Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T08:38:44.866Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Taking Religion Seriously? Habermas on Religious Translation and Cooperative Learning in Post-secular Society

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 September 2017

GIORGI ARESHIDZE
GIORGI ARESHIDZE*
Affiliation:
Claremont McKenna College
*
Giorgi Areshidze is Associate Professor of Government at Claremont McKenna College. He is the author of Democratic Religion from Locke to Obama: Faith and the Civic Life of Democracy (University Press of Kansas, 2016). Mailing Address: 850 Columbia Avenue, Claremont, CA 91711. (giorgi.areshidze@gmail.com; gareshidze@cmc.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article evaluates Jürgen Habermas's attempt to reopen political liberalism to religion. In trying to “take religion seriously,” Habermas goes further than John Rawls and other liberal theorists by affirming that religious traditions articulate truths on which democratic societies continue to depend for their civic and moral health. “Post-secular” societies, in his view, should learn from religion by translating its “moral intuitions” into universal secular language. Although Habermas in this way appears friendlier to religion than Rawls, unlike Rawls he also calls for the “modernization of religious consciousness.” This theological transformation not only reveals the foundationalist presuppositions of liberalism, but also points to a highly attenuated conception of learning from religion. Taking religion seriously will require us to be open to its insights not only when they agree with, but especially when they challenge, our secular presuppositions. This dimension of religion is at risk of getting “lost in translation” in the Habermasian paradigm.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 111 , Issue 4 , November 2017 , pp. 724 - 737
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The author would like to thank the following individuals for their comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this article, as well as for help with developing the ideas that this article investigates: Tom and Lorraine Pangle, Devin Stauffer, Jeff Tulis, Christopher Nadon, Mark Blitz, Justin Dyer, Ariel Helfer, Tim Burns, as well as the anonymous reviewers and the two editors (Steven Forde and Leigh Jenco) at American Political Science Review. For special assistance, the author would also like to thank Irakly Areshidze, Kosta Psaltis, and Maddy Stein.

References

Audi, Robert. 2000. Religious Commitment and Secular Reason. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, Peter. 1999. ‘The Desecularization of the World: A Global Overview.” In The Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eardmans Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Bernstein, J. M. 2013. “Forgetting Isaac: Faith and the Philosophical Impossibility of a Postsecular Society.” In Habermas and Religion, eds. Callhoun, Craig, Mendieta, Eduardo, and VanAntwerpen, Jonathan. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 154–75.Google Scholar
Casanova, Jose. 1994. Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chambers, Simone. 2007. “How Religion Speaks to the Agnostic: Habermas on the Persistent Value of Religion.” Constellations 14 (2): 210–223.Google Scholar
Chambers, Simone. 2010. “Secularism Minus Exclusion: Developing a Religious-Friendly Idea of Public Reason.” The Good Society 19 (2): 16–21.Google Scholar
The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html Google Scholar
Cooke, Maeve. 2006. “Salvaging and Secularizing the Semantic Contents of Religion: The Limitations of Habermas's Postmetaphysical Proposal.” International Journal for the Philosophy of Religion 60: 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, Maeve. 2007. “A Secular State for a Postsecular Society? Postmetaphysical Political Theory and the Place of Religion.” Constellations 14 (2): 224–38.Google Scholar
Cooke, Maeve. 2011. “Translating Truth.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 37 (4): 479–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, Maeve. 2013. “Violating Neutrality? Religious Validity Claims and Democratic Legitimacy.” In Habermas and Religion, eds. Callhoun, Craig, Mendieta, Eduardo, and VanAntwerpen, Jonathan. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 249–74.Google Scholar
d'Arcais, Paolo Flores. 2009. “Eleven Theses Against Habermas.” Utopian. http://www.the-utopian.org/d'Arcais_1 Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald. 2013. Religion Without God. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Eberle, Christopher. 2002. Religious Conviction in Liberal Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley. 2010. “Does Reason Know What is Missing?” The New York Times. April 12, 2010. https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/12/does-reason-know-what-it-is-missing/ Google Scholar
Garsten, Bryan. 2006. Saving Persuasion: A Defense of Rhetoric and Judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garsten, Bryan. 2011. “The Rhetorical Revival in Political Theory.” Annual Review of Political Science 14: 159–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaus, Gerald F. and Vallier, Kevin. 2009. “The Roles of Religious Conviction in a Publicly Justified Polity.” Philosophy & Social Criticism 35 (1-2): 51–76.Google Scholar
Gordon, Peter. E. 2013. “Between Christian Democracy and Critical Theory: Habermas, Bockenforde, and the Dialectics of Secularization in Postwar Germany.” Social Research 80 (1): 173–202.Google Scholar
Gordon, Peter. E. 2011. “What Hope Remains.” New Republic. https://newrepublic.com/article/98567/jurgen-habermas-religion-philosophy Google Scholar
