Abstract

The article is built in twelve remarks posing and arguing the “choice of not to”: not to enter the systematics of Joas’ essay and Joas’ thought about what he conceives as “the powers of the sacred”. The discussion is based on the introduction to the book and the preface to its French translation, remaining in a multidisciplinary references field, external to the Joasian systematics. It is not about the terms of the debate, nor about the debate concerning the Weber’s concept of disenchantment and its reception. On the contrary, all along the threshold pages of Joas’ essay, the argument consolidates its discussing exteriority, without seeking or claiming to invalidate Joas’ thesis. The choice of not to, as a way of thinking attempted here, is closer to the Taubesian “discordant accord” figure, than that of the Weberian “elective attraction”, which, moreover, Joas takes over in his own way. What is at stake is not to subscribe to the anachronistic invalidation of a modern self-understanding that was effective, which indeed does not solve the question of thinking how it is outdated today. It is also not to subscribe to think the extreme effective plurality of the religions on the bases of two unifying notions, the political and the (in fact too particular) notion of “sacred”.