Thirty or forty years ago, the phrase method and theory in Religious Studies scholarship referred to more social scientific approaches to the study of religion, as opposed to the more traditional theological hermeneutics common to the field. Today, however, it seems that everyone claims to do theory and method, including those people who shun social scientific approaches the academic study of religion. As a result, what does it mean to do theory and method in an era where the phrase has no distinct meaning? To help address this question, the North American Association for the Study of Religion (NAASR) addressed the issue of theory at its annual meeting in 2015. Based on what all agreed were productive and rigorous conversations, NAASR returned to the topic at its meeting a year later, where panelists and presenters discussed the issue of method. This volume is a collection of papers presented at the 2016 NAASR meeting, where panelists specifically addressed description, interpretation, comparison, and explanation in Religious Studies scholarship.

Thirty or forty years ago, the phrase method and theory in Religious Studies scholarship referred to more social scientific approaches to the study of religion, as opposed to the more traditional theological hermeneutics common to the field. Today, however, it seems that everyone claims to do theory and method, including those people who shun social scientific approaches the academic study of religion. As a result, what does it mean to do theory and method in an era where the phrase has no distinct meaning? To help address this question, the North American Association for the Study of Religion (NAASR) addressed the issue of theory at its annual meeting in 2015. Based on what all agreed were productive and rigorous conversations, NAASR returned to the topic at its meeting a year later, where panelists and presenters discussed the issue of method. This volume is a collection of papers presented at the 2016 NAASR meeting, where panelists specifically addressed description, interpretation, comparison, and explanation in Religious Studies scholarship.

In his bio-bibliographical essay, J.Z. Smith wrote that he was fond of the expression “when the chips are down” in the sense of all being said and done. With his passing in December 2017, the phrase has gained an additional layer of sad finality – the chips are really down. Scholarship is not poker, however, which means that these chips not only can but in fact should be picked up and circulated. Thinking with J. Z. Smith brings together the contributions of scholars who do exactly that by considering theoretical and methodological issues central to J. Z. Smith’s oeuvre in the context of their own research. Through analyses of Smith’s own work as well as applications of his concerns to new situations, historic periods, and regions, the contributors test the adequacy and applicability of Smith’s ideas and thus provide an indirect assessment of his influence and legacy in the field of Religious Studies.

In his bio-bibliographical essay, J.Z. Smith wrote that he was fond of the expression “when the chips are down” in the sense of all being said and done. With his passing in December 2017, the phrase has gained an additional layer of sad finality – the chips are really down. Scholarship is not poker, however, which means that these chips not only can but in fact should be picked up and circulated. Thinking with J. Z. Smith brings together the contributions of scholars who do exactly that by considering theoretical and methodological issues central to J. Z. Smith’s oeuvre in the context of their own research. Through analyses of Smith’s own work as well as applications of his concerns to new situations, historic periods, and regions, the contributors test the adequacy and applicability of Smith’s ideas and thus provide an indirect assessment of his influence and legacy in the field of Religious Studies.

After an opening section that explores the deployment of “crisis” in various aspects of higher education, this volume structures the critical approach to the category of crisis through four distinct sections: Language, Lexicon, Locus, and Locution. The section on Language examines the social rhetoric that emerges in historical moments of rupture, resistance, and reconstitution. The section on Lexicon considers different projects of persuasion exemplified in the critical study of religion in and through crisis. The section on Locus discusses three instances of religious institutions adapting to “crises” in the United States, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, and Russia, highlighting that religions are not fixed entities but living constructions. The final section, Locution, brings together senior scholars to assess the stated aim of the American Academy of Religion (i.e., “thinking about the actual human implications of religion in a world upended”) and explain how we might provide an alternative to that use of crisis in the field of religious studies. The book is concluded with an Afterword by Aaron Hughes.

After an opening section that explores the deployment of “crisis” in various aspects of higher education, this volume structures the critical approach to the category of crisis through four distinct sections: Language, Lexicon, Locus, and Locution. The section on Language examines the social rhetoric that emerges in historical moments of rupture, resistance, and reconstitution. The section on Lexicon considers different projects of persuasion exemplified in the critical study of religion in and through crisis. The section on Locus discusses three instances of religious institutions adapting to “crises” in the United States, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, and Russia, highlighting that religions are not fixed entities but living constructions. The final section, Locution, brings together senior scholars to assess the stated aim of the American Academy of Religion (i.e., “thinking about the actual human implications of religion in a world upended”) and explain how we might provide an alternative to that use of crisis in the field of religious studies. The book is concluded with an Afterword by Aaron Hughes.

Given the continued challenges that face the higher education job market in the Humanities in North America, this multi-authored volume offers (i) a critical assessment of the current situation of Humanities doctoral students, early career scholars, and those now working in doctoral degree-granting institutions in the U.S. along with (ii) concrete proposals for a way forward which. In turn, these proposals (iii) are the starting point for constructive reflections by faculty now working in leading American doctoral programs. The aim for the volume is therefore to initiate and then move forward a conversation among future, current, and recent graduate students as well as those who train them concerning the content, process, and purpose of acquiring advanced research skills in the early twenty-first century university. For this is a time when most everyone in higher ed. knows that a decreasing few who earn these degrees will ever attain work as tenured faculty members while an ever increasing number will, instead, end up either in perpetually insecure contingent faculty positions or, for a variety of reasons, will opt to seek careers outside academia, where the explicit relevance of their training is, at least at present, uncertain and uncharted. The volume asks what the role of these students’ faculty, supervisors, degree programs, and Departments ought to be in helping them—and thereby helping these doctoral programs themselves, along with their affiliated faculty—to excel in an economic, and sometimes political, environment that is often not kind to scholarship in the Humanities.

Given the continued challenges that face the higher education job market in the Humanities in North America, this multi-authored volume offers (i) a critical assessment of the current situation of Humanities doctoral students, early career scholars, and those now working in doctoral degree-granting institutions in the U.S. along with (ii) concrete proposals for a way forward which. In turn, these proposals (iii) are the starting point for constructive reflections by faculty now working in leading American doctoral programs. The aim for the volume is therefore to initiate and then move forward a conversation among future, current, and recent graduate students as well as those who train them concerning the content, process, and purpose of acquiring advanced research skills in the early twenty-first century university. For this is a time when most everyone in higher ed. knows that a decreasing few who earn these degrees will ever attain work as tenured faculty members while an ever increasing number will, instead, end up either in perpetually insecure contingent faculty positions or, for a variety of reasons, will opt to seek careers outside academia, where the explicit relevance of their training is, at least at present, uncertain and uncharted. The volume asks what the role of these students’ faculty, supervisors, degree programs, and Departments ought to be in helping them—and thereby helping these doctoral programs themselves, along with their affiliated faculty—to excel in an economic, and sometimes political, environment that is often not kind to scholarship in the Humanities.

Neoliberalism and authoritarian populism are some of the main forces endangering contemporary universities. This applies to the study of religion in several ways. The numbers of new tenured positions and students are going down in North America, but some departments suffer more than others. What is required is a careful reflection on the current working conditions and an examination of future of the field. This volume asks, in what ways do specific educational, institutional, and broader social locations and environments inform perspectives on religion and the contours of scholarly debate? Based on surveys and self-consciously personal observations of various university settings, explorations of research environments, and investigations of dissemination platforms, these personal contributions from different career stages exemplify the dynamic between forces shaping academia today and individuals navigating in their situation while constructing a better future for themselves and the field of study. Examining the elements that comprise the ecology of the field provides opportunities to sharpen our scholarly pursuits.

Thirty or forty years ago, the phrase method and theory in Religious Studies scholarship referred to more social scientific approaches to the study of religion, as opposed to the more traditional theological hermeneutics common to the field. Today, however, it seems that everyone claims to do theory and method, including those people who shun social scientific approaches the academic study of religion. As a result, what does it mean to do theory and method in an era where the phrase has no distinct meaning? To help address this question, the North American Association for the Study of Religion (NAASR) addressed the issue of theory at its annual meeting in 2015. Based on what all agreed were productive and rigorous conversations, NAASR returned to the topic at its meeting a year later, where panelists and presenters discussed the issue of method. This volume is a collection of papers presented at the 2016 NAASR meeting, where panelists specifically addressed description, interpretation, comparison, and explanation in Religious Studies scholarship.

Thirty or forty years ago, the phrase method and theory in Religious Studies scholarship referred to more social scientific approaches to the study of religion, as opposed to the more traditional theological hermeneutics common to the field. Today, however, it seems that everyone claims to do theory and method, including those people who shun social scientific approaches the academic study of religion. As a result, what does it mean to do theory and method in an era where the phrase has no distinct meaning? To help address this question, the North American Association for the Study of Religion (NAASR) addressed the issue of theory at its annual meeting in 2015. Based on what all agreed were productive and rigorous conversations, NAASR returned to the topic at its meeting a year later, where panelists and presenters discussed the issue of method. This volume is a collection of papers presented at the 2016 NAASR meeting, where panelists specifically addressed description, interpretation, comparison, and explanation in Religious Studies scholarship.

In his bio-bibliographical essay, J.Z. Smith wrote that he was fond of the expression “when the chips are down” in the sense of all being said and done. With his passing in December 2017, the phrase has gained an additional layer of sad finality – the chips are really down. Scholarship is not poker, however, which means that these chips not only can but in fact should be picked up and circulated. Thinking with J. Z. Smith brings together the contributions of scholars who do exactly that by considering theoretical and methodological issues central to J. Z. Smith’s oeuvre in the context of their own research. Through analyses of Smith’s own work as well as applications of his concerns to new situations, historic periods, and regions, the contributors test the adequacy and applicability of Smith’s ideas and thus provide an indirect assessment of his influence and legacy in the field of Religious Studies.

