Colloquium: Does autonomy entail theology? Autonomy, legitimacy, and the study of religion

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Donald Wiebe and other theorists have challenged the doctrine of the autonomy of religion as an intrusion of confessional claims upon non-theological, social scientific study of the subject. This article contends that such criticisms (1) fail to appreciate the diversity of ways in which autonomy has been affirmed by classic theorists; (2) fail to notice that even where confessionalism serves as motive, it does not provide the grounds for such affirmations; (3) fail to see that a legitimate claim of autonomy can be made to rest, axiomatically, on humanistic assumptions no different from those that undergird other disciplines in the academy; and (4) fail to see that overagainst, say, natural scientific explanation, social science itself must make similarly axiomatic claims to autonomy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-16
Number of pages16
JournalReligion
Volume20
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 1990

Fingerprint

theology
legitimacy
autonomy
Religion
academy
doctrine
criticism
social science
Theology
Legitimacy
Colloquium
Autonomy
Theorists

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • History
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Colloquium : Does autonomy entail theology? Autonomy, legitimacy, and the study of religion. / Pals, Daniel.

In: Religion, Vol. 20, No. 1, 1990, p. 1-16.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d3c1219387ce4396bc90f5735340f7e8,
title = "Colloquium: Does autonomy entail theology? Autonomy, legitimacy, and the study of religion",
abstract = "Donald Wiebe and other theorists have challenged the doctrine of the autonomy of religion as an intrusion of confessional claims upon non-theological, social scientific study of the subject. This article contends that such criticisms (1) fail to appreciate the diversity of ways in which autonomy has been affirmed by classic theorists; (2) fail to notice that even where confessionalism serves as motive, it does not provide the grounds for such affirmations; (3) fail to see that a legitimate claim of autonomy can be made to rest, axiomatically, on humanistic assumptions no different from those that undergird other disciplines in the academy; and (4) fail to see that overagainst, say, natural scientific explanation, social science itself must make similarly axiomatic claims to autonomy.",
author = "Daniel Pals",
year = "1990",
doi = "10.1016/0048-721X(90)90024-Z",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "1--16",
journal = "Religion",
issn = "0048-721X",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Colloquium

T2 - Does autonomy entail theology? Autonomy, legitimacy, and the study of religion

AU - Pals, Daniel

PY - 1990

Y1 - 1990

N2 - Donald Wiebe and other theorists have challenged the doctrine of the autonomy of religion as an intrusion of confessional claims upon non-theological, social scientific study of the subject. This article contends that such criticisms (1) fail to appreciate the diversity of ways in which autonomy has been affirmed by classic theorists; (2) fail to notice that even where confessionalism serves as motive, it does not provide the grounds for such affirmations; (3) fail to see that a legitimate claim of autonomy can be made to rest, axiomatically, on humanistic assumptions no different from those that undergird other disciplines in the academy; and (4) fail to see that overagainst, say, natural scientific explanation, social science itself must make similarly axiomatic claims to autonomy.

AB - Donald Wiebe and other theorists have challenged the doctrine of the autonomy of religion as an intrusion of confessional claims upon non-theological, social scientific study of the subject. This article contends that such criticisms (1) fail to appreciate the diversity of ways in which autonomy has been affirmed by classic theorists; (2) fail to notice that even where confessionalism serves as motive, it does not provide the grounds for such affirmations; (3) fail to see that a legitimate claim of autonomy can be made to rest, axiomatically, on humanistic assumptions no different from those that undergird other disciplines in the academy; and (4) fail to see that overagainst, say, natural scientific explanation, social science itself must make similarly axiomatic claims to autonomy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=45149140231&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=45149140231&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0048-721X(90)90024-Z

DO - 10.1016/0048-721X(90)90024-Z

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:45149140231

VL - 20

SP - 1

EP - 16

JO - Religion

JF - Religion

SN - 0048-721X

IS - 1

ER -