A religious view of human action shapes how women survive patriarchy

Evidence

In particular I want to understand the practical and conceptual implications of a religious imaginary in which humans are considered to be only partially responsible for their own actions, versus an imaginary in which humans are regarded as the sole authors of their actions. It is not so much the epistemological repercussions of these different accounts of human action that interest me (cf. Chakrabarty 2000; Hollywood 2004), but how these two accounts affect women’s ability to survive within a system of inequality and to flourish despite its constraints. — Saba Mahmood, Politics of Piety, 1132

Categorization

Category: Inspiration and Speculation

• QUESTION: Chakrabarty 2000 and Hollywood 2004 are cited but not elaborated — worth chasing what they say about divergent accounts of human action and their epistemological stakes.
• XREF: Connects to the Milgrom material on how institutional and moral framings of agency shape behavior, and to general questions of whether attribution of agency is a resource for the oppressed.

Related

• Different accounts of human agency shape women’s capacity to endure inequality (similarity 0.93)
• Liberal feminism’s agency frame blinds analysis of pious women’s movements (similarity 0.79)