Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In this brief response to Belzen's proposal that the psychology of religion undertakes a cultural approach to its subject matter, I suggest that (1) the psychology of religion is not as a-cultural as suggested by Belzen and (2) a cultural approach has both practical and theoretical liabilities, including the lack of coherence and the inability to identify universals. I then offer a friendly amendment to Belzen's approach, suggesting from a Kuhnian perspective that he presents a cultural approach more in terms of rapprochement with the existing experimental paradigm.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Peter C. Hill (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: