The book Engaging Philosophies of Religion: Thinking Across Boundaries consists of 18 contributions and 1 epilogue. Most contributions give an overview of one line of thought, approach, or core idea from one particular tradition. A minority of contributions introduce a philosophical methodology or approach (i.e., embodied neuroscience, deconstruction, visual reasoning through maps, systems approach, anapoetics, and critical theory). A handful cover non-Western philosophical schools of thought (i.e., Nyaya philosophy and transrationalism as exemplified in Chinese Daoism). Most contributions cover ‘real-life’ traditions that have a following of actual practitioners and long history rather than philosophical, abstract religious ideas. The mix of both is uncommon in anthologies of this kind but works rather well. Both ‘real-life’ traditions and philosophical traditions have different approaches to think about religion, and both can challenge existing paradigms in philosophy of religion, which is the central goal of the book.
The book’s central goal is ambitious. It aims to change how academics do philosophy of religion in a profound way. Most contributions share the sentiment that current academic philosophy of religion is limited at best and deeply flawed at worst. Philosophy of religion is limited in scope (it mainly focuses on propositional or rationalistic forms of religiosity), limited in approach (it mainly follows standard methodologies in analytic philosophy), and limited in impact (it mainly speaks to academics). Contemporary philosophy of religion would also continue to be plagued by remnants of colonialism and patriarchal systems of thought. The critique of philosophy of religion is not new. Some of the portrayals of current philosophy of religion in the book do not do justice to the variety we currently find in its main journals and book series. More than other existing critiques, the book offers alternatives and directions for how the perceived problems can be overcome.
The book proposes different methodologies for philosophy of religion. It thereby aims to change how academics conduct research and what the guiding assumptions ought to be. The focus is less on alternative concepts of God, beliefs, or religious ideas. Several contributions (especially those that depart from particular religious traditions) do present such alternatives as well. They are, however, not put forward as superior to alternative concepts but presented as potential alternative guiding assumptions. New ideas are presented more like alternative paradigms of which the core assumptions are not strictly under discussion. The book does not shy away from approaches that may seem wild or weird from a Western perspective. Some defend a view that includes magical ways of thinking or strong connectivity between all that exists.
By presenting new methodologies, the book aims to make a lasting change in the philosophy of religion. Not all proposed alternative approaches are strictly new. Some are derived from very old traditions, like Daoism and Jainism. This is one of the great strengths of the book. Other attempts at broadening philosophy of religion are often highly theoretical and far removed from actual religious practices. Such attempts therefore easily come over as unviable, artificial, or far-fetched. By pointing out that the dominant paradigm in philosophy of religion is factually not widely shared by adherents of many traditions, the book can make a stronger case that change is called for. By pointing out that the alternatives are in fact already practiced to some extent, the book can also make a stronger case that the proposed change is viable and not artificial.
All contributions follow a semi-fixed format. The first sections vary according to the author’s needs. One section in all contributions discusses the historical context of the idea or approach under discussion. The next section provides details on the relevant vocabulary and terms of art of importance. The last two sections are similar across contributions as well. Here all authors reflect on how their topic relates to two other contributions in the volume. Authors point out differences and similarities. This approach is laudable since many anthologies of this kind are more non-committal and merely seem to propose alternatives. By fostering interaction, some contributions are able to show the strengths of some approaches over others. This is not the case in all contributions. Mostly, the interaction stops at noting similarities to other approaches. The interaction does bring the discussion to a next level than merely putting forward new perspectives.
Most traditions discussed in the book are underrepresented in academic discourse. Some do discuss Christianity, Islam, and naturalism. These, however, also focus on less discussed forms of these traditions. Aaron Simmons’ contribution on Christianity discusses Pentecostal Christianity. Oludamini Ogunnaike’s contribution on Islam discusses Sufism. Some contributions cover better-known philosophical traditions, like deconstructionism. Overall, most of the content will be novel for most readers and original.
Unlike other anthologies, the contributions do not read like entries in religious studies that merely summarize beliefs or doctrines within a particular tradition. The authors also go beyond merely showcasing the moral or ecological virtues of non-Western traditions, which is common to many similar volumes. Most contributions show the intricacies of ideas and how they prompt profound philosophical reflection. Most also show how the ideas under discussion are different from dominant approaches in philosophy of religion. For example, Marie-Hélène Gorisse’s paper on the Jain renunciate approach does a great job of explaining how the Jain mindset with its esoteric experiences and ideas is profoundly different than the Western mindset. For the most part, contributions are accessible and do not require prior knowledge. The authors also appear to have made an effort to avoid jargon or to explain terms of art in detail.
The book ends with an epilogue where the editors share their thoughts on how the book came about and how lasting change in philosophy of religion can be achieved. The editors reiterate some recurring critiques of contemporary philosophy of religion. They also note several remaining difficulties, like how academic philosophy can truly do justice to the lived experiences of people. They further note that the volume will likely lead to resistance or ignoring by academic philosophers committed to existing assumptions and paradigms. They also note that earlier calls for change in academic philosophy from deconstructionist philosophy suffered the same fate.
While the book makes considerable effort to make workable suggestions to change philosophy of religion, it remains somewhat wanting in the end. Most of the interactions between contributions remain conciliatory rather than criticizing. There is also only limited interaction with dominant paradigms and approaches in philosophy of religion. No contributions defend the focus on Christian ideas or the focus on propositional, rationalistic forms of religiosity. Interacting with defenders would have led to a different interaction than merely brushing aside existing methodologies as incomplete at best and misleading at worst.
Overall, the book is an impressive collection of essays. They are both informative about the alternatives they discuss and successfully show how they challenge orthodoxy in philosophy of religion. That challenge could have gone one step further but already goes much further than what many other similar anthologies achieve.
