A Normative Turn in the Study of Religions?: Reflections on Richard Miller's Why Study Religion?

In his book Why Study Religion? ethicist and philosopher Richard B. Miller criticizes the discipline of religious studies for being negligent about the fundamental goal of its academic pursuits. In this review essay, the authors challenge Miller's diagnosis by arguing that scholars of religion do share a common goal and that the state of affairs bemoaned by Miller is healthier than he admits. The essay raises doubts concerning his selection of six "methodologies" that supposedly represent the field and it challenges Miller's interpretation of Jonathan Z. Smith's famous comparative analysis of the Jonestown massacre. The essay proposes a different distinction between goals and values in research and critically reviews the four goals/values proposed by Miller, three of which appear to represent business as usual. The essay argues that Miller's proposed teleology is suspicious, not as innovative as he seems to think, and maybe even a retrogression. Finally, the essay faults Miller's undertheorized conception of religion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]