pseudo- and anti-scientific approaches have also been bolstered by a long-standing paranormalism in anthropology championed by Margaret Mead and others. Hermeneutical/interpretive approaches, which emphasize the insider’s perspective and treat religion as an independent variable, have not only hampered scientific studies of religious phenomena, but they have also enabled the development of approaches advocating paranormal beliefs and religious supernaturalism as scholarship. The article concludes by highlighting the problematic nature of these non-scientific and pro-paranormal and religious perspectives as scholarly enterprises.
Reference47 articles.
1. Ambasciano, L. 2019. An Unnatural History of Religions: Academia, Post-Truth, and the Quest for Scientific Knowledge. London and New York: Bloomsbury. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350062412
2. Beals, R. 1978. “Sonoran Fantasy or Coming of Age?” American Anthropologist 80(2): 355–62. https://www.jstor.org/stable/676859 https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1978.80.2.02a00070
3. Bielo, J. 2015. Anthropology of Religion: The Basics. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
4. Cannell, F. 2006. “Introduction: Anthropology and Christianity.” In The Anthropology of Christianity, ed. Fenella Cannell, 1–50. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1198v5x.4
5. Castaneda, C. 1968. The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.