Response to Helmut Reich: Overview or Apologetic?
Reich's contribution that the Oser/Gmunder approach provides a balance for the hard-soft distinction among theories of religious thinking is critiqued in three ways. First, hard and soft categories are seen to be obsolete in light of their dated use in debates with behaviorists and maturationis...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
[1993]
|
| In: |
The international journal for the psychology of religion
Year: 1993, Volume: 3, Issue: 3, Pages: 173-179 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Resolving-System) |
| Summary: | Reich's contribution that the Oser/Gmunder approach provides a balance for the hard-soft distinction among theories of religious thinking is critiqued in three ways. First, hard and soft categories are seen to be obsolete in light of their dated use in debates with behaviorists and maturationists. Second, the thesis neglects the feminist critique of constructive developmental approaches. Third, the expanded treatment of the Oser/Gmunder theory becomes an apologetic rather than an even-handed treatment. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1532-7582 |
| Reference: | Kritik von "Cognitive-Developmental Approaches to Religiousness (1993)"
|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The international journal for the psychology of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1207/s15327582ijpr0303_2 |