Advertisement

Introduction

  • Jonathan Tuckett
Chapter
Part of the Sophia Studies in Cross-cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures book series (SCPT, volume 28)

Abstract

Social science is in crisis. By this “crisis” I mean that the genuine scientific character of social science itself lies in a questionable state. Despite many claiming to do social science, these claimants struggle to cohere with one another as to what is meant by “social science”. The task of social science as it will be defined in this book is (co-opting Sartre) the study of “man in situation”: to understand the world as it is for “man”. Following Husserl, such a science receives its “genuine character” insofar as it is the pursuit of nonpractical knowledge. My focus in this book is with those who have advocated this idea of social science—though none have done so in these exact terms—and why they have consistently failed to realise it. In this first chapter I lay the basis for how we know there is a crisis and how it is I intend to go about analysing it with a future aim to resolving it. This will contextualise my understanding of phenomenology in relation to the philosophy of social science and why I have chosen Religious Studies as a useful case study for examining and demonstrating the consequences of this crisis.

Keywords

Social science Religious studies Edmund Husserl Philosophy of social science Phenomenology 

References

  1. Allen, Charlotte. 1996. Is Nothing Sacred? Casting Out the Gods from Religious Studies. Lingua Franca 6: 30–40.Google Scholar
  2. Barrett, Justin. 2004. Why Would Anyone Believe in God? Lanham: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  3. de Caro, Mario. 2004. In Naturalism in Question, ed. David MacArthur. London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Delanty, Gerard, and Piet Strydom, eds. 2003. Philosophies of Social Science: The Classic and Contemporary Readings. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Englisc Onstigende Wordbōc. 2014. Englisc Onstigende Wordbōc. http://hord.ca/projects/eow/. Accessed 22 Sept 2014.
  6. Fitzgerald, Timothy. 1997. A Critique of ‘Religion’ as cross-cultural category. Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 9: 91–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. ———. 2000. The Ideology of Religious Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Foucault, Michel. 2002a. The Order of Things. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 2002b. The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Gadamer, Hans. 2013. Truth and Method. Trans. J. Weinsheimer and D.G. Marshall. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  11. Gordon, Scott. 1991. The History and Philosophy of Social Science. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gregory, Brad. 2012. The Unintended Reformation: How a Religious Revolution Secularised Society. London: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gurwitsch, Aaron. 1974. In Phenomenology and the Theory of Science, ed. L. Embree. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Heidegger, Martin. 2010. Being and Time. Trans. J. Stambaugh. Albany: State University of New York PressGoogle Scholar
  15. Hook, Sydney. 1944. Naturalism and Democracy. In Naturalism and the Human Spirit, ed. Y. Krikorian, 40–65. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hughes, Aaron. 2013. Sleeping with Elephants. Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 25: 319–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Husserl, Edmund. 1952. Ideen zu Einer Reinen Phänomenologie und Phänomenologischen Philosophie zweites buch: Phänomenologische Untersuchungen zur Konstitution. ed. M. Biemel. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. English edition: Husserl, Edmund. 1980. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy, Third Book: Phenomenology and the Foundations of the Sciences. Trans. T. Klein and W. Pohl, foreword G. van Kerckhoven. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  18. ———. 1965. Philosophy and the Crisis of European Man. In Phenomenology and the Crisis of Philosophy, trans. and ed. Q. Lauer. 149–192. London: Harper Torchbooks.Google Scholar
  19. ———. 1970a. Logical Investigations Vol.1. Trans. J. Findlay. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. ———. 1970b. Logical Investigations Vol.2. Trans. J. Findlay. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 1970c. The Crisis of European Science and Transcendental Phenomenology: An Introduction to Phenomenological Philosophy. Trans. D. Carr. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  22. ———. 1980. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy, Third Book: Phenomenology and the Foundations of the Sciences. Trans. T. Klein and W. Pohl, foreword G. van Kerckhoven. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  23. ———. 1989. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy second book: Studies in the Phenomenology of Constitution. Trans. R. Rojcewicz and A. Schuwer. London: Kluwer Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
  24. ———. 1999. The Idea of Phenomenology. Trans. L. Hardy. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. IAHR. 2015. The International Association for the History of Religions. http://www.iahr.dk/. Accessed 27 Sept 2017.
  26. Jember, Gregory, et al. 1975. English-Old English, Old English-English Dictionary. Colorado: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  27. Kiesel, Theodore. 2004. Scientific Discovery: Logical, Psychological, or Hermeneutical? In Phenomenology, ed. D. Moran and L. Embree, vol. III, 43–58. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Koyré, Alexandre. 1943. Galileo and the Scientific Revolution of the Seventeenth Century. The Philosophical Review 52: 333–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lauer, Quentin, ed. 1965. Phenomenology and the Crisis of Philosophy. London: Harper Torchbooks.Google Scholar
  30. Machlup, Fritz. 1963. Are the Social Sciences Really Inferior? In Philosophy of the Social Sciences: A Reader, ed. M. Natanson, 158–180. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  31. Martin, Luther, and Donald Wiebe. 2004. Establishing a Beachhead: NAASR, Twenty Years Later. NAASR. https://naasrreligion.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/establishingabeachhead.pdf. Accessed 13 Jan 2017.
