Religion, models of, and reality: Are we through with Geertz?

Abstract

Clifford Geertz's influential definition of religions as providing their members with both an ethos and a worldview - in his terms, both a "model for" and "model of" reality - has of late become a neuralgic point of contention in religious studies. In particular some critics have seen his ideas of religious models of reality as biased, out-moded, or in other ways confused about the way that language refers (or does not refer) to the world. In this article, I consider two criticisms of Geertz's project and seek to show that, despite the partial value of the criticisms, the idea of religious models of reality continues to be a legitimate and fruitful approach to what religious communities are typically up to.