The Contemporary Deconstruction of Religion: How Current Scholarship in Religious Studies is Changing Methods and Theories

Q3 Social Sciences
N. Goldenberg
{"title":"The Contemporary Deconstruction of Religion: How Current Scholarship in Religious Studies is Changing Methods and Theories","authors":"N. Goldenberg","doi":"10.5130/pjmis.v18i1-2.7807","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"My paper has 3 goals: 1) to introduce and outline the field of ‘critical religion’; 2) to set out my contribution to this field by explaining how and why religions should be considered ‘vestigial states’; and 3) to suggest ways in which the approach to the topic of religious synthesis in India might be influenced by critical religion in general and vestigial state theory in particular. I argue that ‘religion’ as an ahistorical, eternal, indefinable category –what Roland Barthes called ‘depoliticized’ speech –warrants energetic critique. To this end, I survey a variety of theorists whose work deconstructs ‘religion’ and attendant binaries such as religious/secular and religion/politics. I maintain that religions function as vestigial states within contemporary states. By ‘vestigial states’ I mean practices and institutions originating in particular histories as survivals of former sovereignties. These remnants are tolerated as attenuated jurisdictions within fully functioning states. These vestigial states (religions) are always somewhat problematic because they compete with contemporary states - especially if they challenge the present state’s right to control violence. However, religions also work to ground the governments that authorize them by recalling earlier, mystified forms of sovereignty. Moreover, religions are useful because they can be depicted as less progressive versions of power. Thus do ‘religions’, understood as vestigial states, both disturb and maintain current regimes. I conclude with some speculations on how insights derived from critical religion might impact work on conceptualizing ‘religious synthesis’ in India specifically and ‘interreligious’ interactions more generally in a global context.","PeriodicalId":35198,"journal":{"name":"PORTAL: Journal of Multidisciplinary International Studies","volume":"78 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PORTAL: Journal of Multidisciplinary International Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5130/pjmis.v18i1-2.7807","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

My paper has 3 goals: 1) to introduce and outline the field of ‘critical religion’; 2) to set out my contribution to this field by explaining how and why religions should be considered ‘vestigial states’; and 3) to suggest ways in which the approach to the topic of religious synthesis in India might be influenced by critical religion in general and vestigial state theory in particular. I argue that ‘religion’ as an ahistorical, eternal, indefinable category –what Roland Barthes called ‘depoliticized’ speech –warrants energetic critique. To this end, I survey a variety of theorists whose work deconstructs ‘religion’ and attendant binaries such as religious/secular and religion/politics. I maintain that religions function as vestigial states within contemporary states. By ‘vestigial states’ I mean practices and institutions originating in particular histories as survivals of former sovereignties. These remnants are tolerated as attenuated jurisdictions within fully functioning states. These vestigial states (religions) are always somewhat problematic because they compete with contemporary states - especially if they challenge the present state’s right to control violence. However, religions also work to ground the governments that authorize them by recalling earlier, mystified forms of sovereignty. Moreover, religions are useful because they can be depicted as less progressive versions of power. Thus do ‘religions’, understood as vestigial states, both disturb and maintain current regimes. I conclude with some speculations on how insights derived from critical religion might impact work on conceptualizing ‘religious synthesis’ in India specifically and ‘interreligious’ interactions more generally in a global context.
当代宗教解构:当前宗教研究如何改变方法和理论
我的论文有三个目标:1)介绍和概述“批判宗教”的领域;2)通过解释宗教如何以及为什么应该被视为“残余状态”来阐述我对这一领域的贡献;3)提出印度宗教综合主题的方法可能受到批判宗教的影响,特别是退化国家理论。我认为,“宗教”作为一种非历史的、永恒的、不可定义的范畴——罗兰·巴特称之为“去政治化”的言论——值得大力批判。为此,我调查了各种理论家,他们的工作解构了“宗教”和随之而来的二元对立,如宗教/世俗和宗教/政治。我认为,宗教是当代国家中的残余国家。所谓“残余国家”,我指的是源自特定历史的做法和制度,它们是前主权国家的残余。这些残余物在功能完备的国家中被视为弱化的管辖权而被容忍。这些残存的国家(宗教)总是有些问题,因为它们与当代国家竞争——尤其是当它们挑战当前国家控制暴力的权利时。然而,宗教也通过回忆早期的、神秘的主权形式,使授权他们的政府扎根。此外,宗教是有用的,因为它们可以被描述为权力的不那么进步的版本。因此,被理解为残余国家的“宗教”既扰乱又维持着当前的政权。最后,我对批判性宗教的见解如何影响印度的“宗教综合”概念化工作以及全球背景下更普遍的“宗教间”互动进行了一些推测。
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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
52 weeks
期刊介绍: PORTAL Journal of Multidisciplinary International Studies is a fully peer reviewed journal with two main issues per year, and is published by UTSePress. In some years there may be additional special focus issues. The journal is dedicated to publishing scholarship by practitioners of—and dissenters from—international, regional, area, migration, and ethnic studies. Portal also provides a space for cultural producers interested in the internationalization of cultures. Portal is conceived as a “multidisciplinary venture,” to use Michel Chaouli’s words. That is, Portal signifies “a place where researchers [and cultural producers] are exposed to different ways of posing questions and proffering answers, without creating out of their differing disciplinary languages a common theoretical or methodological pidgin” (2003, p. 57). Our hope is that scholars working in the humanities, social sciences, and potentially other disciplinary areas, will encounter in Portal scenarios about contemporary societies and cultures and their material and imaginative relation to processes of transnationalization, polyculturation, transmigration, globalization, and anti-globalization.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信