지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2008.12
- 수록면
- 27 - 51 (25page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This paper is to examine the recent trends in phenomenological approaches to the study of religions, mainly, done by students in the North America and the Europe. After the death of Mircea Eliade, Cantwell Smith, and Ninian Smart, social scientists such as Robert Segal, Donald Wiebe, and Timothy Fitzgerald are criticizing the essential definitions of religion and the theological-metaphysical intentions behind their phenomenological studies. Phenomenologists (or religionists) have paid more attention to the structure and meaning of religious phenomena than their contexts and changes.
First, among religionists, there has been a great confusion in the definitions and boundaries of phenomenology of religion. Due to the influence of philosophical phenomenology, theology, and cultural studies, religionists could not reach any consensus on various types of phenomenology of religion. Nevertheless, Western male scholars (Otto, van der Leeuw, Eliade, Smith, and Smart) have dominated in traditional phenomenology of religion. Second, epoche and eidetic vision in phenomenology of religion play important roles in understanding religious phenomena through the eyes of believers. Phenomenology of religion is a-historical, a-theological, and non-reductionistic. As Jim Cox suggests, we can follow thirteen stages of phenomenology of study, which is based on the models of van der Leeuw, Eliade, and Smith. Third, using the ‘methodological agnosticism’ and ‘dimensional anatomy,’ Ninian Smart tried to understand the meaning of the focus in different religious and ideological believers. He regarded religion as organism, but his critics point out limitations of his model in terms of reification and metaphysical assumption. Fourth, in spite of methodological crisis, we have a chance to reconstruct new styles of ‘self-reflective’ phenomenology of religion, with which Waadernburg and Cox emphasize the dimension of context and change.
In conclusion, in the 21st century, phenomenology of religion is still important in that scholars can understand religious phenomena from believers perspective. In order to overcome the Western male dominance, more balanced phenomenological approach based on feminism and multi-multiculturalism is needed. It should be noted that the formation and transformation of phenomenology are influenced by personal experience and historical context, which wait for our examination and analysis.
First, among religionists, there has been a great confusion in the definitions and boundaries of phenomenology of religion. Due to the influence of philosophical phenomenology, theology, and cultural studies, religionists could not reach any consensus on various types of phenomenology of religion. Nevertheless, Western male scholars (Otto, van der Leeuw, Eliade, Smith, and Smart) have dominated in traditional phenomenology of religion. Second, epoche and eidetic vision in phenomenology of religion play important roles in understanding religious phenomena through the eyes of believers. Phenomenology of religion is a-historical, a-theological, and non-reductionistic. As Jim Cox suggests, we can follow thirteen stages of phenomenology of study, which is based on the models of van der Leeuw, Eliade, and Smith. Third, using the ‘methodological agnosticism’ and ‘dimensional anatomy,’ Ninian Smart tried to understand the meaning of the focus in different religious and ideological believers. He regarded religion as organism, but his critics point out limitations of his model in terms of reification and metaphysical assumption. Fourth, in spite of methodological crisis, we have a chance to reconstruct new styles of ‘self-reflective’ phenomenology of religion, with which Waadernburg and Cox emphasize the dimension of context and change.
In conclusion, in the 21st century, phenomenology of religion is still important in that scholars can understand religious phenomena from believers perspective. In order to overcome the Western male dominance, more balanced phenomenological approach based on feminism and multi-multiculturalism is needed. It should be noted that the formation and transformation of phenomenology are influenced by personal experience and historical context, which wait for our examination and analysis.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 종교현상학의 개념과 범주
Ⅲ. 종교현상학의 특징과 단계
Ⅳ. 종교현상학자들의 회귀
Ⅴ. 종교현상학의 위기와 기회
Ⅵ. 결론: 회고와 전망
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
The Development of Phenomenology in Korea
Korea Journal
1999 .03
-
종교현상학의 창조적 다양성과 비판적 변형 -엘리아데의 종교현상학과 신종교연구의 가능성-
신종교연구
2019 .01
-
종교 사용 설명서 : 종교 교육에 대한 시론적 접근
종교문화연구
2012 .12
-
종교현상학의 창조적 다양성과 비판적 변형 : 김종서의 신종교와 종교사회학 연구를 중심으로
현상학과 현대철학
2018 .12
-
인간을 변화시키는 종교와 종교학 : 엘리아데의 인간론과 교육론
종교연구
2016 .03
-
현상학에 (現象學) 있어서의 경험의 의의 (1)
철학연구
1977 .12
-
현상학에 (現象學) 있어서의 경험의 의의 (2)
철학연구
1977 .12
-
『정신현상학』과 철학의 역사(Ⅱ) : 「감성적 확실성」과 「소크라테스 이전 철학」
철학연구
1999 .05
-
Non-Western Religion
Korea Journal
1967 .02
-
중국문화 연구에서 ‘종교’를 다루기 위한 선행적 연구
중국어문학논집
2014 .12
-
한국 종교교단 연구의 현실과 과제
종교연구
2013 .03
-
19세기 말~20세기 초 서양 선교사들의 한국종교 이해
한국기독교와 역사
2003 .08
-
리꾀르의 『의지의 철학』에 전개된 해석학적 착상
철학논총
2003 .07
-
현대 한국 교회 성장에 대한 종교현상학적 이해
한국기독교신학논총
2001 .04
-
한국 종교학 방법론의 과제와 전망
종교연구
2013 .03
-
불교와 종교학
불교학연구
2007 .01
-
한국 종교정책의 진단과 과제 : 문화체육관광부의 종무실을 중심으로
종교연구
2011 .12
-
한국사회 법의 영역에서 형성된 종교 개념 : 지구적 관점의 적용
종교문화연구
2009 .06
-
New Religions and Social Change in Modern Korea History
THE REVIEW OF KOREAN STUDIES
2002 .06
-
The New Religions in Korean Society
Korea Journal
1980 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
종교현상학의 주요 인물과 최근 동향 : 네덜란드 종교현상학파와 브레데 크리스텐센을 중심으로
안신
현상학과 현대철학
2008
.11
조나단 스미스의 종교 현상학 연구 : 형태론과 비교론을 중심으로
안신
현상학과 현대철학
2007
.08
인간을 변화시키는 종교와 종교학 : 엘리아데의 인간론과 교육론
유요한
종교연구
2016
.03
[과학과 기독교 신앙의 대화 (5)] 다섯째 마당 : 우주론과 기독교 (2)
김기석
기독교사상
2015
.07
종교 다원주의 상황과 한국교회 : Peter L. Berger 의 사회학적 이론을 중심으로
이원규
한국기독교신학논총
1990
.10
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-205-000838048