Journals Books 2687-5527 doi.org/10.36287/setsci
Latest Issue Archive Future Issues About Us
Conference Proceedings

SETSCI - Volume 4 (8) (2019)
ISAS WINTER-2019 (SHS) - 4th International Symposium on Innovative Approaches in Social, Human and Administrative Sciences, Samsun, Turkey, Nov 22, 2019

Religio:The Origin, Function and Meaning of Religion From Classical to Postmodern Study of Religion
Duygu Mete1*
1Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University, Erzincan, Turkey
* Corresponding author: duygumete24@gmail.com
Published Date: 2019-12-23   |   Page (s): 47-59   |    62     7
https://doi.org/10.36287/setsci.4.8.009

ABSTRACT It is clear that the anthropologists launched by Edward B. Tylor in the classical religionswissenschaft period, having continued on the evolutionary line - for instance those of Robert R. Marett, George Frazer - with terms such as anxiety, devotion, fear, deprivation, definitions for the religio also provided constructive ethnological contributions to the development of religious studies. In addition, it is seen that these scientists adhered to the evolutionary positivism questioning the biological and socio-cultural origins of human beings in accordance with the spirit of their own periods as well as they tried to make sense of the phenomenon of religion  within the humanity. As for the interdisciplinary approach of the modern religious sciences; the datum on religion has adopted a method that emphasizes on multiple phenomena values rather than the historical source or the matter of the origin for religion by shifting from tribal religions to major world religions. In this respect, scientists have examined the philosophical, psychological, sociological and phenomenological dimensions of religion in terms of symbolic and functional aspects. It can be said that multidisciplinary character of Modern study of religion attributes importance to the composite of “interreligious and intercultural characters of religions in order to understand the nature of religio. Based on the personal belief of the individual egoist religious and the refues and rejects of all religious institutions, Postmodernism has determined the agenda of contemporary religious discussions by depending on the spirit of time rather “individual religious meanings” and focus on revealing the cognitive and analytical values of religio. Because of this orientation, postmodern studies on tries to understand the “in value of religio, which regards as a secular and human phenomenon. The aim of this study is to examine the reactions of human beings to the phenomenon of religio from the beginning of Religious studies to the present day in the contexts of “origin, function, definition and meaning using analytical approach.
KEYWORDS Religion, Interreligious Relations, Modernism, Postmodernism, Analytic Approach
REFERENCES A. Coşkun, Din Antropolojisi, Kesit Yayınları, İstanbul: 2014.
A. E. Şekerci, Aydınlanma ve Din -İngiliz Aydınlanma Geleneğinde Din Algısı-, İnsan Yayınları, İstanbul: 2018.
A. Geels, “Glocal Spirituality for a Brave New World”, Ed. T. Ahback, Postmodern Spirituality, Donner Institute Publishing, Finland: 2009.
A. Lang, The Making of Religion, AMS Press, New York: 1909.
A. Özbolat, “Postmodern Dünyada Din: Yaygınlaşan Dinsellik, Yüzeyselleşen Dindarlık”, Journal of Islamic Research, C. 28, ss. 265-278, 2017.
B. Malinowski, Büyü, Bilim ve Din, çev. Saadet Özkal, Kabalcı Yayınları, İstanbul: 1990.
B. Morris, Din Üzerine Antropolojik İncelemeler, çev. Tayfun Atay, İmge Kitabevi, Ankara: 2004.
C. Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures, Basic Books, United States of America: 1973.
D. L. Pals, Eight Theories of Religion, Oxford University Press, New York: 2006.
D. Motak, “Postmodern Spirituality and the Culture of Individualism”, Ed. T. Ahback, Postmodern Spirituality, Donner Institute Publishing, Finland: 2009.
D. Wiebe, “Modernism”, Ed. W. Braun and R. T. McCutcheon, Guide to the Study of Religion, Cassell Publishing, New York: 2000.
E. Durkheim, Dini Hayatın İlkel Biçimleri, çev. Fuat Aydın, Eskiyeni Yayınları, Ankara: 2011.
F. Bowie, “Anthropology of Religion”, Ed. R. A. Segal, Study of Religion, Blackwell Publishing, United States of America: 2006.
H. Smith, “Postmodernism’s Impact on the Study of Religion”, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, S. 4, ss. 653-670, 1990.
I. Strenski, Understanding Theories of Religion an Introduction, Blackwell Publishing, Chichester: 2015.
J. C. Wolfart, “Postmodernism”, Ed. W. Braun and R. T. McCutcheon, Guide to the Study of Religion, Cassell Publishing, New York: 2000.
J. P. Mitchell, “Defining Religion”, Ed. R. King, Religion Theory Critique -Classical and Contemporary Approaches and Methodologies-, Columbia University Press, New York: 2017.
J. Waardenburg, Classical Approaches to The Study of Religion, Mouton the Hague Publishing, Paris: 1973.
