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 language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-16 |
| Number of pages | 16 |
| Journal | Religion |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1990 |
Fingerprint
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 journal › Article
}
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 -