{"title":"“宗教素养”:一些思考与保留","authors":"J. Wolfart","doi":"10.1163/15700682-bja10074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nIn recent years “religious literacy” advocacy has gained a significant following, both academic and non-academic. Furthermore, it is widely accepted that attainment of religious literacy (and the reduction of religious illiteracy – ignorance about religions, either explicitly or by implication) will bring social benefits or cure societal ills. Yet, the term “religious literacy” itself remains poorly defined; neither have the benefits touted by advocates of “religious literacy” been subjected to empirical testing. Instead, reasons for the ready adoption of the term can be found in its particular genealogy, and in its relation to advocacies for other “literacies”. Moreover, especially the advocacy of basic literacy (i.e., of literacy, literally speaking) is historically entangled with Christian theologies and other ideologies, a history giving rise to what Harvey Graff once called the “literacy myth” linking increased literacy to social improvements or progress. Thus, finally, the particular resonance of “religious literacy” in Religious Studies and related academic circles may reflect the inescapable historical character of our particular academic enterprise as “ex-theological.”","PeriodicalId":44982,"journal":{"name":"Method & Theory in the Study of Religion","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Religious Literacy’: Some Considerations and Reservations\",\"authors\":\"J. Wolfart\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15700682-bja10074\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nIn recent years “religious literacy” advocacy has gained a significant following, both academic and non-academic. Furthermore, it is widely accepted that attainment of religious literacy (and the reduction of religious illiteracy – ignorance about religions, either explicitly or by implication) will bring social benefits or cure societal ills. Yet, the term “religious literacy” itself remains poorly defined; neither have the benefits touted by advocates of “religious literacy” been subjected to empirical testing. Instead, reasons for the ready adoption of the term can be found in its particular genealogy, and in its relation to advocacies for other “literacies”. Moreover, especially the advocacy of basic literacy (i.e., of literacy, literally speaking) is historically entangled with Christian theologies and other ideologies, a history giving rise to what Harvey Graff once called the “literacy myth” linking increased literacy to social improvements or progress. Thus, finally, the particular resonance of “religious literacy” in Religious Studies and related academic circles may reflect the inescapable historical character of our particular academic enterprise as “ex-theological.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":44982,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Method & Theory in the Study of Religion\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Method & Theory in the Study of Religion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15700682-bja10074\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Method & Theory in the Study of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15700682-bja10074","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
‘Religious Literacy’: Some Considerations and Reservations
In recent years “religious literacy” advocacy has gained a significant following, both academic and non-academic. Furthermore, it is widely accepted that attainment of religious literacy (and the reduction of religious illiteracy – ignorance about religions, either explicitly or by implication) will bring social benefits or cure societal ills. Yet, the term “religious literacy” itself remains poorly defined; neither have the benefits touted by advocates of “religious literacy” been subjected to empirical testing. Instead, reasons for the ready adoption of the term can be found in its particular genealogy, and in its relation to advocacies for other “literacies”. Moreover, especially the advocacy of basic literacy (i.e., of literacy, literally speaking) is historically entangled with Christian theologies and other ideologies, a history giving rise to what Harvey Graff once called the “literacy myth” linking increased literacy to social improvements or progress. Thus, finally, the particular resonance of “religious literacy” in Religious Studies and related academic circles may reflect the inescapable historical character of our particular academic enterprise as “ex-theological.”
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.