Suchergebnisse

The article explores the various meanings and concepts of secularism presented by famous ideologues and sociologists of their time. Two contrary concepts of the secularism - one that defines secularism as denial of existence of religions or supernatural forces and another that defines secularism as concept of peaceful co-existence and mutual harmony has been discussed here. The difference of application of secularism on the individual human being and a state is also explained here. The article concludes that no state of human being can remain isolated or indifferent from the influence of religion even if they want. None of the concepts of secularism apply in real life performances; neither on individual nor state.

In recent years, the intellectual tide has moved strongly against the kind of secular thinking that characterized Gellner's work. Whether couched in terms of postcolonialism, multiculturalism, genealogy, global understanding, political theology, or the revival of normative, metaphysical and openly religious perspectives, today's postsecular and even anti-secular mood in social theory seems to consign Gellner's project to the dustbin of history: a stern but doomed attempt to shore up western liberal rationalism. Under some revisionary lights, it has even become pointless to distinguish flexible secular thinking which still retains some firm 'bottom lines' from what is routinely portrayed as rampant ideological secularism. Unconvinced by key assumptions and motivations on this terrain, I reactivate Gellner's essential concerns and propositions around secularity and secularism, feeding these into the current debates. Whilst Gellner's stringent, unrivalled exposure of intellectual cant continues to be hugely valuable, and his sense of the utter historicity of social life and thought indispensable, Gellner's critical positivism could not, by his own admission, produce a coherent cultural politics.

"In contrast with the progressive dilution of religions predicted by traditional liberal and Marxist approaches, religions remain important for many people, even in Europe, the most secularised continent. In the context of increasingly culturally-diverse societies, this calls for a reinterpretation of the secular legacy of the Enlightenment and also for an updating of democratic institutions. This book focuses on a central question: are the classical secularist arrangements well-equipped to tackle the challenge of fast-growing religious pluralism? Or should we move to new post-secular arrangements when dealing with pluralism in Europe? Offering an interdisciplinary approach that combines political theory and legal analysis, the authors tackle two interrelated facets of this controversial question. They begin by exploring the theoretical perspective, asking what post-secularism is and looking at its relation to secularism. The practical consequences of this debate are then examined, focusing on case-law through four empirical case studies. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of political theory, philosophy, religion and politics, European law, human rights, legal theory and socio-legal studies"--

The present paper seeks 'to explore the nature of Indian secularism, the difficulties it has run into, and the ways in which it may be revised'. This is a large undertaking for a short text, originally written as public lecture, particularly because the issues posed do nopt readily translate into plain questions. The most that I can hope to do is to raise some doubts and make a few suggestions for rethinking the issues involved.

The 'Indian' lives in a land of diverse traditions and his­- tories. The 'we' as a collective, inclusive of multiple identities, both regional and religious, is one that, rooted in the particular, celebrates plurality. Indian secularism is the ideal tool to allow for integration, and poses a challenge to fundamentalism. However, there are divisive forces that bring to fore the question of the possibility of a diverse people co-existing in free, respectful spaces. It shakes our foundations and leaves citizens questioning the future and the validity of ideals they believed they practiced as a nation. This paper shall explore an Indian worldview of secularism in plurality and the threats that are posed to it. An Indian worldview of secularism in plurality, in the final analysis depends on the defini­- tion that its citizens, as participatory agents, give to itself.

"In contrast with the progressive dilution of religions predicted by traditional liberal and Marxist approaches, religions remain important for many people, even in Europe, the most secularised continent. In the context of increasingly culturally-diverse societies, this calls for a reinterpretation of the secular legacy of the Enlightenment and also for an updating of democratic institutions. This book focuses on a central question: are the classical secularist arrangements well-equipped to tackle the challenge of fast-growing religious pluralism? Or should we move to new post-secular arrangements when dealing with pluralism in Europe? Offering an interdisciplinary approach that combines political theory and legal analysis, the authors tackle two interrelated facets of this controversial question. They begin by exploring the theoretical perspective, asking what post-secularism is and looking at its relation to secularism. The practical consequences of this debate are then examined, focusing on case-law through four empirical case studies. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of political theory, philosophy, religion and politics, European law, human rights, legal theory and socio-legal studies"--

What is sometimes talked about as the 'post-secular' or a 'crisis of secularism' is, in Western Europe, quite crucially to do with the reality of multiculturalism. By which I mean not just the fact of new ethno-religious diversity but the presence of a multiculturalist approach to this diversity, namely: the idea that equality must be extended from uniformity of treatment to include respect for difference; recognition of public/private interdependence rather than dichotomized as in classical liberalism; the public recognition and institutional accommodation of minorities; the reversal of marginalisation and a remaking of national citizenship so that all can have a sense of belonging to it. I think that equality requires that this ethno-cultural multiculturalism should be extended to include state-religion connexions in Western Europe, which I characterise as 'moderate secularism', based on the idea that political authority should not be subordinated to religious authority yet religion can be a public good which the state should assist in realising or utilising. I discuss here three multiculturalist approaches that contend this multiculturalising of moderate secularism is not the way forward. One excludes religious groups and secularism from the scope of multiculturalism (Kymlicka); another largely limits itself to opposing the 'othering' of groups such as Jews and Muslims (Jansen); and the third argues that moderate secularism is the problem not the solution (Bhargava).

Ward talks about secularism, which is a state-sponsored mythology that has evolved to replace the monarchic mythology of cuius regius eius religio. Laicite itself -- a complex and evolving idea that came to be understood in terms of state-monitored secularism -- goes back to laws preceding, including, and succeeding the Separation of Churches and State Act 1905. The fight here was State control of Roman Catholicism following years of conflict between republican anti-clericalism and Catholic anti-republicans. The 1905 law become the legal basis for laicite, but it has to be understood in terms of what it did not do. Adapted from the source document.

Main description: Bringing clarity to a subject clouded by polemic, Secularism, Identity, and Enchantment is a rigorous exploration of how secularism and identity emerged as concepts in different parts of the modern world. At a time when secularist and religious worldviews appear irreconcilable, Akeel Bilgrami strikes out on a path distinctly his own, criticizing secularist proponents and detractors, liberal universalists and multicultural relativists alike.