The Comparative Method in religious studies

This paper discusses the usage of the Comparative Method in religious studies. The Comparative Method is employed in academic study by many different disciplines, such as the natural sciences of physics and biology, to name but a few. However, the effectiveness of the Comparative Method has been debated in the discipline of religious studies. The main criticism is that the Comparative Method is only interested in similarities and either ignores or downplays differences. For this reason, critics such as J Z Smith have argued that the usage of the Comparative Method should be revised in religious studies. Scholars, such as Smith, have argued that differences, as well as similarities, ought to be considered. Nevertheless, this paper will present the argument that that the objections to the Comparative Method are based on misunderstandings. Firstly, it will be put forward that seeking differences does not provide a methodological advantage. The discipline of religious studies aims to study religion scientifically. This can only be accomplished via generalisation and in turn, by seeking similarities. If differences are considered, in addition to similarities, generalisation becomes difficult, if not impossible, in the discipline of religious studies. Secondly, it will be explained that only seeking similarities does not necessitate the denial of differences. The paper will discuss most traditional users of the Comparative Method are concerned with similar human needs, rather than the similarity of religions; therefore most traditional users of the Comparative Method have no issue accepting differences. Additionally, generalisations made by the Comparative Method can be revised if they fail. The paper concludes that the objections to the Comparative Method are unjustified.