Sales Managers and Sales Contacts. Ordering From Brill. LibLynx for Selected Online Resources. Discovery Services. Online User and Order Help. MARC Records. Titles No Longer Published by Brill. Latest Key Figures. Latest Financial Press Releases and Reports.
Annual General Meeting of Shareholders. Share Information. Specialty Products. Catalogs, Flyers and Price Lists. Open Access. Open Access for Authors. Open Access and Research Funding. Annual General Meeting of Shareholders. Share Information. Specialty Products. Catalogs, Flyers and Price Lists. Open Access. Open Access for Authors. Open Access and Research Funding.
Open Access for Librarians. Open Access for Academic Societies. About us. Stay updated. Corporate Social Responsiblity. Investor Relations. Review a Brill Book. Reference Works. Primary source collections. Modernity, in Latour''s sense, is a way of generating knowledge by means of classification of previously isolated structures, phenomena, signs, and things, which lead to a proliferation of non-classifiable hybrids. Classifications, on the other hand, lead to dichotomies The most fundamental modern dichotomy is the one between the human and the non-human.
Many of the less fundamental dichotomies have been negotiated in recent postmodern discussions, for example the cultural dichotomy between «us and them » , i. Ali of these three laws are about ma king distinctions and about clarifying the dichotomy between A and non-A.
Why, then, should «crypte-modern reasoning » be a problem if this is how classical academic logic works? To follow Hanegraaff''s argument again: because it generates a biased. The modern paradigm rests on distinct premises and is therefore not necessarily compatible with other paradigms.
Modern concepts, that is, concepts generated on the basis of modern logic, will only consider comparanda based on a different logic as nonscientific, unreasonable or, according to the law of bivalence, as simply «false ». They may also, and this is what I suspect Hanegraaff''s definition does, subtly transfer modern reason onto a different logical framework, thereby positing modern logic as a universal. Moreover, «crypte-modern reasoning » keeps the Study of Religion and no doubt other disciplines as well trapped in the conflict between modern academic reason and postmodern critique of this very reason.
This is a vicious circle, since postmodern argumentation follows these three laws as well. Even non-classical postmodern logics never criticize and revise more than one of the three laws and can therefore be translated back into classical logic Thus, in its failure to propose a real alternative to classical logic, postmodern deconstruction rather reinforces than criticizes modern assumptions.
Religion has already been conceptualized in many ways : as something bigger and more universal than its offshoots, the so-called world-religions; as «natural religion » or phenomenon or otherwise essential; as an evolutionary step in our episteme; as a system of symbols or beliefs and, most recently, as a category. While the first notions on this list have received considerable attention both in their development and deconstruction, the category has been adopted without much ado.
However, the various definitions that have been proposed for religion were based on individually chosen prototypes according to expertise. Therefore, no definition was comparative enough to serve for research undertaken with another focus see also discussion below. The quest for a consensual definition for religion, a basic requirement for a category, was thereupon steadily abandoned Via a cluster of modifying adjectives, however, the «category religion » could be retained despite the lack of a definition.
The most frequent of these qualifiers is «heuristic ». The idea of a «heuristic category » might be a remote spin-off from Algebra, where categories were. However, without any explanation of the heuristics that the scholar intends to apply, the label «only disguises the tact that scholars wish to avoid defining the supposedly undefinable and instead resort to pre-theoretical or even everyday language, thereby leaving the task of sense-making to their readers » Before discussing other types of categories proliferating in the field, it may be worth looking at the very nature of categories first.
This will help to answer the question of how religion could become an undefined category. Philosophy and Implication of Categories. Category formation has reached the Study of Religion via several disciplines. Baird pointed to. For the present purposes, the above-mentioned spin-off from a so-called exact science, mathematics, shall be discussed. This will not only provide some basic information concerning the nature of categories but dismantle prejudices concerning the exactness of category theory.
Recently, there has been increasing awareness that the evaluation of data is by no means less decision-choice based in higher mathematics than in the Humanities Category theory was introduced into Algebra in by Professors Samuel Eilenberg and Saunders Mac Lane, though only in the margins and as an auxiliary device. They used categories as axiomatic definitions for heuristic purposes. The intellectual context of the theory was structuralism, in which mathematics and humanities interacted «closely and fruitfully » A result of these interactions was structural mathematics.
Category theory combined structuralism with the «axiomatic method » as introduced by David Hilbert and adopted by Albert Einstein. However, the ridge between the conscious use of a self-posited axiom as an auxiliary in research and the notion that an axiom is a self-evident universal truth is narrow. Tarski''s world of individuals and classes would be still there even if the empirical science would not exist and would not be possible » Thus, the very idea of the axiomatic method is deeply connected to the search for a dogmatic truth, quite similar to the purpose of dogmatic theology.
Members of a category are equal and share one or more features. Further, categories are dichotomous in that their components cannot be members of categories A and non-A at the same time cf. Categories and their relationship towards each other can be depicted as follows :.
For graphie reasons, B stands for non-A. While this picture seems indeed very primitive and simplified, it is basically, what categorytheory is ail about : lt is a way of simplifying complex structures.
Sets are defined as opposites but, contrary to categories, they are not mutually exclusive. Thus, some elements can be contained in two or more sets, thereby generating an overlap of the sets. This overlap can be defined as union A U B Thus, with the uncut overlap, set theory is accounting for the «middle » between two or more sets, while category theory is not.
Accordingly, category theory is much more restricted by the classical laws of thought than set theory : the law of bivalence is expressed in the axiomatic nature of the categories i. Category formation is classical logic turned into a method. The «exclusion of the middle » and its somewhat merciless application has generally been an issue in postmodern criticism.
Thus, one counterproposal was «fuzzy logic ». Fuzzy logic tries to overcome the rigidity of classical logic and its limitations by inclusion of the middle.
Fuzzy logic is thereby decidedly post-modem : lt criticizes modern logic and points to its deficiencies, while, at the same time, depending on it. Without defined sets, there is no continuum and a continuum generated by defined sets will always allow for deduction, as is expressed in the still valid algebraic formulae.
Yet, in practice, the continuum merely served as a scale : A hybrid was placed on the continuum according to arbitrarily defined criteria and then subsumed under the set to which it seemed more closely related. You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. Create a free website or blog at WordPress. Posted by: aboutalbion June 27, The polythetic approach to religion. Share this: Twitter Facebook.
Like this: Like Loading
0コメント