Maximilian Runge
Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel
Since Jürgen Habermas' speech for the Peace Price of the German Book Trade in October 2001, secular reason – personified by one of its main protagonists – has been able to debate with religion anew. For the purpose of an unbiased encounter between philosophy and religion, Habermas introduced the term “postsecular” back then in order to emphasize that this dialogue was inevitably necessary, all the more in the face of religiously motivated terrorism. Nonetheless, this willingness to debate was accompanied by the conviction that secular reason itself, as a matter of fact, would be “ideologically neutral”. However, taking the necessity of accomplishing the confrontation with “world” (Weltbewältigung) seriously, the reflection on world view as a whole unveils its implied tasks of granting metaphysical and existential certainty (metaphysische Sicherheit), therefore resulting in the statement that there cannot be a neutral world view at all. Only dialogue as exchange of beliefs generates the general framework within which the discursive issues of world views are separated from their existential aspects, thus enabling a reasonably conducted debate without endangering the existential certainty of its participants. As a consequence, the neutrality of world views exclusively rests in dialogue and is no unique feature of secular reason at all. Eventually, this leads to the reconsideration of the conditions that must be given for an argument to be called “rational”. The article tries to point out that an argument in political contexts, whether given by a religious or a secular person, should only be acknowledged rational if it takes at least all living people – regardless of their group affiliations – into account.
Keywords Jürgen Habermas  secular rationality  secularism  post-secular  post-metaphysics  ideologically neutral  religiosity  religion  Existentialism  philosophy of existence
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Glauben und Wissen.Jürgen Habermas - 2002 - Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 7:16-16.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Can We Afford to Be “Post-Secular?”.Bill Cooke - 2013 - Essays in the Philosophy of Humanism 21 (1):93-103.
A Religião E A Esfera Pública - Religion and Public Sphere.Julio Paulo T. Zabatiero - 2008 - Cadernos de Ética E Filosofia Política 12:139-159.
A Ordem Moral Moderna E A Política Do Secularismo.Luiz Bernardo Araujo - 2011 - [email protected] - An International Journal for Moral Philosophy 10 (3):39-53.
The Archaic and Us: Ritual, Myth, the Sacred and Modernity.Massimo Rosati - 2014 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 40 (4-5):363-368.
A Postsecular Rationale – Religious and Secular as Epistemic Peers.Paolo Monti - 2013 - Philosophy and Public Issues - Filosofia E Questioni Pubbliche 3 (2).
Is Secularism Neutral?Rex Ahdar - 2013 - Ratio Juris 26 (3):404-429.


Added to PP index

Total views
200 ( #54,257 of 2,462,951 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
36 ( #24,400 of 2,462,951 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes