In this chapter, the final piece of the framework of recognition is put into place, something that has been implicit in discussions in previous chapters, but which now needs more focussed attention. The final principle, multilogue, is crucial to how the framework as a whole operates (see Figure 1).

A lack of dialogue has been a central point of critique of multiculturalism for some, and an aspect of its tendency to reinforce group boundaries and not deal with intra-group domination (Cantle, 2016; Zapata-Barrero, 2017). A first point to make is that this criticism overlooks that dialogue has been a central feature of the writings of figures such as Taylor, Parekh and Modood. It is, nevertheless, probably fair to say that the dialogic aspects of Taylor's foundational essay have received comparatively less systematic attention than theorizing identities has. This is perhaps especially the case in relation to a developed body of literature that has been extremely significant for questions of religion and politics, namely that focussed on religious reasons and language in public and political debate. A major sub-theme of liberal secularism and its critics has been precisely this matter, but multiculturalists have said little on the subject. It is this that forms the central concern of this chapter. Indeed, it is this that provoked the title for the book as a whole and its use of the prefix post-.

One of the most well-known and commented on works in this area is Habermas's (2006) essay ‘Religion in the Public Sphere’.