Can One Be a Critical Caretaker?

in Method & Theory in the Study of Religion
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



There is a movement in the field of religious studies today which questions whether scholars of religion should have any interest in questions regarding the truth and value of religion. In this paper I critically examine the views of one of its leading figures, Russell T. McCutcheon, and argue that his views on the nature and study of religion are problematic in several key respects. Specifically, I argue that McCutcheon's basic methodological and theoretical claims are untenable, as is his well known distinction between "critics" and "caretakers" of religion. Having called into question McCutcheon's claim that being a critical scholar of religion is incompatible with being a "caretaker" of religion, I conclude with a brief reflection on his corollary claim that there are (or should be) "discursive constraints" on inquiry in public institutions of higher learning.

Can One Be a Critical Caretaker?

in Method & Theory in the Study of Religion



Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 11 11 4
Full Text Views 7 7 2
PDF Downloads 4 4 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0