Objectivity and the supernormal: the limitations of bracketing approaches in providing neutral accounts of supernormal claims

This paper contends that bracketing approaches to the sociological study of supernatural, paranormal, and occult proponents do not truly ‘bracket' the reality-claims made by those being studied, but instead impose ontological limits on what can be considered ‘supernormal'. It is argued tha...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Northcote, Jeremy (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Carfax Publ. [2004]
In: Journal of contemporary religion
Year: 2004, Volume: 19, Issue: 1, Pages: 85-98
Online Access: Volltext (Resolving-System)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1691201065
003 DE-627
005 20200227171927.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 200227s2004 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1080/1353790032000165131  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1691201065 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1691201065 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 0  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Northcote, Jeremy  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Objectivity and the supernormal  |b the limitations of bracketing approaches in providing neutral accounts of supernormal claims 
264 1 |c [2004] 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This paper contends that bracketing approaches to the sociological study of supernatural, paranormal, and occult proponents do not truly ‘bracket' the reality-claims made by those being studied, but instead impose ontological limits on what can be considered ‘supernormal'. It is argued that such boundaries and definitions tend to rule out alternative ontological perspectives of the kind that researchers typically encounter among religious, paranormal, and occult proponents. It is also argued that, unlike earlier reductionist approaches to the supernormal, the bias of bracketing approaches is not necessarily based on an underlying sceptical outlook of researchers, but rather reflects an inherent ontological limitation within the sociological enterprise itself. It is recommended that bracketing should be replaced by a reflexive, dialogical approach that emphasises the ontological positioning of social analyses with respect to supernormal claims. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of contemporary religion  |d Basingstoke, Hants [u.a.] : Carfax Publ., 1995  |g 19(2004), 1, Seite 85-98  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)320501132  |w (DE-600)2012230-5  |w (DE-576)095237976  |x 1469-9419  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:19  |g year:2004  |g number:1  |g pages:85-98 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1080/1353790032000165131  |x Resolving-System 
936 u w |d 19  |j 2004  |e 1  |h 85-98 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 3599052247 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1691201065 
LOK |0 005 20200227171927 
LOK |0 008 200227||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixzo  |a rwrk 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
SUB |a REL