The given paper takes a close look at the theoretical concepts of Mircea Eliade, Edward Evans-Pritchard, and Clifford Geertz regarding religion. Each of these authors aims to safeguard religion from skeptical philosophical views. These attempts are closely studied in the paragraphs below.
To begin with, Eliade stresses that views, such as those suggested by Marx and Freud, are reductionist. Marx’s understanding of religion is strictly economic, while Freud ascribes religion to the individual’s neurotic impulses. In countering these ideas, Eliade proposes that religion is viewed as it is, without reducing it to some other, external factors. Religion, according to Eliade, should not be seen as the product of another reality; it is autonomous and independent, standing in its own right (Pals).
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Defending Religion".
The philosopher introduces the concept of the sacredness into his idea of religion. In The Nature of Religion Eliade explains that the sacred is opposite to the profane. He views this as a polarity, an opposition between that which is real and not real. Hence, any object can be viewed as possessing something supernatural in it or it can be viewed merely as an object. However, those who have come close to the sacred sense of living perceive the world much differently. Most importantly, the sacred “is the sphere of order and perfection” (Pals). Relying on Rudolf Otto’s work, Eliade explains that religious experiences can only be interpreted from the perspective of divinity. Thus, the sacred is where all being originates. It is the source of spiritual and human power.
As for Evans-Pritchard, he studied native peoples by immersing himself in their culture. During his observations, he discovered that these people had a rather sophisticated spiritual/religious outlook. They were able to successfully manage their physical and spiritual realities, going back and forth from one to the other via a series of rituals/beliefs. Thus, religion has always been an essential part of human existence, regardless of the level of scientific progress in a given society. Evans-Pritchard is drawn toward greater complexity in the realm of religious studies. By researching “primitive” societies, the theory of religion can further be elaborated, helping to explain religious beliefs and phenomena.
Finally, Geertz’s approach is rooted in the practice of interpretation. He stresses that the only way to understand religion is to interpret its ideas and practices. The philosopher views religion “as a cultural fact in its own right, not as mere expression of social needs or economic tensions” (Pals). Furthermore, he carried out a study of Javan culture; in his research, Geertz presented a detailed account of the different aspects of Javan life. In all of his research, he aims to avoid generalizations; his study of the cultural/religious phenomena is extremely detailed. According to Geertz, religion is a system of symbols that generates moods and motivations in people; it aims to conceptualize and explain the surrounding reality in a way that make these moods/motivations valid.
From the standpoint of critique, Eliade can be admired for his attempt to set religion apart from all reductionist theories. While there is some vagueness in his concepts and examples, his theory offers a valid basis for studying religion as a subject of its own – independent and unobstructed by other fields of study. As for Evans-Pritchard, his research adds extremely valuable information to the field of religious studies. Specifically, Evans-Pritchard’s research of the primitive/native societies helped to demonstrate that religion is not the byproduct of insufficient knowledge.
What is more, it does not stand in opposition to science. Rather, it complements it by providing interpretations of absolutely different nature. Finally, Geertz points to the absolute importance of going into a detailed interpretative study of each phenomenon/culture. He stresses that all cultures should be interpreted without the use of other theories/subjects as potential explanatory tools. While each of these theories has its own drawbacks, each of these approaches adds to the realm of study wherein religion is viewed as a separate discipline.
