Religion, Politics, History, and Culture

IF 0.5 2区哲学 0 RELIGION

Method & Theory in the Study of Religion Pub Date : 2020-07-28 DOI:10.1163/15700682-12341496

T. Fitzgerald

{"title":"Religion, Politics, History, and Culture","authors":"T. Fitzgerald","doi":"10.1163/15700682-12341496","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nIn his critique of my 2007 monograph Discourse on Civility and Barbarity: a Critical History of Religion and Related Categories, Daniel Miller attributes me with the error of transcendental historicism and an illusion of cultural authenticity. Miller’s challenge leads me to the question ‘what is history?’—what does it mean to be ‘in history’, or to be ‘out of history’, or to be a ‘historical agent’? I also defend myself against the charge of cultural essentialism by questioning the essentially empty term ‘culture’. First, though, I challenge Miller for his continual insistence that my work is ‘political’. Miller seems to accept at least some aspects of my critique of ‘religion’. However, he does not mention that DCB is as much concerned with the invention of a noun word discourse on ‘politics’ as it is with the invention of ‘religion’. ‘Politics’ and the ‘nation state’ were invented by men of substantial property ambitions to organise, normalise and protect male private property accumulation. Rather than being the foundation of our democratic rights, a gateway to equality and emancipation, ‘politics’ promotes and globally facilitates the processes of ‘accumulation by dispossession’.","PeriodicalId":44982,"journal":{"name":"Method & Theory in the Study of Religion","volume":"32 1","pages":"386-422"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/15700682-12341496","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Method & Theory in the Study of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15700682-12341496","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

In his critique of my 2007 monograph Discourse on Civility and Barbarity: a Critical History of Religion and Related Categories, Daniel Miller attributes me with the error of transcendental historicism and an illusion of cultural authenticity. Miller’s challenge leads me to the question ‘what is history?’—what does it mean to be ‘in history’, or to be ‘out of history’, or to be a ‘historical agent’? I also defend myself against the charge of cultural essentialism by questioning the essentially empty term ‘culture’. First, though, I challenge Miller for his continual insistence that my work is ‘political’. Miller seems to accept at least some aspects of my critique of ‘religion’. However, he does not mention that DCB is as much concerned with the invention of a noun word discourse on ‘politics’ as it is with the invention of ‘religion’. ‘Politics’ and the ‘nation state’ were invented by men of substantial property ambitions to organise, normalise and protect male private property accumulation. Rather than being the foundation of our democratic rights, a gateway to equality and emancipation, ‘politics’ promotes and globally facilitates the processes of ‘accumulation by dispossession’.

查看原文本刊更多论文

宗教、政治、历史和文化

丹尼尔·米勒在他对我2007年的专著《文明与野蛮的话语：宗教和相关类别的批判史》的评论中，将我归因于先验历史主义的错误和文化真实性的幻觉。米勒的挑战让我想到了“什么是历史？”--“在历史中”、“脱离历史”或“历史代理人”意味着什么？我还通过质疑“文化”这个本质上空洞的术语来为自己辩护，反对文化本质主义的指控。不过，首先，我向米勒提出质疑，因为他一直坚持认为我的作品是“政治性的”。米勒似乎至少在某些方面接受了我对“宗教”的批判。然而，他并没有提到DCB与“宗教”的发明一样关注“政治”名词话语的发明政治和民族国家是由有着巨大财产野心的男性发明的，目的是组织、规范和保护男性的私人财产积累。“政治”不是我们民主权利的基础，是通往平等和解放的门户，而是促进并在全球促进“剥夺积累”的过程。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Method & Theory in the Study of Religion RELIGION-

CiteScore

1.40

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Method & Theory in the Study of Religion publishes articles, notes, book reviews and letters which explicitly address the problems of methodology and theory in the academic study of religion. This includes such traditional points of departure as history, philosophy, anthropology and sociology, but also the natural sciences, and such newer disciplinary approaches as feminist theory and studies. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion also concentrates on the critical analysis of theoretical problems prominent in the study of religion.