Gutmann, Amy. 1999. “Religious Freedom and Civic Responsibility,” Washington and Lee Law Review 56: 907–22.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1985. The Theory of Communicative Action, translated by Thomas McCarthy. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1992. Postmetaphysical Thinking: Philosophical Essays, translated by Hohengarten, W.M.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2001. “Faith and Knowledge,” translated by Hella Beister and William Rehy. In Frankfurt School on Religion, eds. Mendieta, Eduardo. New York: Routledge, 327–38.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2002. Religion and Rationality. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2003a. Philosophy in a Time of Terror, eds. Borradori, Giovanna. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2003b. The Future of Human Nature. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2005. “Religion in the Public Sphere.” The Holberg Prize Seminar Report. http://www.holbergprisen.no/en/juergen-habermas/holberg-prize-symposium-2005.html Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2006a. “Religion in the Public Sphere.” European Journal of Philosophy 14 (1): 1–25.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2006b. “Pre-political Foundations of the Democratic Constitutional State?” In The Dialectics of Secularization: On Reason and Religion, eds. Schuller, Florian and McNeil, Brian, trans. San Francisco: Ignatius, 2006, 19–52.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2008a. “Notes on a Post-Secular Society.” New Perspectives Quarterly 25 (4): 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2008b. “The Boundary Between Faith and Knowledge.” In Between Naturalism and Religion, translated by Ciaran Cronin. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 209–47.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2008c. “Equal Treatment of Cultures and the Limits of Postmodern Liberalism.” Between Naturalism and Religion, translated by Cronin, Ciaran. Cambridge: Polity Press, 271–311.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2008d. “Religious Tolerance as Pacemaker of Cultural Rights.” In Between Naturalism and Religion, Cronin, Ciaran, transl. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2009. Europe: A Faltering Project. Ciaran Cronin, trans. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2010a. An Awareness of What is Missing. Ciaran Cronin, transl. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2010b. “A Postsecular World Society? On the Philosophical Significance of Postsecular Consciousness and the Multicultural World Society.” Interview by Eduardo Mendieta. Monthly Review Zine. http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/habermas210310.html Google Scholar
Habermas, Jurgen. 2011. “The Political: The Rational Meaning of a Questionable Inheritance of Political Theology.” In The Power of Religion in the Public Sphere, eds. Mendieta, Eduardo and Vanantwerpen, Jonathan. New York: Columbia University Press, 15–33.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2013. “Reply to My Critics.” In Habermas and Religion, eds. Callhoun, Craig, Mendieta, Eduardo, and VanAntwerpen, Jonathan. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 347–90.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen, and Taylor, Charles. 2011. “Dialogue: Jürgen Habermas and Charles Taylor.” In The Power of Religion in the Public Sphere, eds. Mendieta, Eduardo and VanAntwerpen, Jonathan. New York: Columbia University Press, 60–9.Google Scholar
Harrington, Austin. 2007. “Habermas and the ‘Post-Secular Society.’” European Journal of Social Theory 10 (4): 543–60.Google Scholar
Hollenbach, David. 1994. “A Communitarian Reconstruction of Human Rights: Contributions from the Catholic Tradition,” In Catholicism and Liberalism: Contributions to American Public Policy, eds. Douglas, R. Bruce and Hollenbach, David. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 127–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kettell, Steven. 2012. “Has Political Science Ignored Religion?” PS: Political Science & Politics 45 (1): 93–100.Google Scholar
Kettell, Steven. 2016. “Do We Need a ‘Political Science’ of Religion?” Political Studies Review 14 (2): 210–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lafont, Cristina. 2007. “Religion in the Public Sphere: Remarks on Habermas's Conception of Public Deliberation in Postsecular Societies.” Constellations 14 (2): 239–59.Google Scholar
Lafont, Cristina. 2009. “Religion in the Public Sphere: What are the Deliberative Obligations of Democratic Citizenship.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 35 (1-2): 127–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leiter, Brian. 2012. Why Tolerate Religion?. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lima, Maria Herrera. 2013. “The Anxiety of Contingency: Religion in a Secular Age.” In Habermas and Religion, eds. Calhoun, Craig, Mendieta, Eduardo, and VanAntwerpen, Jonathan. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 59–71.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1975. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, eds. Nidditch, Peter H.. Oxford: Clarendon Press Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1999. Reasonableness of Christianity, eds. Higgens-Biddle, John C.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Macedo, Stephen. 1998. “Transformative Constitutionalism and the Case of Religion: Defending the Moderate Hegemony of Liberalism.” Political Theory 26 (1): 56–80.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1981. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press.Google Scholar
