Broughton, V.; Lomas, E.: irreconcilable diversity or a unity of purpose? : Philosophical foundations for the organization of religious knowledge (2020)
0.00
0.0028703054 = product of:
0.005740611 = sum of:
0.005740611 = product of:
0.011481222 = sum of:
0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 5994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011481222 = score(doc=5994,freq=16.0), product of:
0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046056706 = queryNorm
0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 5994, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5994)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- We examine the way in which religion is managed in the major library classification schemes and in archival practice and how and why bias and misrepresentation occur. Broad definitions of what is meant by diversity and religious pluralism and why it is a cause for concern precede a discussion of the standard model of interreligious attitudes (exclusivism/inclusivism/pluralism) with particular reference to the philosophy of John Hick. This model is used as a lens through which to evaluate knowledge organization systems (KOSs) for evidence of comparable theoretical positions and to suggest a possible typology of religious KOSs. Archival and library practice are considered, and, despite their very different approaches, found to have some similarities in the way in which traditional societal structures have affected bias and misrepresentation of religious beliefs. There is, nevertheless, evidence of a general move towards a more pluralistic attitude to different faiths.
- Type
- a
