Response to Review Panelists
This article consists of replies to the reviewers. For Ambasciano I show that his concern about the taint of epistemic phenomenologies can be largely deflected by understanding the exact contextualization of the materials he questions, particularly their place in the function, structure and serializ...
| Autore principale: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo di documento: | Elettronico Articolo |
| Lingua: | Inglese |
| Verificare la disponibilità: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Caricamento...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Pubblicazione: |
Brill
2018
|
| In: |
Method & theory in the study of religion
Anno: 2018, Volume: 30, Fascicolo: 2, Pagine: 165-172 |
| Notazioni IxTheo: | AA Scienze religiose AD Sociologia delle religioni AE Psicologia delle religioni |
| Altre parole chiave: | B
Evoluzione
natural history
world-making
function
comparativism
|
| Accesso online: |
Volltext (Verlag) |
| Riepilogo: | This article consists of replies to the reviewers. For Ambasciano I show that his concern about the taint of epistemic phenomenologies can be largely deflected by understanding the exact contextualization of the materials he questions, particularly their place in the function, structure and serialized nature of the argument. Responding to Segal I try to clarify the evolutionary role of functionalism, the relation of Durkheim and Eliade as I am using them, and the role of difference in comparativism. Willard’s questions about the relations of my natural history approach to the cultural evolution model provides a good opportunity to point out their complementarity and differences. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1570-0682 |
| Comprende: | In: Method & theory in the study of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15700682-12341418 |