Hans Penner, Horatio and the Terminator: a review essay of Radical Interpretation in Religion

Adaptations of Donald Davidson’s meta-methodology of “radical interpretation” by Hans Penner and colleagues create more problems than they solve. Penner’s affirmation of both holistic and naturalistic approaches to the study of religion ring true. But, making the inclusion of ‘superhuman beings’—those “that do things you and I cannot do”—sufficient to the definition of religion. It is alternately counterfactual (Theravada, Chan or Zen Buddhism, Confucianism, Jainism and others), or not restrictive enough (does every such being qualify? viz. Schwarzenegger’s Terminator?), or logically ‘uninteresting’—is reference to superhuman beings alone what makes a discourse religious, or is it their being ‘worshipful’?