Comparing comparison: Smith and Davidson
Resumo
Nos últimos anos, vários autores têm criticado a comparação, como método na ciência da religião. Grande parte da discussão aborda o que chamamos da dilema da comparação religiosa: ou as semelhanças entre os casos comparados são reais e as diferenças acidentais, ou as diferenças são reais e as semelhanças meramente aparentes. No primeiro caso, o ato da comparação impõe semelhanças de uma maneira artificial, privilegiando erroneamente uma das coisas a serem comparadas, o que pressupõe uma visão essencialista, afirmando que as suas características servem como medida de todo caso comparável. No segundo caso, as diferenças entre os casos a serem comparados são vistas como uma barreira insuperável, minando a própria premissa da comparação. Argumentamos que este aparente dilema pressupõe uma concepção representativa do significado, ou seja, que a comparação tem como meta descobrir qual tipo de coisa é representada pelos casos que estão sendo comparados. Entretanto, existem outras concepções do significado que podem potencialmente evitar ou resolver o dilema, reorientando a concepção básica de comparação, ao invés de entrar em detalhes dos recentes debates críticos. Este artigo afirma que o interpretarismo, uma abordagem do significado associada ao filósofo Donald Davidson, faz exatamente isso. JZ Smith não adotou explicitamente uma teoria semântica. Mas demonstramos que todos os seus principais elementos em seu trabalho de comparação se sustentam na base de uma visão interpretarista. As obras de Smith representam um modelo rico e detalhado de como a comparação prossegue sob uma semântica interpretativa. Este artigo tem duas implicações importantes para o estudo da religião. Primeiro, ela dissolve o dilema da comparação religiosa, sugerindo uma base teórica e metodológica mais firme para estudos comparativos. Segundo, sublinha que o trabalho de Smith serve como um modelo poderoso e prático do método comparativo, construído a partir desta base. Como corolário, oferece um benefício colateral interdisciplinar: a leitura de Smith à luz de Davidson também faz contribuições importantes para a filosofia da linguagem.
Palavras-chave
Texto completo:
PDFReferências
Albinus, Lars. (2018). “A Grammar of Religious ‘Truth’: Pragmatic Considerations on the Nature of Religious Truth.” Method & Theory in the Study of religion/s 30 (4-5):338-356.
Bagger, Matthew C. 2018. Pragmatism and Naturalism: Scientific and Social Inquiry after Representationalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Blair, Heather. (2019). ‘Smith at Play.’ Journal of the American Academy of Religion 87 (1):22-25.
Bush, Stephen S. (2014). Visions of Religion : Experience, Meaning, and Power, Reflection and Theory in the Study of Religion/s. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Carter, Jeffrey. (2004). “Comparison in the History of Religions: Reflections and Critiques: Introduction.” Method & Theory in the Study of religion/s 16 (1):3-11.
Davidson, Donald. (1967 (1984)). ‘Truth and Meaning.’ In Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, 17 - 35. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------. (1970 (1984)). ‘Semantics for Natural Langauges.’ In Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, 55 - 64. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------. (1973 (1984)). ‘Radical Interpretation.’ In Inquiries into Meaning and Truth, 125 - 139. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------. (1974 (1984)-a). ‘Belief and the Basis of Meaning.’ In Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, 141-154. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------. (1974 (1984)-b). ‘On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme.’ In Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, 183 - 198. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------. (1978 (1984)). “What Metaphors Mean.” In Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, 245 - 264. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------. (1980). ‘Actions, Reasons, and Causes (1963).’ In Essays on Actions and Events, 3 - 19. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
------. (1983 (2001)). “A Coherence Theory of Truth and Knowledge.” In Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective, 137-153. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------. (1984). Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------. (1986). ‘A Nice Derangement of Epitaphs.’ In Truth and Interpretation : Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, edited by Ernest LePore, 433-446. Oxford: Blackwell.