  32. ———. 2012a. Religious Studies as a Scientific Discipline: The Persistence of a Delusion. Journal for the American Academy of Religion 80: 587–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. ———. 2012b. Religious Studies as a Scientific Discipline: The Persistence of a Delusion. Religio 20: 9–18.Google Scholar
  34. ———. 2012c. Why the Possible is Not Impossible but is Unlikely: A Response to Our Colleagues. Religio 20: 63–72.Google Scholar
  35. McCauley, Robert. 2011. Why Religion is Natural and Science is Not. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. McCutcheon, Russell. 1997. Manufacturing Religion: The Discourse on Sui Generis Religion and the Politics of Nostalgia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. ———. 2001. Critics not Caretakers: Redescribing the Public Study of Religion. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  38. Molendijk, Arie. 2000. At the Cross-roads: Early Dutch Science of Religion in International Perspective. In Man, Meaning, and Mystery: 100 years of History of Religions in Norway, ed. S. Hjelde, 19–51. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  39. Moran, Dermot. 2012. Husserl’s Crisis of the European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moran, Dermot, and Lester Embree, eds. 2004. Phenomenology Vol. III: Phenomenology on Science, Art, and Ethics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Müller, Max. 1892. Natural Religion. London: Longmans, Green and Co..Google Scholar
  42. ———. 1893. Introduction to the Science of Religion. London: Longmans, Green, and Co..Google Scholar
  43. ———. 2006. Preface to Chips from a German Woodshop. In Thinking about Religion: A Reader, ed. I. Strenski, 50–53. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  44. Murphy, Tim. 2010. The Politics of Spirit. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  45. Nagel, Ernest. 1963. Problems of Concept and Theory Formation in the Social Sciences. In Philosophy of the Social Sciences: A Reader, ed. M. Natanson, 189–209. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  46. ———. 2003. Methodological Problems of the Social Sciences. In Philosophies of Social Science: The Classic and Contemporary Readings, ed. G. Delanty and P. Strydom, 39–41. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Old English Translator. 2014. Old English Translator. http://www.oldenglishtranslator.co.uk/. Accessed 22 Sept 2014.
  48. Preus, Samuel. 1987. Explaining Religion: Criticism and Theory from Bodin to Freud. London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Schacht, Richard. 1990. Philosophical Anthropology: What, Why, and How. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 50: 155–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Scheler, Max. 1980. Problems of a Sociology of Knowledge. Trans. M. Frings, intro. K. Stikkers. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. ———. 1989. Sociology and the Study and Formulation of Weltanschauung. In Max Weber’s “Science as a Vocation”, ed. P. Lassman and I. Velody, trans. R. Speirs, 87–91. London: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  52. Schutz, Alfred. 1964. Equality and the Meaning Structure of the Social World. In Collected Papers II: Studies in Social Theory, ed. A. Brodersen, 226–273. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. ———. 1970. Edmund Husserl’s Ideas, Volume II. In Collected Papers III: Studies in Phenomenological Philosophy, ed. I. Schutz, 15–39. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Seebohm, Thomas. 2013. Husserl on the Human Sciences in Ideen II. In Husserl’s Ideen, ed. L. Embree and T. Nenon, 125–141. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Seiwert, Hubert. 2012. The Study of Religion as a Scientific Discipline: A Comment on Luther Martin and Donald Wiebe’s Paper. Religio 20: 27–38.Google Scholar
  56. Sharpe, Eric. 1975. Comparative Religion: A History. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  57. ———. 1988. Religious Studies, the Humanities and the History of Ideas. Soundings 7: 245–258.Google Scholar
  58. Spiegelberg, Herbert. 1982. The Phenomenological Movement: Third revised and enlarged edition. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Steel, Daniel, and Francesco Guala, eds. 2011. The Philosophy of Social Science Reader. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  60. Swedberg, Richard, and Ola Agevall. 2016. The Max Weber Dictionary: Key Words and Central Concepts. 2nd ed. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Toulmin, Stephen. 1972. Human Understanding Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  62. Tremlett, Paul-Francois. 2008. Levi-Strauss on Religion: The Structuring Mind. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
  63. Turner, Jonathan. 2005. Is Public Sociology Such a Good Idea? The American Sociologist 36: 27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. von Stuckrad, Koku. 2012. Straw Men and Scientific Nostalgia: A Response to Luther H. Martin and Donald Wiebe. Religio 20: 55–62.Google Scholar
  65. Weber, Max. 1946. Science as a Vocation. In From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, ed. H. Gerth and G. Wright Mills, 129–156. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Wiebe, Donald. 1999. The Politics of Religious Studies. New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  67. ———. 2012. It’s Never Been Better: Comments on the Current State of the Science of Religion. Religio 20: 173–192.Google Scholar
  68. ———. 2013. Change the Name! On the Importance of Reclaiming NAASR’s Original Objectives for the Twenty-First Century. Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 25: 350–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zbíral, David. 2012. Introduction to the Discussion: ‘Religious Studies as a Scientific Discipline: A Delusion?’. Religio 20: 5–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan Tuckett
    • 1
  1. 1.Independent AcademicEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations