A Response to Stephen L. Young, “Let’s Take the Text Seriously”: the Protectionist Doxa in Mainstream New Testament Studies

IF 0.5 2区哲学 0 RELIGION Method & Theory in the Study of Religion Pub Date : 2020-05-19 DOI:10.1163/15700682-12341481

G. Dye

引用次数: 1

Abstract

This response to Stephen Young’s excellent paper vindicates his general argument against protectionism, connects his analyses to some aspects of contemporary Qurʾanic and Early Islamic studies, and highlights some of the problems with the distinction between dominant protectionism and dominated protectionism.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

对Stephen L. Young“让我们认真对待文本”的回应:主流新约研究中的保护主义Doxa

这篇对斯蒂芬·杨的优秀论文的回应证明了他反对保护主义的一般观点是正确的，将他的分析与当代古兰经和早期伊斯兰研究的某些方面联系起来，并突出了主导保护主义和主导保护主义之间区别的一些问题。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Method & Theory in the Study of Religion RELIGION-

CiteScore

1.40

自引率

0.00%

发文量

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.

期刊最新文献

Awkward History, Awkward Theory Front matter The Discursive Side of Sociological Institutionalism in the Study of Religion ‘Religious Literacy’: Some Considerations and Reservations Scholarly Values, Methods, and Evidence in the Academic Study of Religion