{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.039673278879813305, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003500583430571762, 'mean_word_length': 5.217391304347826, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Religion, Religious: Can Anti-Definitionalists Stay Tethered to the Study of Religion?

This important methodological intervention in the study of religion makes a com-pelling case for the indispensable role of history in the empirical study of religion. In doing so, Seiwert draws on the philosophy of science (specifically Critical Rea-lism) and makes a clear and highly useful distinction between theory and me-tatheory, as well as other key terms. As he explains (217), “ theories of religion are attempts at explaining religion. ” Metatheories, by way of contrast, reflect on “ the aims, conditions, methods, and restrictions of studying religion. ” The latter, he adds, “ cannot be separated from methodology where the methods of forming theories, conducting empirical research, and connecting theory formation with empirical research are discussed. ”