1. Why did Geertz think interpretation was better than explanation, when it came to understanding and writing about cultures?
2. What did Geertz mean by “thick description”? By contrast, what was thin description, and why did Geertz think thick description was better?
3. Why, according to Geertz, was it really not possible to have a science of religion, or an overarching theory of religion?
4. What was Geertz’s argument in Islam Observed? What was the difference between the classical style of Islam of Morocco compared with the classical style of Islam of Indonesia, and how was scripturalist Islam changing both those places?
5. Pals offers a critique of Geertz that deals with Geertz’s description of the massacre of tens of thousands of Balinese peasants in 1965. What was Geertz’s explanation, and what is the critique of that explanation? Which do you find most convincing, and why?