This article was downloaded by:[ANKOS 2007 ORDER Consortium] On: 6 December 2007 Access Details: [subscription number

772815468] Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Beliefs & Values

Studies in Religion & Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713429021

A methodological approach to the epistemic classification of knowledge in religious sciences

Ismail L. Hacinebioglu a a Suleyman Demirel University, Turkey

Online Publication Date: 01 December 2007 To cite this Article: Hacinebioglu, Ismail L. (2007) 'A methodological approach to the epistemic classification of knowledge in religious sciences', Journal of Beliefs & Values, 28:3, 235 - 241 To link to this article: DOI: 10.1080/13617670701712133 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13617670701712133

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Downloaded By: [ANKOS 2007 ORDER Consortium] At: 11:42 6 December 2007

Journal of Beliefs & Values, Vol. 28, No. 3, December 2007, pp. 235241

A methodological approach to the epistemic classification of knowledge in religious sciences

Ismail L. Hacinebioglu*
Suleyman Demirel University, Turkey
IsmailHacinebioglu 0 300000December 28 2007 OriginalofFrancis 1361-7672 (print)/1469-9362 Journal&Article and 10.1080/13617670701712133 CJBV_A_271109.sgmValues (online) Taylor andBeliefs 2007 Francis

In many ways the religious sciences are named according to their subjects, methodologies and epistemologies. The historical and modern terminologies of such sciences sometimes create confusions in understanding what the epistemic and methodological differences are amongst them. In this article, the various grounds for religion in terms of theology and religious studies are highlighted in order to understand more clearly how knowledge is acquired in the religious sciences. Epistemological and methodological requirements need to be considered to evaluate logically the various subject matter and problems in religious thought.

Faith and values are studied through many different disciplines. Theology and philosophy/religious studies are the main domains to discuss issues related to them. The question of whether we say theology and religious studies or theology versus religious studies indicates a possible conceptual separation between two fields of interest. Similar questions could be raised, for example, in whether we say philosophy and philosophical studies or philosophy versus philosophical studies. In both cases the bottom line of the discussion is about a classification of epistemology and appropriate methodology. Rational thinking is possible only on the basis of an epistemology and methodology. Where theology refers to any single religion, we may safely assume theology comes first historically within that religion. Normally the main components of a religion are: 1) its founder; 2) its sacred texts and teachings; 3) its followers and interpretations.

*S. Demirel Universitesi, Ilahiyat Fakultesi, Isparta, Turkey 32260. Email: hacinebioglu@yahoo. com ISSN 1361-7672 (print)/ISSN 1469-9362 (online)/07/03023507 2007 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/13617670701712133

236 I. L. Hacinebioglu
Downloaded By: [ANKOS 2007 ORDER Consortium] At: 11:42 6 December 2007

Theology will reflect on those components. This might be labelled a process of establishing theology, as making theology or theologising. This process inevitably involves a forming of creedal preferences and practices. Philosophising on the problems in those areas naturally comes after theology. Every religion has its own history of how this process developed (Marmura, 1995; Sharma, 1995). In classical terminology faith can be understood as response to belief in God or in a broader sense as a generic term; faith is a way of experiencing the divine. Theology is a theoretical reflection on faith. This theoretical framework is built on the grounds of indispensable or asserted elements of creed. Religious studies analyses and interprets the outcome of theological problems in the sense of problems created by theology. Theology indicates the more theoretical side of faith whilst religious studies concentrates more on the produced knowledge out of faith and its theology. While creeds and beliefs are the products of theology as they are, religious studies searches how they are perceived and practised. In order to avoid a debate as to whether every religion has a theology or not, it is helpful to see theology as a theoretical and creedal structure in this context. Theological studies can focus on the texts and their interpretations. They can be analysed in turn by textual studies, historical studies and philosophical studies. Religious studies can be established and produced from them, but do not aim to create a theology. Subject studies on philosophical theology, theological philosophy, scientific study of religion, history of religion, religious sciences, psychology and sociology of religion, education in religion and studies of logic can all be listed as part of religious studies. These studies have three dimensions which should not be viewed as completely separable from each other: 1) theoretical; 2) practical; 3) scientific. An analysis of their relationship should be done on the grounds of epistemology and methodology. Theories are produced through different interpretations of methodological approaches and preferences in their epistemology. The experience of practically living the applications of theories may not be the same as the theory, whilst the goal of scientific analysis is to find out what the specific facts are in reality. Epistemology and methodology Truth claims Religious studies pictures and analyses how religion works in life experience. Theology is the engine of religion but it does not represent all aspects of religion. In this process, religion interacts with science and philosophy and, through this interaction, religious studies emerges. In fact, the discussions about the classification of areas of knowledge are not something new in the history of thought. The dichotomy between philosophy and theology is made evident by the modern epistemology of

