This book looks at the large-scale theories of religion characteristics of nineteenth- and twentieth-century approaches to the study of religion. The philosophical assumptions behind the alleged need to produce a theory of religion are examined in Part I. The aims and means of defining religion are treated as part of this examination. The discussion of method in the theory of religion is then illustrated in detailed treatments of five major forms of large-scale theory of religion in Part religious, philosophical, sociological, socioeconomic and psychological. Major thinkers in the theory of religion such as Marx, Freud, Durkheim, Hegel and Feuerbach are discussed. The book aims to reveal the difficulties in demonstrating the necessity and validity of any large-scale theory of religion. It argues for less extensive aims for the study of religion, contending in particular that religion should be defined in family-resemblance terms, and explained piecemeal and through historical forms of understanding.
A mixed experience. The basic premise of examining the connection between definition and explanation is useful. The chapters are intelligent attempts at assessing the philosophical consistency of theories of religion, divided here into religious, philosophical, socio-economic, sociological, and psychological varieties. On the other hand, the authors espouse a strange version of methodological agnosticism. Instead of phenomenologically bracketing the objects of belief, they consider any theory postulating the source of religion beyond that object of belief (e.g. society instead of God) to be 'radical'. The theological/religious side shows especially in the chapter on the philosophy of explanation, which tries hard to argue for openness to religiously-based explanation. Nevertheless, an interesting read and something that I would like to see rewritten for a contemporary audience.