Clarifying the Phenomenology of Gerardus van der Leeuw

Citation

Tuckett J (2016) Clarifying the Phenomenology of Gerardus van der Leeuw. Method and Theory in the Study of Religion, 28 (3), pp. 227-263. https://doi.org/10.1163/15700682-12341361

Abstract
The argument of this paper is that Gerardus van der Leeuw's Religion in Essence and Manifestation has been consistently misread. This is due to three factors: i. the "Prolegomena" was changed to an "Epilegomena"; ii. Hans Penner's additions to the posthumous second edition, and; iii. John Evan Turner's Hegelian biased translation into English. These factors have contributed to a "Tyranny of the Same" whereby van der Leeuw has been back-read into either phenomenological history-of-religion or phenomenology-of-religion, two inventions of "phenomenology" that began after van der Leeuw. Dealing with the criticisms of Herbert Spiegelberg, Penner, and Tim Murphy, I will argue that van der Leeuw properly belongs under philosophical phenomenology. Read in such a light, this leads to a radically different understanding of "religion" and "power" in Religion in Essence and Manifestation. © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Keywords
Gerardus van der Leeuw; phenomenology of religion; philosophical phenomenology; Hegel; Max Scheler

Journal
Method and Theory in the Study of Religion: Volume 28, Issue 3