This essay investigates the theoretical and methodological challenges undertaken in the research of “religious pluralism” which aspires to use comparison as a method to achieve inter-religious dialogue. In particular, the essay addresses the debate at the heart of Comparative Theology and Hindu-Christian Studies, which today are moving beyond the legacy of John Hick’s theoretical works to a new research track, adopting comparison as a means of stripping theological inquiry of its essentialist and ideological assumptions and, at the same time, promoting a comparative and inter-religious approach. The essay also analyzes the strategic role of “comparison” as a cognitive tool in the methods and theories that historians of religions have used over the past five decades. In doing so, it also pays close attention to the destabilizing effects that recent postmodernist critiques have had on “comparison.” Finally, the purpose of this essay is to establish whether comparison, a well-accepted method in the history of religions, could be adopted to evaluate inter-religious practices.
In questo saggio ci si interroga sulle sfide intraprese sul piano teorico e metodologico nelle ricerche sul “pluralismo religioso” che ambiscono a compiere il dialogo interreligioso attraverso il metodo della comparazione. In particolare, si analizza il dibattito in seno alla Comparative Theology e agli Hindu-Christian Studies, che sull’eredità di John Hick oggi si stanno spostando su una pista di ricerca nuova, che individua nella comparazione lo strumento in grado di emancipare l’indagine teologica da essenzialismi e valutazioni teologiche, così da renderla comparativamente interreligiosa. Ci si interroga tuttavia sul ruolo strategico della comparazione, quale strumento cognitivo, nei metodi e nelle teorie adottate dagli storici delle religioni negli ultimi cinquant’anni, prestando attenzione agli effetti destabilizzanti delle critiche del postmodernismo rivolte alla “comparazione”. Infine, questo saggio intende verificare se il metodo comparativo, quale strumento accolto nella Storia delle religioni, possa essere adottato per valutare pratiche interreligiose.
Il pluralismo religioso e le magie della comparazione: Dagli Hindu-Christian Studies alla nuova Comparative Theology / Ferrara, Marianna. - (2020), pp. 68-82. - QUADERNI DI SMSR.
Il pluralismo religioso e le magie della comparazione: Dagli Hindu-Christian Studies alla nuova Comparative Theology
Ferrara, Marianna
2020
Abstract
This essay investigates the theoretical and methodological challenges undertaken in the research of “religious pluralism” which aspires to use comparison as a method to achieve inter-religious dialogue. In particular, the essay addresses the debate at the heart of Comparative Theology and Hindu-Christian Studies, which today are moving beyond the legacy of John Hick’s theoretical works to a new research track, adopting comparison as a means of stripping theological inquiry of its essentialist and ideological assumptions and, at the same time, promoting a comparative and inter-religious approach. The essay also analyzes the strategic role of “comparison” as a cognitive tool in the methods and theories that historians of religions have used over the past five decades. In doing so, it also pays close attention to the destabilizing effects that recent postmodernist critiques have had on “comparison.” Finally, the purpose of this essay is to establish whether comparison, a well-accepted method in the history of religions, could be adopted to evaluate inter-religious practices.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Ferrara_Il-pluralismo-religioso-e-le-magie-della-comparazione-Dagli-Hindu-Christian-Studies-alla-nuova-Comparative-Theology_2020.pdf
solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione
642.47 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
642.47 kB | Adobe PDF | Contatta l'autore |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.