The Insider/Outside Debate in Religion
THE INSIDER/OUTSIDE DEBATE IN RELIGION
One of the major debate in religious studies is the believers/observers or insiders/outsiders position. The debate is about how the individual position themselves in the study. Often the discussion is put into term of “emic” and “etic”. The outsider’s approach is to produce a completely informative description or productions of sound, behavior, beliefs. This is the emic or phonemic approach. The insider’s approach is the observer being involved in the activities that are being preformed at the time of the study. This is the etic or phonetic approach. These approaches continue to create debate by Rudolph Otto and Mircea Eliade. They argue for the emic approach. They claim that by using any other approach results in reductionism and undermine those religions being studied. The etic scholars argue it is impossible to investigate a particular religion without being a part of that religion. They also insist that reductionism can be the only approach for the outsider. The outsider can only understand the religion by understanding how the effects of economics, politics, society, gender, and other social constructions in that religion. The separation of insider/outsider is base on the concept of objectivity as it pertains to religion. But this is a loaded term, it contradicts itself to start. The entire debate is based on the stance of the individual studying that religion. The students’ subjective and objective approach has always been in question. This is what defines the differences between insider and outsider. While outsiders are more objective relative to the insiders, the insiders don’t think of themselves as just being subjective. Therefore, objectivity is understood to be present in both the insider and outsider approach. Many scholars argue that it isn’t the place for the philosophers to solve the insider/outsider debate but rather to deconstruct it. This approach would help in obtaining an objective view. It
One of the major debate in religious studies is the believers/observers or insiders/outsiders position. The debate is about how the individual position themselves in the study. Often the discussion is put into term of “emic” and “etic”. The outsider’s approach is to produce a completely informative description or productions of sound, behavior, beliefs. This is the emic or phonemic approach. The insider’s approach is the observer being involved in the activities that are being preformed at the time of the study. This is the etic or phonetic approach. These approaches continue to create debate by Rudolph Otto and Mircea Eliade. They argue for the emic approach. They claim that by using any other approach results in reductionism and undermine those religions being studied. The etic scholars argue it is impossible to investigate a particular religion without being a part of that religion. They also insist that reductionism can be the only approach for the outsider. The outsider can only understand the religion by understanding how the effects of economics, politics, society, gender, and other social constructions in that religion. The separation of insider/outsider is base on the concept of objectivity as it pertains to religion. But this is a loaded term, it contradicts itself to start. The entire debate is based on the stance of the individual studying that religion. The students’ subjective and objective approach has always been in question. This is what defines the differences between insider and outsider. While outsiders are more objective relative to the insiders, the insiders don’t think of themselves as just being subjective. Therefore, objectivity is understood to be present in both the insider and outsider approach. Many scholars argue that it isn’t the place for the philosophers to solve the insider/outsider debate but rather to deconstruct it. This approach would help in obtaining an objective view. It