The classification of knowledge in religious sciences 237

Downloaded By: [ANKOS 2007 ORDER Consortium] At: 11:42 6 December 2007

science. The superiority of modern science over theology and philosophy in the last few centuries pushed these fields to look for some conciliation with modern science. It is not too crude to argue that the birth of modern religious studies originates from this development. This should not exclude the historical background of the problem. However, the scientific approach to theological issues seriously affected religious studies (King, 1990). This scientific approach is meant to analyse religion through modern scientific methodologies and epistemological criticism. In every religion the position of theology taken towards rationality has played a crucial part in the understanding and application of that religion. Rational thinking is an important tool to evaluate epistemologies and methodologies, which will be taken as the ground for understanding religion (Woozley, 1969, pp. 99, 124). How theological sources are understood depends on the epistemology and methodology (Audi, 1998, 2002; Sosa & Greco, 1999) employed. Analysis of the sources of knowledge determines how to grasp the essence of theology. The character of knowledge can be seen in the following terms, as M. H. Yazdi writes, Analysis of the notion of knowledge logically implies that since the object is nothing but immanent and essential, the meaning of the objectivity of this object is analytic and manifested in the very constitution of knowing (Yazdi, 1992, p. 40). Knowledge in theology does not have to be all about the sacred. Theological knowledge can be based on the following: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) sacred books; textual methodology; tradition; facts and realities/responses to life; scientific methodology.

An epistemology of a religion is present in all religious subjects and theology. If knowledge is defined as justified true belief, the question is about whether or not following the argument P, a believes in p, Then as belief is justified (Dancy, 1985, p. 23) is valid. Justification of its knowledge might be established differently in the different religions. For example, justification of the knowledge of theology is sought in sacred texts and reasoning over theological issues. Especially in Islam, the sacred text is the main source of any theological view and matters and problems are derived from there. Theoretically, reason should not contradict it and theology cannot contradict the divine sources. Obviously the problem is not that simple. Methodological approaches on how to reason with regards to the text and interpretation is a long-established problem. Objectivity and subjectivity Religious studies is only accurately evaluated when theological connections are truly established. If truth claims are considered as the starting point, religious studies should not assert a separate truth claim which theology does not have. When we look at the subject of rationality, rational thinking can be applied to the analysis of theology and religious studies. Rationality means here applying rational thinking to a religion. Theology is a sort of rational response of faith by structuring the religious framework

