Weber, Geertz, and Ricoeur on Explanation and Interpretation
One perennial issue in the study of religion is the relationship between explanation and interpretation. Explanation provides causes. Interpretation provides meanings. The issue is the relationship between causes and meanings, for which rough synonyms are reasons, motives, intentions, and purposes....
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
2014
|
| In: |
Bulletin for the study of religion
Year: 2014, Volume: 43, Issue: 1, Pages: 25-33 |
| Further subjects: | B
Interpretation of
B Max Weber B Paul Ricoeur B Explanation B Clifford Geertz B method and theory |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | One perennial issue in the study of religion is the relationship between explanation and interpretation. Explanation provides causes. Interpretation provides meanings. The issue is the relationship between causes and meanings, for which rough synonyms are reasons, motives, intentions, and purposes. This article presents three of the most common positions on the relationship: those of Max Weber, Clifford Geertz, and Paul Ricoeur. The aim is not to endorse any of the positions but simply to compare them. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2041-1871 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Bulletin for the study of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1558/bsor.v43i1.25 |