In his bio-bibliographical essay, J.Z. Smith wrote that he was fond of the expression “when the chips are down” in the sense of all being said and done. With his passing in December 2017, the phrase has gained an additional layer of sad finality – the chips are really down. Scholarship is not poker, however, which means that these chips not only can but in fact should be picked up and circulated. Thinking with J. Z. Smith brings together the contributions of scholars who do exactly that by considering theoretical and methodological issues central to J. Z. Smith’s oeuvre in the context of their own research. Through analyses of Smith’s own work as well as applications of his concerns to new situations, historic periods, and regions, the contributors test the adequacy and applicability of Smith’s ideas and thus provide an indirect assessment of his influence and legacy in the field of Religious Studies.

After an opening section that explores the deployment of “crisis” in various aspects of higher education, this volume structures the critical approach to the category of crisis through four distinct sections: Language, Lexicon, Locus, and Locution. The section on Language examines the social rhetoric that emerges in historical moments of rupture, resistance, and reconstitution. The section on Lexicon considers different projects of persuasion exemplified in the critical study of religion in and through crisis. The section on Locus discusses three instances of religious institutions adapting to “crises” in the United States, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, and Russia, highlighting that religions are not fixed entities but living constructions. The final section, Locution, brings together senior scholars to assess the stated aim of the American Academy of Religion (i.e., “thinking about the actual human implications of religion in a world upended”) and explain how we might provide an alternative to that use of crisis in the field of religious studies. The book is concluded with an Afterword by Aaron Hughes.

After an opening section that explores the deployment of “crisis” in various aspects of higher education, this volume structures the critical approach to the category of crisis through four distinct sections: Language, Lexicon, Locus, and Locution. The section on Language examines the social rhetoric that emerges in historical moments of rupture, resistance, and reconstitution. The section on Lexicon considers different projects of persuasion exemplified in the critical study of religion in and through crisis. The section on Locus discusses three instances of religious institutions adapting to “crises” in the United States, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, and Russia, highlighting that religions are not fixed entities but living constructions. The final section, Locution, brings together senior scholars to assess the stated aim of the American Academy of Religion (i.e., “thinking about the actual human implications of religion in a world upended”) and explain how we might provide an alternative to that use of crisis in the field of religious studies. The book is concluded with an Afterword by Aaron Hughes.

Given the continued challenges that face the higher education job market in the Humanities in North America, this multi-authored volume offers (i) a critical assessment of the current situation of Humanities doctoral students, early career scholars, and those now working in doctoral degree-granting institutions in the U.S. along with (ii) concrete proposals for a way forward which. In turn, these proposals (iii) are the starting point for constructive reflections by faculty now working in leading American doctoral programs. The aim for the volume is therefore to initiate and then move forward a conversation among future, current, and recent graduate students as well as those who train them concerning the content, process, and purpose of acquiring advanced research skills in the early twenty-first century university. For this is a time when most everyone in higher ed. knows that a decreasing few who earn these degrees will ever attain work as tenured faculty members while an ever increasing number will, instead, end up either in perpetually insecure contingent faculty positions or, for a variety of reasons, will opt to seek careers outside academia, where the explicit relevance of their training is, at least at present, uncertain and uncharted. The volume asks what the role of these students’ faculty, supervisors, degree programs, and Departments ought to be in helping them—and thereby helping these doctoral programs themselves, along with their affiliated faculty—to excel in an economic, and sometimes political, environment that is often not kind to scholarship in the Humanities.

Given the continued challenges that face the higher education job market in the Humanities in North America, this multi-authored volume offers (i) a critical assessment of the current situation of Humanities doctoral students, early career scholars, and those now working in doctoral degree-granting institutions in the U.S. along with (ii) concrete proposals for a way forward which. In turn, these proposals (iii) are the starting point for constructive reflections by faculty now working in leading American doctoral programs. The aim for the volume is therefore to initiate and then move forward a conversation among future, current, and recent graduate students as well as those who train them concerning the content, process, and purpose of acquiring advanced research skills in the early twenty-first century university. For this is a time when most everyone in higher ed. knows that a decreasing few who earn these degrees will ever attain work as tenured faculty members while an ever increasing number will, instead, end up either in perpetually insecure contingent faculty positions or, for a variety of reasons, will opt to seek careers outside academia, where the explicit relevance of their training is, at least at present, uncertain and uncharted. The volume asks what the role of these students’ faculty, supervisors, degree programs, and Departments ought to be in helping them—and thereby helping these doctoral programs themselves, along with their affiliated faculty—to excel in an economic, and sometimes political, environment that is often not kind to scholarship in the Humanities.

Neoliberalism and authoritarian populism are some of the main forces endangering contemporary universities. This applies to the study of religion in several ways. The numbers of new tenured positions and students are going down in North America, but some departments suffer more than others. What is required is a careful reflection on the current working conditions and an examination of future of the field. This volume asks, in what ways do specific educational, institutional, and broader social locations and environments inform perspectives on religion and the contours of scholarly debate? Based on surveys and self-consciously personal observations of various university settings, explorations of research environments, and investigations of dissemination platforms, these personal contributions from different career stages exemplify the dynamic between forces shaping academia today and individuals navigating in their situation while constructing a better future for themselves and the field of study. Examining the elements that comprise the ecology of the field provides opportunities to sharpen our scholarly pursuits.