Maclure, Jocelyn and Taylor, Charles. 2011. Secularism and Freedom of Conscience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, Andrew F. 2013. “Rethinking Religious Reasons in Public Justification.” American Political Science Review 107 (3): 523–39.Google Scholar
McConnell, Michael W. 1990. “The Origins and Historical Understanding of Free Exercise of Religion.” Harvard Law Review 103 (7): 1409–51Google Scholar
McConnell, Michael W. 1992. “Accommodation of Religion: An Update and a Response to the Critics.” George Washington Law Review 60: 685–742.Google Scholar
Mendieta, Eduardo. 2005. The Frankfurt School on Religion. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mendieta, Eduardo. 2014. “Rationalization, Modernity and Secularization.” In Jürgen Habermas: Key Concepts, eds. Fuller, Barbara. New York: Rutledge, 222–37.Google Scholar
Muñoz, Vincent Philip. 2016. “Two Concepts of Religions Liberty: the Natural Rights and Moral Autonomy Approaches to Free Exercise.” American Political Science Review 110 (2): 369–81.Google Scholar
Murray, John Courtney. 1966. “ Religious Freedom.” In The Documents of Vatican II, ed. Abbott, Walter M.. New York: Guild Press/America Press/Association Press.Google Scholar
Philpott, Daniel. 2009. “Has the Study of Global Politics Found Religion?” Annual Review of Political Science 12: 183–202.Google Scholar
Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal. 2006. “That Which Holds the World Together: The Pre-Political Moral Foundations of a Free State.” In The Dialectics of Secularization: On Reason and Religion, ed. Schuller, Florian and McNeil, Brian, trans. San Francisco: Ignatius, 19–52.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2005a. Political Liberalism: Expanded Edition. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2005b. “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited.” Political Liberalism: Expanded Edition. New York: Columbia University Press, 435–90.Google Scholar
Rorty, Richard. 1999. “Religion as a Conversation Stopper.” Philosophy and Social Hope. New York: Penguin Books, 158–74.Google Scholar
Rosati, Massimo, and Stoeckl, Kristina. 2012. Multiple Modernities and Postsecular Societies. Aldershot/Burlington: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
Sandel, Michael. 1992. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sandel, Michael. 1996. Democracy's Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sandel, Michael. 2009. Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Sikka, Sonia. 2016. “On Translating Religious Reasons: Rawls, Habermas, and the Quest for a Neutral Public Sphere.” The Review of Politics 78 (1): 91–116.Google Scholar
Stout, Jeffrey. 2004. Democracy and Tradition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Strauss, Leo. 1953. Natural Right and History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Strauss, Leo. 1988. What Is Political Philosophy? And Other Studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Talisse, Robert. 2009. Democracy and Moral Conflict. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 2011. “Why We Need a Radical Redefinition of Secularism.” In The Power of Religion in the Public Sphere, eds. Mendieta, Eduardo and Vanantwerpen, Jonathan. New York: Columbia University Press, 34–59.Google Scholar
Wald, Kenneth D., and Wilcox, Clyde. 2006. “Getting Religion: Has Political Science Rediscovered the Faith Factor?” American Political Science Review 100 (4): 523–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walhof, Darren R. 2013. “Habermas, Same-Sex Marriage and the Problem of Religion in Public Life.” Philosophy Social Criticism, 39 (3): 225–42.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 1993. “Religious Contributions in Public Deliberation.” San Diego Law Review 30: 837–48.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 2009. “Human Rights in Judaeo-Christian Thought.” Warsaw Lecture: http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/ECM_PRO_063948.pdf Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 2010a. “The Image of God: Rights, Reason, and Order,” New York University Public Law and Legal Theory Research Papers Series Working Papers, 10 (85): 216– 325.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 2010b. “Secularism and the Limits of Community,” New York University Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers, 10 (88): 1–26.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 2012. “Two-Way Translation: The Ethics of Engaging with Religious Contributions in Public Deliberation.” Mercer Law Review 63 (3): 845–68.Google Scholar
Weithman, Paul. 2002. Religion and the Obligations of Citizenship. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 1997. “Why We Should Reject What Liberalism Tells Us about Speaking and Acting in Public for Religious Reasons.” In Religion and Contemporary Liberalism, eds. Weithman, Paul J.. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press Google Scholar
Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 2013. “An Engagement with Jürgen Habermas on Postmetaphysical Philosophy, Religion, and Political Dialogue.” In Habermas and Religion, eds. Callhoun, Craig, Mendieta, Eduardo, and VanAntwerpen, Jonathan. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 92–113.Google Scholar
Zerilli, Linda M. G. 2012a. “Value Pluralism and the Problem of Judgment: Farewell to Public Reason.” Political Theory 40 (1): 6–31.Google Scholar
Zerilli, Linda M. G. 2012b. “Truth and Politics.” In Truth and Democracy¸ eds. Elkins, Jeremy and Norris, Andrew. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar