I am curious about what Allen Scott really meant.
I don't think he would deny the fact that social and cultural analyses of
religion from critical or radical perspective have contributions to make.
Does he think even critical analyses of religion would somehow "validate"
religion?
Regards,
Jung Won
=================================
Jung Won SONN
Ph.D. in Urban Planning
Lecturer (Assistant Professor) in Urban Economic Development
BSc. Programme Director
Bartlett School of Planning
UCL, University of London
Phone: +44 (0)20 7679 4893
Fax: +44 (0)87 1251 9402
New MSc: Sustainable Urbanism:
http://www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/planning/programmes/msc_dp/sust_u.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Doerfler" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 9:09 PM
Subject: Re: Geographies of Religion conference - 8-9th March 2010 - call
for papers
Am 01.12.2009 um 21:56 schrieb Maarten Loopmans:
> I learned from people more acquainted with Marx's writings than I am
> that Marx was much more nuanced on religion than the
> decontextualized classical quote of 'religion as opiate of the
> people' would make us believe...don't know if that's true but even
> if not, to make such a sentence in a dogma to the extent that no
> serious research on the impact and meaning of religion in our
> societies is possible or allowed does not appear as rigorous
> critical scholarship to me...
OK, but in fact there seems to be no positive reference to religion
possible with Marx. See even his sometimes (quite falsely) as »anti-
semitic« classified notes Jews, who had to emancipate themselves to
get a subject of/in society etc. - to leave any cultural/religious
commitment behind, of course. I don't see any chance to revitalise a
positive perspective on religion with Marx. You have to skip to
»cultural studies« and say goodbye to social change...
thomas
|