Why the possible is not impossible but is unlikely: a response to our colleagues
Roč.20,č.1(2012)
Abstrakt
Klíčová slova:
religious studies; religious concerns; history of the study of religion; cognitive science of religion
Stránky:
63–72
This paper is a response to the responses to our paper "Religious Studies as a Scientific Discipline: The Persistence of a Delusion" by Hans Gerald Hödl, Hubert Seiwert, Radek Kundt, Tomáš Bubík, and Kocku von Stuckrad, published in this same issue of Religio: Revue pro religionistiku. Some of the respondents actually overstate our position. We have claimed, and still now claim, that a fully scientific program of "Religious Studies", even if possible, is highly unlikely to ever be achieved.
religious studies; religious concerns; history of the study of religion; cognitive science of religion
63–72