------. (1988 (2001)). “The Myth of the Subjective.” In Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective, 39 - 52. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
------. (1991 (2001)). ‘Three Varieties of Knowledge.’ In Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective, 205 - 220. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
------. (1993). ‘Locating Literary Language.’ In Literary Theory after Davidson, edited by Reed Way Dasenbrock, 295 - 308. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
------. (1997 (2001)). “The Emergence of Thought.” In Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective, 123-134. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------. (2005). James Joyce and Humpty Dumpty (1989). In Truth, Langauge, and History. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
------. (2006). ‘The Perils and Pleasures of Interpretation.’ In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Language, edited by Ernest LePore and Barry C. Smith, 1056 - 1068. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Davis, G. Scott. (2012). Believing and Acting: The Pragmatic Turn in Comparative Religion and Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
------. (2018). ‘Semantics and the Study of religion/s.’ Method & Theory in the Study of religion/s 30 (4-5):378-401.
Doniger, Wendy. (2000). ‘Post-Modern and -Colonial -Structural Comparisons.’ In A Magic Still Dwells : Comparative Religion in the Postmodern Age, edited by Kimberley C. Patton and Benjamin C. Ray, 63-74. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.
Frankenberry, N. K., and Hans H. Penner. (1999). Language, Truth, and Religious Belief: Studies in Twentieth-Century Theory and Method in Religion. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press.
Frankenberry, N.K. (2002). Radical Interpretation in Religion. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press.
------. (2014). “The Study of Religion/s after Davidson and Rorty.” American Journal of Theology and Philosophy 35 (3):195-210.
Frazer, James George. (1922). The Golden Bough; A Study in Magic and Religion, Abridged ed. New York,: The Macmillan company.
Gardiner, Mark Q., and Steven Engler. (2016). ‘Semantics.’ In The Oxford Handbook of the Study of Religion/s, 195-207. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Geertz, Clifford. (1973 (1993)). “Religion as a Cultural System.”, In The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Godlove, Terry F. (1989). Religion, Interpretation, and Diversity of Belief: The Framework Model from Kant to Durkheim to Davidson. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press.
------. (2014). Kant and the Meaning of Religion. New York: Columbia University Press.
------. (2018). ‘Truth, Meaning, and the Study of Religion/s.’ Method & Theory in the Study of religion/s 30 (4-5):357-377.
Hanegraaff, Wouter J. (2016). “Reconstructing ‘Religion’ from the Bottom Up”. Numen 63: 577-606.
Holdrege, Barbara A. (2000). “What's Beyond the Post? Comparative Analysis as Critical Method.” In A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion in the Postmodern Age, edited by Kimberley C. Patton and Benjamin C. Ray, 77-91. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.
Hughes, Aaron W. (2019). “Introduction.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 87 (1):18-21.
Jensen, Jeppe Sinding. (2001). “Universals, General Terms and the Comparative Study of Religion.” Numen 48 (3):238-266.
------. (2003). The Study of religion/s in a New Key: Theoretical and Philosophical Soundings in the Comparative and General Study of Religion/s. Åarhus: Aarhus University Press.
------. (2004a). “Meaning and Religion; on Semantics in the Study of Religion.” In New Approaches to the Study of Religion/s, edited by Peter Antes, Armin W. Geertz and Randi R. Warne, 219-252. Berlin: De Gruyter.
------. (2004b). “Why Magic? It's Just Comparison.” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion. 16 (1):45-60.
------. (2014). What Is Religion? Durham: Acumen Publishing.
------. (2019). “Scholarly Imaginations--and Modes of Their Comparability.” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 31:23-33.
Juschka, Darlene M. (2004). “Cane Toads, Taxonomies, Boundaries, and the Comparative Study of Religion.” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 16 (1):12-23.
Levy, Gabriel. (2012). “False but Significant: The Development of Falsity in Religious Cognition in Light of the Holism of the Mental.” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 24 (2):143-165.
------. (2018). “Can Fictional Superhuman Agents Have Mental States?” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 30 (4-5):425-448.
Martin, Luther H. (2004). “ ‘Disenchanting’ the Comparative Study of Religion.” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 16 (1):36-44.
Matory, J. Lorand. (2018). The Fetish Revisited: Marx, Freud, and the Gods Black People Make. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
McCutcheon, Russell T. (1997). Manufacturing Religion: The Discourse on Sui Generis Religion and the Politics of Nostalgia. New York: Oxford University Press.
