{"title":"为游戏命名","authors":"Charles E. Vernoff","doi":"10.1558/bsor.23548","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In The Archive, we bring back some of our most provocative essays from yesteryear to see what lessons we might learn from them today. Given the shifting grounds on which defenses of the academic study of religion are being made—whether in the IAHR as discussed in The Interview or in the context of the contemporary U.S., a post-Carson v. Makin academy as discussed in The Editorial—we return to a 1983 piece by Charles Elliot Vernoff, originally published in the Council on the Study of Religion Bulletin 15.4, 109-112, where he traces the contours of the field in the early 1980s.","PeriodicalId":354875,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin for The Study of Religion","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Naming the Game\",\"authors\":\"Charles E. Vernoff\",\"doi\":\"10.1558/bsor.23548\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In The Archive, we bring back some of our most provocative essays from yesteryear to see what lessons we might learn from them today. Given the shifting grounds on which defenses of the academic study of religion are being made—whether in the IAHR as discussed in The Interview or in the context of the contemporary U.S., a post-Carson v. Makin academy as discussed in The Editorial—we return to a 1983 piece by Charles Elliot Vernoff, originally published in the Council on the Study of Religion Bulletin 15.4, 109-112, where he traces the contours of the field in the early 1980s.\",\"PeriodicalId\":354875,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin for The Study of Religion\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin for The Study of Religion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1558/bsor.23548\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin for The Study of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1558/bsor.23548","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
In The Archive, we bring back some of our most provocative essays from yesteryear to see what lessons we might learn from them today. Given the shifting grounds on which defenses of the academic study of religion are being made—whether in the IAHR as discussed in The Interview or in the context of the contemporary U.S., a post-Carson v. Makin academy as discussed in The Editorial—we return to a 1983 piece by Charles Elliot Vernoff, originally published in the Council on the Study of Religion Bulletin 15.4, 109-112, where he traces the contours of the field in the early 1980s.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
