open access

https://doi.org/10.14943/jfhhs.19.9

https://hdl.handle.net/2115/91157

The Scientific Nature of the Study of Religion in the West and Asia

英語

2024-02

北海道大学文学研究院

Journal of the Faculty of Humanities and Human Sciences

19

9-13

In the West during the first half of the 20th century, the study of religion was more religious than scientific. Many religious scholars were involved in religious studies as spiritual people. In Germany, Friedrich Heiler and Rudolf Otto were prime examples. They believed that religion was an innate ability of human beings and attempted to clarify its nature. Their activities were of a practical nature and linked to their religious movements. After World War II, the “religious” study of religions was criticized, and the scientific nature of religious studies was emphasized. In particular, religious studies after the critical theory of the concept of religion criticized the Western-centeredness of the concept of “religion.” On the other hand, empirical scientific studies of religion flourished during the postwar period. Examples include sociological and cognitive scientific studies of religion. Both the former and the latter insist on the scientific nature of religious research, but there are differences between the two. The former does not directly address the question, “What is religion?” Rather, it views religion as a social phenomenon and clarifies the relationship between various elements of society and religion. Such research is mainly derived from sociology and has a different genealogy from past studies of religion. In contrast, cognitive-scientific religious studies in Europe and the U.S. view religion as an innate ability of human beings and consider it to be a universal phenomenon for humankind. In practice, however, researchers who argue for the necessity of cognitive-scientific religious studies harshly criticize the former religious and practical nature of religious studies. At issue is the study of religion in Japan and other parts of Asia. Studies in Asia include not only social and natural scientific studies of religion, but also many philosophical and practical studies. To Western scientific religious scholars, such studies appear to be “lagging behind.” While it is reasonable to argue that religious studies must be distinguished from religious activities, a kind of “evolutionary theory” from religious studies to scientific religious studies might not be a universal movement rather than a Western-centric one. Rather, there could be possibilities for the study of religion in Asia that are uniquely Asian.

紀要論文

Version of Record

2437-0177