This article responds to Andrew Wright's critique of my views on the representation of religions. Using various literary devices - associating my work closely with that of others whose views are in some ways different from my own, referring very selectively to published texts and exaggerating, and sometimes misrepresenting, what I actually say - Wright presents my work as dualistic, nominalist and as not genuinely hermeneutical. Wright contrasts what he sees as my extreme idea of religions as 'constructions' with his own view of them as 'social facts'. My reply illustrates and responds to Wright's account of my work, clarifies my own position and raises questions about Wright's views, especially in relation to those of Gavin Flood, whom he cites with favour. My conclusion includes the suggestion that, although our epistemological positions are different in some ways, they spawn pedagogies utilising some common principles and values
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.