J. Z. Smith, “Religion, Religions, Religious”, Ed. M. C. Tylor, Critical Terms for Religious Studies, The University of Chicago Press, London: 1998.
J. Z. Smith, Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown, Chicago: 1982.
M. Alıcı, “Çağdaş Din Bilimleri Metodolojisinde Modernizm-Postmodernizm Tartışmaları”, Akra Uluslararası Kültür, Sanat, Edebiyat ve Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, C. 5, ss. 35-49, 2017.
M. Alıcı, “Dindar Değil Maneviyatçıyım: Postmodern Din Bilimlerinde Maneviyat-Dindarlık Tartışmaları”, Akra Kültür, Sanat ve Edebiyat Dergisi, C. 6, ss. 11-20, 2018.
M. Alıcı, “Dinler Tarihinde Çağdaş Metodolojik Problemler”, Haz. İsmail Kurt, Seyit Ali Tüz, İslami İlimlerde Metodoloji/Usul Meselesi-II, Ensar Neşriyat, İstanbul: 2005.
M. Alıcı, “Kutsalın Peşindeki Adam: Ölümünün 19. Yılında Mircea Eliade İçin Kısa Bir Rehber”, Ekev Akademi Dergisi, S. 24, ss. 51-74, 2005.
M. Alıcı, Dinler Tarihinin Batılı Öncüleri, İz Yayıncılık, İstanbul: 2011.
M. Alıcı, Evrimci Politeizm Devrimci Monoteizm (Erken Kültürde Yüce Tanrı Fikrine Etnolojik ve Fenomenolojik Yaklaşımlar), Rağbet Yayınları, İstanbul: 2013.
M. Arslan, “Postmodern Yeni Dinsel Kimlik ve Paranormal İnançlar”, Milel ve Nihal İnanç, Kültür ve Mitoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, C. 12, S. 2, ss. 55-72, 2015.
M. Banton, Anthropological Approaches to The Study of Religion, Routledge Publishing, London: 2004.
M. Eliade, Dinler Tarihine Giriş, çev. Lale Arslan Özcan, Kabalcı Yayıncılık, İstanbul: 2014.
M. Eliade, Dinsel İnançlar ve Düşünceler Tarihi -Taş Devrinden Eleusis Mysterialarına-, çev. Ali Berktay, Alfa Yayıncılık, İstanbul: 2017.
M. Eliade, Dinin Anlamı ve Sosyal Fonksiyonu, çev. Mehmet Aydın, Din Bilimleri Yayınları, Konya: 2004.
M. Eliade, The Sacred&The Profane-The Nature of Religion, çev. Willard R. Trask, A Harvest Book, New York: 1987.
M. Lambek, “What is ‘Religion’ for Anthropology? And What Has Anthropology Brought to Religion?”, Ed. J. Boddy and M. Lambek, A Companion to the Anthropology of Religion, Wiley Blackwell Publishing, United States of America: 2013.
M. Müller, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion, New York: 1910.
M. Müller, Natural Religion-Part I, Londra: 1888.
M. Ş. Özkan, “Din Kavramına Eleştirel Yaklaşım: Wilfred Cantwell Smith Örneği”, Hitit Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, C. 15, S. 30, ss. 429-448, 2016.
M. Tekin, “Postmodernizmin Din Sorunu”, Milel ve Nihal İnanç, Kültür ve Mitoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, C. 12, S. 2, ss. 7-24, 2015.
N. G. Holm, “Mysticism and Spirituality”, Ed. T. Ahback, Postmodern Spirituality, Donner Institute Publishing, Finland: 2009.
N. Yavuz ve Y. S. Zavalsız, “Postmodern Dönemde Kimliğin Belirleyicisi Olarak Tüketim (Tüketilmiş Kimlikler)”, Tarih, Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi, S. 4, ss. 126-152, 2015.
P. Arnold, “Religions, History of”, Ed. V. E. Taylor and C. E. Winquist, Encyclopedia of Postmodernism, Routledge Publishing, London: 2001.
R. Firth, “An Anthropological Approach to the Study of Religion”, Ed. R. T. McCutcheon, The İnsider/Outsider Problem in the Study of Religion, The Bath Press, New York: 2005.
R. McCutcheon, Manufacturing Religion -The Discourse on Sui Generis Religion and The Politics of Nostalgia-, Oxford University Press, New York: 1997.
R. R. Marett, The Threshold of Religion, Methuen Publishing, London: 1909.
R. Styers, “Classical Anthropological Theories of Religion”, Ed. R. King, Religion Theory Critique -Classical and Contemporary Approaches and Methodologies-, Columbia University Press, New York: 2017.
S. Aslan ve A. Yılmaz, “Modernizme Bir Başkaldırı Projesi Olarak Postmodernizm”, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, C. 2, S. 2, ss. 93-108, 2001.
S. Freud, Totem ve Tabu, çev. Hasan İlhan, Altay Yayınları, Ankara: 2014.
S. Guthrie, “Anthropological Theories of Religion”, Ed. M. Martin, The Cambridge Companion to Atheism, Cambridge University Press, London: 2006.
S. L. Atalay, “Bir Batı İcadı Olarak Din: Religion Kavramının Modern Batı’da İnşası”, İnsan ve Toplum Dergisi, C. 6, ss. 27-47, 2016.
T. Asad, “Anthropological Conceptions of Religion: Reflections on Geertz”, Man, C. 18, ss. 237-259, 1983.
T. Atay, Din Hayattan Çıkar, İletişim Yayınları, İstanbul: 2017.
W. Arnal and R. T. McCutcheon, The Sacred is The Profane, Oxford University Press, New York: 2013.
W. C. Smith, Faith and Belief: The Difference Between Them, Princeton University Press, New Jersey: 1979.
W. C. Smith, The Meaning and the End of Religion, Mentor Books Publishing, New York: 1964.
W. E. Arnal, “Definition”, Ed. W. Braun and R. T. McCutcheon, Guide to the Study of Religion, Cassell Publishing, New York: 2000.


SET Technology - Turkey

eISSN  : 2687-5527    
DOI : doi.org/10.36287/setsci

E-mail : info@set-science.com
+90 533 2245325

Tokat Technology Development Zone Gaziosmanpaşa University Taşlıçiftlik Campus, 60240 TOKAT-TURKEY
©2018 SET Technology