Class Notes (836,562)
Canada (509,854)
Religion (798)
RLG305H1 (15)

Lec 04 - Space and Place.doc

4 Pages
Unlock Document

Simon Coleman

Lec 04 - Oct 4 Material Rlg 2 view of materiality and rlg “inside” - varied of materiality from positive to neg “outside/social scientific view” - rlg exists through materiality no matter what the rlgios ideology - we cant say things force us to believe but rlg commitment is embodied and embedded in our social cultural environment which are sometime implicit or explicit - Sometimes its the implicit that are the strongest its easier to argue implicit - I.e. The smashing of buildings in england or the thesis that luther posted - Even the breaking of images and the reaction of breaking things in relation to religion is still a form a of materiality - start to see how looking itself is not through a vacuum but in occurs in placrs and spa- ces that form material rlg - There has been a shift of how people look at rlg - there has been a spacial term where people have looked at these spaces in dif way - These are different way of looking at rlg matter … - Shifts in the stify of rlg - Spatial term - Materal term - Bodily term Space and Place Space : 3 ‘spheres of analysis; - sacred spaces on ecloses buildings - Sacred landscapes (the relationship btw buildings-where spaces may compete with each other) - Mapping - top which has been neglected, the making of maps and how one thinks about much wider spaces of the glode, and over view of charactry, the gods of view of being up in the sky, looking at things from the perspective of a map - Looking at these spheres 2 dif analytical perspectives on these sacred spaces. - 1. The phenomenology/Experience - I.e. Eliade, sacred spaces have theses experiential effects, the polticis of the space, who is controlling who. - Th. Extent to whoch spaves and perspectives effect us - is there a power di- mention there? Lec 04 - Oct 4 Material Rlg - 2. Power/Control Westen Churchill - resp to the rebuilding to the house of commons - “we shape our buildings and afterwards are buildings shape us” Fixity of buildings tells us little about its “reception career” over time - look less as buildings as objects but the interactions of humans the building , arcitecual relations - The means attached to a building can be hugely varried Kant - who says “its the relation to the human body and our experience of it that orients us in space that confer meaning to place. Human beings are not places they are being placed into being” Debate: should be distinguish btw the terms space and place? … Yi-Fu Tuan - he is saying that it is the giving of meaning that terms the space into a place “Space is more abstract than place. What begins as undifferentiate
More Less

Related notes for RLG305H1

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.