Mind the (Unbridgeable) Gaps

Abstract

In this paper, I explore two of the most pernicious kinds of scientific distortions and misconceptions pertinent to the study of religion (i.e., pseudoscientific trends focused on allegedly paranormal/supernatural phenomena and discontinuity between human and non-human cognition), arguing that: a) the adherence to the prestigious reputation of Eliadean academic frameworks may still cause grave distortions in the comprehension of relevant scientific fields; b) a reliance on cognition alone does not guaranteeipso factoa more epistemically warranted study of religion; c) an evolutionary and cognitively continuist approach to the study of religion is, instead, the most promising and fundamental scholarly tool to bridge the gap between the humanities and the natural sciences, even though it remains a long-term goal; d) the obsolete language of “aboriginal cultures” as open-air museums for our past is rooted in the aforementioned misconceptions and, though basically flawed, is still very much alive.

Evolutionary, Cognitive, and Contextual Approaches to the Study of Religious Systems

“…Here, we illustrate the principles of integration on the subject that we study, that is, religion and follow the appeal from various scholars of religion for tighter integration of the humanities and sciences (Ambasciano 2016;Asprem & Taves 2018;Bulbulia & Slingerland 2012;Martin & Wiebe 2019;Petersen, Gilhus, Martin, Jensen, & Soerensen 2019;Slingerland 2008a;Slingerland & Collard 2011;Taves 2011). We introduce a refined model that is not a forced choice between losing a precious contextuality or losing a possibility to generalize but tries to give due credit to both.…”