Konstantin M. Antonov, Konstantin Polskov, M. Smirnov
{"title":"世俗化与后世俗化(论宗教研究的现代概念框架)","authors":"Konstantin M. Antonov, Konstantin Polskov, M. Smirnov","doi":"10.15382/sturi2023105.138-154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This discussion deals with the issue of validity of the methodological significance of the concept of postsecularity for the study of religions. In this regard, it touched upon the theoretical description of such phenomena as secularisation, secularity, bricolage, hybridisation, privatisation and deprivation of religion, as well as a number of other issues in the sphere of scientifi c discourse on religions.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Secularisation and post-secularity (on the discussion about the modern conceptual framework of religious studies)\",\"authors\":\"Konstantin M. Antonov, Konstantin Polskov, M. Smirnov\",\"doi\":\"10.15382/sturi2023105.138-154\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This discussion deals with the issue of validity of the methodological significance of the concept of postsecularity for the study of religions. In this regard, it touched upon the theoretical description of such phenomena as secularisation, secularity, bricolage, hybridisation, privatisation and deprivation of religion, as well as a number of other issues in the sphere of scientifi c discourse on religions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":407912,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"St. Tikhons' University Review\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"St. Tikhons' University Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturi2023105.138-154\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"St. Tikhons' University Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturi2023105.138-154","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Secularisation and post-secularity (on the discussion about the modern conceptual framework of religious studies)
This discussion deals with the issue of validity of the methodological significance of the concept of postsecularity for the study of religions. In this regard, it touched upon the theoretical description of such phenomena as secularisation, secularity, bricolage, hybridisation, privatisation and deprivation of religion, as well as a number of other issues in the sphere of scientifi c discourse on religions.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
