Based on comments made as part of a plenary roundtable at the 2023 annual meeting of the Canadian Society for the Study of Religion, this brief essay examines the discourse on the public relevance of religious studies scholarship. Specifically, it identifies the anxieties present in such discussions and the false theory–praxis binary on which they rely.
BakerHAJr (1987) In dubious battle. In: NapierW (ed.) African American Literary Theory: A Reader. New York: New York University Press, 313–318.
2.
BrownW (2001) Politics Out of History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3.
ButlerJ (1993) Imitation and gender insubordination. In: AbeloveHBaraleMAHalperinDM (eds) The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader. New York: Routledge, 307–320.
4.
GatesHLJr (1987) “What’s love got to do with it?”: Critical theory, integrity, and the Black idiom. In: NapierW (ed.) African American Literary Theory: A Reader. New York: New York University Press, 298–312.
5.
JoyceJA (1987a) The Black canon: Reconstructing Black American literary criticism. In: NapierW (ed.) African American Literary Theory: A Reader. New York: New York University Press, 290–297.
6.
JoyceJA (1987b) “Who the cap fit”: Unconsciousness and unconscionableness in the criticism of Houston A Baker, Jr, and Henry Louis Gates, Jr. In: NapierW (ed.) African American Literary Theory: A Reader. New York: New York University Press, 319–330.
7.
WattsGMosurinjohnS (2022) Can critical religion play by its own rules? Why there must be more ways to be “critical” in the study of religion. Journal of the American Academy of Religion90(2): 317–334.
8.
WolfeC (2011) Theory as a research programme—the very idea. In: ElliottJAttridgeD (eds) Theory After “Theory.”London: Routledge, 34–48.
