The purpose of this article is to evaluate the stance of the cognitive science of religion (CSR) with respect to the problem of the definition of religion. Firstly, I defend the necessity of an approximate definition of religion due to the fact that (a) definitions are microtheories and (b) there is considerable social demand for a comprehensive definition of religion because of the inclusion of the concept in the majority of contemporary legal systems. Secondly, I present a representative sample of statements about the nature of religion put forward by scholars working within the cognitive tradition, which reveals considerable convergence on what the CSR thinks religion is about and justifies the concept of a "cognitive definition of religion". Thirdly, in a brief historical sketch, I try to identify two opposite tendencies in historical attempts at defining religion and their respective philosophical backgrounds: Essentialist definitions perpetuate the venerable Western tradition harking back to Plato's Euthyphro, while recent non-essentialist definitions draw on the work of late Wittgenstein (in what I term "power-innocent" social constructionism) and Nietzsche, Foucault and Bourdieu (in what I term "power-based" social constructionism), respectively. Lastly, against the background of an essentialist vs. non-essentialist dialectic, I consider the definition of religion provided by the CSR, which, while prima facie almost indistinguishable from Tylor's doctrine of animism, is based philosophically on Kant and Chomsky (and therefore at odds with the prevalent practice of social constructionism) and capable of providing much more cogent justification for a universalistic approach to religion than any of its essentialist predecessors.
Publikace nastiňuje dějinný vývoj dvou základních teoreticko-metodologických přístupů v oblasti studia náboženství. První, historická část práce popisuje ustavení naturalistického a protekcionistického paradigmatu u předsókratovských filosofů a v raně křesťanském myšlení a jejich další rozvinutí v dílech předních postav religionistiky 19. a 20. století. Druhá, systematická část práce se blíže věnuje vybraným aspektům kognitivní vědy o náboženství na pozadí metodologického konfliktu mezi naturalismem a protekcionismem. ,Naturalism and protectionism in the Study of Religions describes the historical development of the two main theoretical and methodological approaches in the Study of Religions. The first part of the book focuses on the origins of the naturalist and protectionist paradigm in Presocratic philosophers and in the early Christian thought and their presence in the works of central protagonists of the 19th and 20th century Study of Religions. The second part discusses selected aspects of the Cognitive Science of Religion on the backdrop of the methodological conflict between naturalism and protectionism.
The article summarizes the main tenets of the monograph Naturalismus a protekcionismus ve studiu náboženství (Naturalism and Protectionism in the Study of Religions), published in Czech by Masaryk University Press in 2017. The monograph, to be published in English by Bloomsbury in 2020, identifies a serious methodological schism between naturalism and protectionism in the modern (19th and 20th century) Study of Religions, tracks the earliest roots of these competing paradigms to Pre-Socratic philosophy and early Christian literature, and evaluates the contribution of the Cognitive Science of Religion to the renewal of the naturalist approach.