Abstract

It has been highly controversial from the beginning of the study of religion to the present day whether it is insiders who follow that religion or outsiders who understand the religion studied the best. It is also questioned if it is really possible to study a religion objectively whether the one who studies is an insider or outsider to that religion. This topic also brings with it the issues that need to be considered, such as emic/ethical positions, ‘experience-near’ and ‘experience-distant’ and the process of reflexivity. In this article, Kim Knott examines the problem of insider and outsider by considering the accounts of different researchers who have adopted the roles of complete participant, observer as participant, participant as observer and complete observer within the framework of these concepts.