Inevitably Comparative, but Not Inevitably Positive: the Study of Jews and Judaism within the Field of Religious Studies

IF 0.5 2区 哲学 0 RELIGION Method & Theory in the Study of Religion Pub Date : 2020-06-30 DOI:10.1163/15700682-12341489
R. Gordan
{"title":"Inevitably Comparative, but Not Inevitably Positive: the Study of Jews and Judaism within the Field of Religious Studies","authors":"R. Gordan","doi":"10.1163/15700682-12341489","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis essay considers the study of Judaism within the framework of Lincoln and Freiberger’s calls for comparative studies. As a minority religion, Judaism usually requires comparative thinking, as scholars consider Judaism within the context of a majority religion. Study of post-WWII American Judaism, in particular, invites comparison, because it marks the high-tide era of “Judeo-Christianity,” in which Judaism was newly considered America’s “third faith,” on a purportedly equal status with Protestantism and Catholicism, thus inviting comparision between the three religions and other traditions outside the small circle of midcentury “American religions.” This postwar, tri-faith status of Judaism reveals some of the costs and benefits of thinking comparatively: when comparison is undertaken with an eye toward creating or maintaining equality among religions, the results may include erasure of distinctions between traditions. The study of Judaism demonstrates some of the politics and ideological motivations of comparative thinking about religion, as well as its potential risks and benefits as explained by Lincoln and Freiberger.","PeriodicalId":44982,"journal":{"name":"Method & Theory in the Study of Religion","volume":"32 1","pages":"475-481"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/15700682-12341489","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Method & Theory in the Study of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15700682-12341489","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This essay considers the study of Judaism within the framework of Lincoln and Freiberger’s calls for comparative studies. As a minority religion, Judaism usually requires comparative thinking, as scholars consider Judaism within the context of a majority religion. Study of post-WWII American Judaism, in particular, invites comparison, because it marks the high-tide era of “Judeo-Christianity,” in which Judaism was newly considered America’s “third faith,” on a purportedly equal status with Protestantism and Catholicism, thus inviting comparision between the three religions and other traditions outside the small circle of midcentury “American religions.” This postwar, tri-faith status of Judaism reveals some of the costs and benefits of thinking comparatively: when comparison is undertaken with an eye toward creating or maintaining equality among religions, the results may include erasure of distinctions between traditions. The study of Judaism demonstrates some of the politics and ideological motivations of comparative thinking about religion, as well as its potential risks and benefits as explained by Lincoln and Freiberger.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
必然是比较的,但并非必然是肯定的:宗教研究领域内的犹太人和犹太教研究
本文将犹太教研究置于林肯和弗赖伯格呼吁进行比较研究的框架内。作为一种少数宗教,犹太教通常需要比较思维,因为学者们将犹太教视为多数宗教。对二战后美国犹太教的研究尤其值得比较,因为它标志着“犹太-基督教”的高潮时代,在这个时代,犹太教被新认为是美国的“第三信仰”,据称与新教和天主教地位平等,因此,这三种宗教与本世纪中叶“美国宗教”这个小圈子之外的其他传统之间进行了比较。战后犹太教的三信仰地位揭示了相对思考的一些成本和好处:当进行比较是为了创造或维护宗教之间的平等时,结果可能包括消除传统之间的区别。对犹太教的研究表明了对宗教进行比较思考的一些政治和意识形态动机,以及其潜在的风险和好处,正如Lincoln和Freiberger所解释的那样。
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
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
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1