reductionism
reverts back to non-being and finally returns back to the Dao. In this
scheme being and non-being give birth to each other in a never ending
cycle, although non-being is prior to being and thus more powerful
because non-being makes being function. If one takes the example of a
wheel, it is the emptiness (non-being) of the hub that allows the spokes
to unite and form a wheel.
Further reading: Dōgen (2007); Lao Tzu (1963); Śankara (1968)
REDUCTIONISM
Reductionism is of some importance for those methods used for com-
ing to grips with various aspects of religion. More specifically, it is
the rendering of data into a presupposed perspective. The tracing of
the origin of religion in animism, the evolution of religion from
magic, the reduction of religion to feelings, the attribution of reli-
gion to mass neurosis, and the reduction of religion to the distinction
between the sacred and profane are some random examples of reduc-
tionism. The major methodological problem with reductionism is
that it injects uncritical presuppositions, biases, and unexamined
judgments on religious phenomena, and it is used to reduce religion
to a sociological, psychological, or economic phenomenon that
destroy its complexity, resulting in an incomplete perspective on the
subject. Those scholars accused of reductionism often insist on the
necessity of an anti-reductionism standpoint. There are other schol-
ars that argue that all methods are to some degree reductionistic, and
presuppose the limited standpoint of the scholar. These critics claim
that to argue for the irreducibility of religious phenomena is to
engage in reductionism.
Further reading: Baird (1971); Fenton (1970); Segal (1983)
RELICS
The English language derivation of the term comes from the Latin relin-
queure (“to leave behind”). There are two Sanskrit terms that have a