238 I. L. Hacinebioglu
Downloaded By: [ANKOS 2007 ORDER Consortium] At: 11:42 6 December 2007

(Mitchell, 1957, p. 108). It could be claimed that religions do not start with their unique theology. The situation is rather different, it is more true to state that a theology is composed to explain systematically doxastic/doctrinal beliefs, to explain their own creeds, teachings and dogmas. However, due to this the various interpretations of theology divide the religious views of a group. Divisions over schools of thought follow from theologies which are systematic explanations of the religion. Theological divisions start by epistemological and methodological differences. Interpretations of creeds affect and are affected by personal, social, political and economic needs. In the beginning, in the history of classification of sciences, there was philosophy and theology, then all the sciences, methodologies and schools were derived from their epistemologies. There is a need to find out what the epistemological ground is for this interaction. It is assumed that religious studies as a scientific inquiry has to be objective. If religious studies wants to be an objective science versus subjective theological claims, it seems to be an endeavour doomed to failure because religious studies arises from theology. Studies within theology can be objective or subjective as much as inquiries within religious studies. For a researcher, there is almost the same difficulty in analysing, evaluating and interpreting the relationship between theology and religious studies. Methodologically speaking, religious studies phenomena are not something new to Islamic studies. They are all studied as a part of the same inquiry because theology has been taken as the prime science of all others for a long time. Their status is something like the independence of epistemologies and methodologies of sociology and psychology from philosophy. If religious studies demands independence from theology, this will take a much longer time than what happened in the case of philosophy. One needs to be fully aware of the fact that modern science is a catalyst for this dichotomy. Religious studies cannot be a back door for science to enter to interfere in or even to claim superiority over theology. The properties of religion make this distinction sometimes more difficult. The separation is related to the division between religion and philosophical social sciences. If this division is made, then theology is reduced to only textual studies. Along with that, religious studies then turns out to be philosophical social studies. But this still does not solve the objectivitysubjectivity problem. Religious studies may in the end turn out to be as subjective as theology. The role of logic A preference for any particular idea or thought may result in misunderstandings and misinterpretations. The logic of any understanding needs to be methodologically investigated. Discussions about the criteria of how to evaluate the objectivitysubjectivity problem in relation to theology and religious studies can start from here: 1) 2) 3) 4) concepts; propositions; arguments; epistemology;

The classification of knowledge in religious sciences 239

Downloaded By: [ANKOS 2007 ORDER Consortium] At: 11:42 6 December 2007

5) rationality; 6) language. Certain approaches to the points mentioned above provide their epistemological ground adopting the appropriate methodologies in the religious sciences. Moreover, logic is crucial because valid argumentation is always sought, and to keep methodologies consistent with their epistemic evaluations. The validity of argument depends on the coherence of propositions. Terms for the concepts and argumentation may change over history in religions. Language is the carrier of thought. Current usage of language for theology, and especially the historical language of religion, needs to be carefully examined to uncover the lines of thought (Sharpe, 1993; Mohanty & Sosa, 1999). Epistemological preferences and the place of rationality can be found through logical analysis of both theology and religious studies. It is not proper to think that religious studies is objective and that it can be elucidated through distinctions such as the secular versus the theological. Whatever criticisms are made of theology, these can be directed to religious studies as well. In order to avoid that discussion without going into categorical division, epistemological and methodological analyses can be applied to both. For example, a study of a theology of a religion has no other epistemological approach than the study of a religious education. Teaching religion itself includes theology but religious education is also a part of education in religion.

Islam With respect to Islamic sciences, Kalam and the philosophy of religion, in conjunction with logic, have an interesting relation to show how truth claims and doxastic/doctrinal beliefs can be analysed methodologically. Kalam is one of the traditional Islamic disciplines. It was initially regarded as an outsider approach to Islam. In later stages this discipline became known as the defender of the faith and logic played a vital part in this process. Especially after Ghazali, along with textual studies, philosophising texts through other sciences became part of Islamic studies. Rationality of faith and logical reasoning flourished among other sciences. Traditional classifications of Islamic sciences did not separate theology from religious studies. It is not much help to understand religion on the basis of the argument that theology has specific and predetermined values and religious studies is value free. Logical analysis of beliefs and facts should not have different epistemic grounds. Religious studies should relate to every science about religion and with all scientific approaches to religion. Religious studies cannot exclude theology. Thus, theology cannot play a part in the religion versus religious studies distinction on the grounds of personal beliefs, methodologies and epistemological origins. In the classification of knowledge, divine knowledge, that is, the Quran, is taken as a basis of epistemologies in Islam. Primary knowledge is thought to be divine knowledge. The remainder of the other forms of understanding and reasoning are treated as worldly ones. However, it was argued that the so-called worldly knowledge

240 I. L. Hacinebioglu
Downloaded By: [ANKOS 2007 ORDER Consortium] At: 11:42 6 December 2007

about things should be analysed or controlled by the divine knowledge. It meant that all sciences, one way or another, have a sort of direct connection to divine knowledge. Not only religious sciences but also all other sciences are therefore seen to be under theology. Since in Islam, theology encompasses the whole of life, there can be no realm of life that is truly secular. Therefore, they cannot be separated epistemologically from what theology teaches. This understanding was quite common amongst Muslims. The science of Kalam was seen as rational interpretations and speculations about theology (Wolfson, 1976). There was a famous saying from the seventh-eighth century (CE): man tamantaka tazandaka, man takallama tazandaka: whoever involves himself in logic or philosophy is a heretic. This understanding has changed enormously. Thus logical studies have indeed helped to analyse studies of the sciences. Kindi, Farabi, Ibn Sina (ninth to eleventh centuries) were theologians as much as they were philosophers and scientists. The father of sociology, Ibn Khaldun, studied how the rules of civilisations work in the created world in his Mukaddimah, which is an introduction to his exegesis of the Quran (Ibn Khaldun, 2005). With respect to Islamic sciences, Kalam and the philosophy of religion, in conjunction with logic, have interesting links to show how truth claims and doxastic beliefs are methodologically analysed. Certain approaches to religion offer their own epistemological grounds in order to discover methodologies for the religious sciences. Conclusion Theology and religious studies should not be seen as epistemologically different subject areas. The rationality of faith and reasoning employing logic alone is the main issue here. Traditional classifications of Islamic sciences did not separate theology from religious studies. From this point of view, it is not helpful to understand religion on the basis of the argument that theology has specific and predetermined values and religious studies is value free. Logical analysis of beliefs and facts should not have different epistemic grounds. Religious studies is related to every one of the sciences that is linked to religion along with all the religious approaches to the sciences, thus religious studies cannot exclude theology. Theology cannot therefore play a part in the religion versus religious studies debate on the grounds of personal beliefs, methodologies and epistemological origins. Exploring these points will allow the demonstration of how the truth value and subjectivityobjectivity problems occur in logical problem solving in relation to the subject of religion. It would be a great epistemological mistake to distinguish the ultimate grounds of theology and religious studies. Rational thinking in pursuit of the whole truth is the shared epistemological basis of both theology and religious studies. References
Audi, R. (1998) Epistemology (London, Routledge). Audi, R. (2002) The architecture of reason: the structure and substance of rationality (Oxford, Oxford University Press).

The classification of knowledge in religious sciences 241

Downloaded By: [ANKOS 2007 ORDER Consortium] At: 11:42 6 December 2007

Dancy, J. (1985) An introduction to contemporary epistemology (Oxford, Basil Blackwell). Ibn Khaldun (2005) Mukaddimah: an introduction to history (abridged by N. J. Dawood) (Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press). King, U. (1990) Turning points in religious studies (Edinburgh, T&T Clark). Marmura, M. (Ed.) (1995) Islamic theology and philosophy: studies in honour of George Hourani (New York, SUNY Press). Mitchell, B. (1957) Faith and logic (London, George Allen and Unwin). Mohanty, J. N. & Sosa, E. (1999) Epistemology: classical readings (Oxford, Blackwell). Sharma, A. (1995) The philosophy of religion & Advaita Vedanta (University Park, PA, Pennsylvania State University Press). Sharpe, E. (1993) Understanding religion (London, Duckworth). Sosa, E. & Greco, J. (1999) Epistemology (Oxford, Blackwell). Wolfson, A. H. (1976) Philosophy of Kalam (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press). Woozley, A. D. (1969) Theory of knowledge (London, Hutchinson University Library). Yazdi, M. H. (1992) The principles of epistemology in Islamic philosophy (New York, SUNY Press).