Paden, William E. (2000). “Elements of a New Comparativism.” In A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion in the Postmodern Age, edited by Kimberley C. Patton and Benjamin C. Ray, 182-192. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.
------. (2004). “Comparison in the Study of Religion.” In New Approaches to the Study of Religion; Volume 2, edited by Peter Antes, Armin W. Geertz, and R.R. Warne, 77-92. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Patton, Kimberley C. (2000). “Juggling Torches: Why We Still Need Comparative Religion.” In A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion in the Postmodern Age, edited by Kimberley C. Patton and Benjamin C. Ray, 153-172. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Patton, Kimberley C., and Benjamin C. Ray. (2000). “Introduction.” In A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion in the Postmodern Age, edited by Kimberley C. Patton and Benjamin C. Ray, 1-19. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.
Penner, Hans H. (1994). “Holistic Analysis: Conjectures and Refutations.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 62 (4):977-996.
------. (1999). “Why Does Semantics Matter?” In Language, Truth, and Religious Belief, edited by Nancy and Hans H. Penner Frankenberry, 473-506. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Quine, W. V. (1951 (1953)). “Two Dogmas of Empiricism.” In From a Logical Point of View; 9 Logico-Philosophical Essays, 20-46. Cambridge,: Harvard University Press.
------. (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge, Mass.: Technology Press.
------. (1969). Ontological Relativity, and Other Essays. New York,: Columbia University Press.
Schilbrack, Kevin. (2014). Philosophy and the Study of Religion; a Manifesto. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Sheedy, Matt. (2019). “Making the Familiar Strange: On the Influence of J. Z. Smith.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 87 (1):41-46.
Smith, Huston. (2000a). “Methodology, Comparisons, and Truth.” In A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion in the Postmodern Age, edited by Kimberley C. Patton and Benjamin C. Ray, 172-181. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Smith, Jonathan Z. (1971). “Adde Parvum Parvo Magnus Acervus Erit.” History of Religions 11 (1):67-90.
------. (1972). “I Am a Parrot (Red).” History of Religions 11 (4):391-413.
------. (1973). “When the Bough Breaks.” History of Religions 12 (4):342-371.
------. (1976 (1982)). “A Pearl of Great Price and a Cargo of Yams: A Study in Situational Incongruity.” In Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown, 90-101. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
------. (1978). “Map Is Not Territory.” In Map Is Not Territory: Studies in the History of Religions, 289-309. Leiden: Brill.
------. (1979 (1982)). “In Comparison a Magic Dwells.” In Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown, 19-35. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
------. (1980). “The Bare Facts of Ritual.” History of Religions 20 (1/2):112-127.
------. (1982a). “The Devil in Mr. Jones.” In Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown, 102-120. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
------. (1982b). Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown, Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
------. (1988). “ ‘Religion’ and ‘Religious Studies’: No Difference at All.” Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal 71 (2/3):231-244.
------. (2000b). “Epilogue: The ‘End’ of Comparison: Redescription and Rectification.” In A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion in the Postmodern Age, edited by Kimberley C. Patton and Benjamin C. Ray, 237-241. Berkeley: University of California Press.
------. (2002). “Manna, Mana Everywhere and / ̆ / ̆ / ̆.’ In Radical Interpretation in Religion, edited by N. K. Frankenberry, 188-212. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
------. (2004). “When the Chips Are Down.” In Relating Religion: Essays in the Study of Religion, 1-60. Chicago: University of Chicago.
------. (2013). Drudgery Divine: On the Comparison of Early Christianities and the Religions of Late Antiquity, Jordan Lectures in Comparative Religion ; 14. London: Routledge.
Stausberg, Michael. (2011). “Comparison.” In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion, edited by Michael Stausberg and Steven Engler, 21-39. London ; New York: Routledge.
------. Forthcoming. “Comparison.” In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion, 2nd ed., edited by Steven Engler and Michael Stausberg. London ; New York: Routledge.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15603/2176-1078/er.v36n1p113-144
Este obra está licenciado com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional.