Philosophical Challenges for Secularism and its Post Narrative
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2016-04
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Addis Ababa University
Abstract
Although secularism has challenged superstitious practices (of any religion either in private or
public sphere) and contributed a lot for inclusion of citizens regardless of their religious
background, the hypersecularizing tendency of the secularists (such as becoming “militant”
against religious practices and symbols) and their weak thesis regarding the role of religion has
made contemporary philosophers to (re)analyze the challenges for secularism. The historical
emancipation of the secular sphere from religion, and the role and acrimonious debate among
influential philosophers of the time has shaped the nature of secularism in their particular
society. The current prominent (Anglo-American and French) models of secularism resulted
from their specific religious and cultural milieu, and the socio-political nature of the early
modern time. Those models are much influenced by the thinking’s of the philosophers of that
time. Those and other models that are described as either soft or hard type of secularism need a
long time of discussion and debate, on bottom up basis, to be implemented in a particular
country. If the way of introducing the secularism is on top-down fashion, without involvement of
thinkers, the effectiveness of the concept in that society is poor or there is the possibility of being
observed as futile end. The challenge for secularism starts in this top-down prescription of the
ideology without considering the context of the intended society.
The challenges for secularism necessitated the introduction of new paradigm that balances the
relation between the religious and the secular. Importantly, the prominent contemporary
philosopher Jürgen Habermas declared post secularism that narrates the co-existence of
religious and secular societies under secular environment. He declared that we are living in post
secular age. Although he has come with a wonderful philosophical alternative considering the
challenges for secularism, he does not do well with all challenges and at the same time he does not do justice to religious contents. After analyzing the gap and weakness of his philosophical alternative, this paper claim the introduction of a new paradigm that enables the real coexistence of religious and secular societies under either secular or religious environmentof religious and secular societies under either secular or religious environment
Description
Keywords
Philosophy