Journals / Amasya Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 11

Eric Sharpe’s Model of Understanding Religion

ERIC J. SHARPE’IN DİNİ ANLAMA MODELİ

Pages
343–376
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, although Sharpe’s model emphasizes that need and awareness of the need to study religion in a multifaceted way, the model appears to have remained in the developmental stage due to the fact that the modes are highly abstract and do not cover up all areas of religion.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the four-mode religion model that Eric J.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Sharpe, one of the most important representatives of the English School of Phenomenology of Religion, has put forward in order to attain a holistic understanding of religion in over against one-sided examination of religion.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, although Sharpe’s model emphasizes that need and awareness of the need to study religion in a multifaceted way, the model appears to have remained in the developmental stage due to the fact that the modes are highly abstract and do not cover up all areas of religion.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study examines the four-mode religion model that Eric J. Sharpe, one of the most important representatives of the English School of Phenomenology of Religion, has put forward in order to attain a holistic understanding of religion in over against one-sided examination of religion. Sharpe's model consists of modes which are existential including religious experience on the axis of faith, intellectual dealing with religious beliefs, organizational that contact with social constructs created by believers and ethical that points to the moral structures of religions. According to this model, there might be a different mode in the center of each religion and the differences between the religions might be evaluated in this frame. This model is based on criticism of the seven-dimensional religion model of Ninian Smart, one of the most important representatives of the same school. The main criticism of Sharpe is that the other dimensions of religion are pushed into the background by emphasizing religious experience. Since, according to him, religion is not a phenomenon that can only be confined to conscience through religious experience. However, although Sharpe’s model emphasizes that need and awareness of the need to study religion in a multifaceted way, the model appears to have remained in the developmental stage due to the fact that the modes are highly abstract and do not cover up all areas of religion.

Özet

Bu çalışmada İngiliz Din Fenomenolojisi Ekolünün önemli temsilcilerinden olan EricJ. Sharpe’ın, dinin tek yönden incelenmesi karşısında bütüncül bir din anlayışınaulaşmak amacıyla ortaya koyduğu dört modlu din modeli ele alınmaktadır.Sharpe’ın modeli, iman ekseninde dinî tecrübeyi içeren varoluşsal, dinlerin inançilkelerini ele alan zihinsel, inananların oluşturduğu sosyal yapılara temas edenorganizasyonel ve dinlerin ahlaki yapılarına işaret eden ahlaki modlardanoluşmaktadır. Bu modele göre her dinin merkezinde farklı bir mod yer alabilmekteve dinler arasındaki farklılıklar bu çerçevede değerlendirilebilmektedir. Bu modelözellikle aynı ekolün önemli temsilcilerinden olan Ninian Smart’a ait yedi boyutludin modeline yönelik eleştirilere dayanmaktadır. Sharpe’ın temel eleştirisi, dinîtecrübenin vurgulanarak dinin diğer boyutlarının ikinci plana itilmesidir. Çünküona göre din, dini tecrübe aracılığıyla yalnızca vicdanlara hapsedilebilecek birfenomen değildir. Ancak Sharpe’ın modeli, dinin çok yönlü tarzda incelenmesineyönelik ihtiyacı ve farkındalığı vurgulamasına rağmen, modların oldukça soyutolması ve dinin bütün alanlarını kapsamaması gibi nedenlerle gelişim aşamasındakalmış görünmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özcan, Ş. (2022). Eric Sharpe’s Model of Understanding Religion. Amasya Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 11, 343–376. https://ajindex.com/articles/435315

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (22)

  1. Aden, Ross. Religion Today: A Critical Thinking Approach to Religious Studies. New York: Rowman&Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2013.
  2. Albayrak, Kadir. Semavi Dinlerde Barış ve Şiddet İkilemi. Ankara: Sarkaç Yayınları, 2010.
  3. Arık, Durmuş. Hıristiyanlaştırılan Türkler Çuvaşlar. Ankara: Berikan Yayınevi, 2012.
  4. Aronowicz, Annette, “Discussion of Eric. J. Sharpe’s ‘Comparative Religion: A History’”. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion. 1/1 (1989): 41-46.
  5. Barnes, L. Philip. Education, Religion and Diversity: Developing a New Model of Religious Education. London, New York: Routledge, 2014.
  6. Batuk, Cengiz. “Türkiye’de Dinler Tarihi Çalışmalarının Tarihsel Seyri”. Dinbilimleri Akademik Araştırma Dergisi. 9/1 (2009): 71-97.
  7. Bennett, Clinton. Studying Islam: The Critical Issues. London: Continuum, 2010.
  8. Berton, Pierre. The Comfortable Pew: A Critical Look at Christianity and the Religious Establishment in the New Age. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1965.
  9. Capps, Walter H. Religious Studies: The Making of a Discipline. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995.
  10. Chilton, Bruce. “Altruism in Christianity”. Altruism in World Religions. Ed. Jacob Neusner ve Bruce Chilton. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 2005, 53-66.
  11. Corrywright, Dominic- Morgan, Peggy. Get Set For Religious Studies, Edingurgh: Edinburg University Press, 2006.
  12. Cox, James L. Kutsalı İfade Etmek: Din Fenomenolojisine Giriş, Trc. Fuat Aydın. İstanbul: İz Yayıncılık, 2004.
  13. Cox, James L. A Guide to the Phenomenology of Religion: Key Figures, Formative Influences and Subsequent Debates. New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group, 2006.
  14. Dhavamony, Mariasusai. Phenomenology of Religion. Roma: Universita Gregoriana Editrice, 1973.
  15. Dick, John A. “Nathan Söderblom and the Study of Religion by Eric J. Sharpe”. The Catholic Historical Review 78/2 (1992): 318-319.
  16. Drees, Willem B. Religion and Science in Context: A Guide to the Debates. London, New York: Routledge, 2010.
  17. Eliade, Mircea. Kutsal ve Dindışı. Ankara: Gece Yayınları, 1991.
  18. Fletcher, Joseph F. Situation Ethics: The New Morality. London: Westminster John Knox Press, 1966.
  19. Gombrich, Richard Francis. Buddhist Precept and Practice: Traditional Buddhism in the Rural Highlands of Ceylon. Oxford: Calenderon Press, 1971.
  20. Graham, Paul. Rawls: A Beginner’s Guide. London: Oneworld Publications, 2014.
  21. Harman, Ömer Faruk. “Evrensel Dinlerin İnsan Haklarına Bakışı”. Diyanet İlmi Dergi. 34/3 (1998): 3-16.
  22. Hoffman, John - Graham, Paul. Introduction to Political Theo