Religion And Discursive Public Sphere In The Post-secular Society

The research object of this dissertation is those articles in which Jurgen Habermas has discussed religious issues over last twenty years. This dissertation aims at analyzing the inner structure and nature of his religious thought. Therefore what this dissertation is planning to do is not a renarrative or general research. Rather, it is the practical dimension and political purport of his religious thought that is my true academic interest. In addition, the dialectical relationship between his religious thought and main theory is the research field of this dissertation too.Habermas’s original intention of discussing religious issues and taking part in dialogue with theologians and religionists was not religious or theological. Generally speaking, he discusses religious issues from perspectives of sociology, philosophy and politics.From sociological perspective, he puts forwards an important concept, post-secular society, which is consequence of criticism of classical and various new theories of secularization. This concept displays his judgment on our contemporary life-context. One of essential features of post-secular society is co-existence of continuing secularization and public power of religions. It is this judgment that makes him think the relationship between religion and politics deeply. He does that from the perspective of politics.From perspective of politics, Habermas discusses the issue of solidarity and integration in a political community in which there are plural cultures and religious faiths. We can analyze this issue from two aspects. On the one hand, political community must protect itself from dividing by plural cultures and religious faiths. On another hand, political community has to seek for a source of integration. His analysis of the issue of religion in the public sphere aims at seeking for a proper way to resolve above-mentioned issues. He does that not only from perspective of politics but also from philosophical one.From philosophical perspective, the relationship between philosophy and theology, reason and faith, and the religious and the secular has become his main research object. Finiteness of reason and faith and their inner relation reveal themselves when a research in genealogy of reason has been done. This insight is the cognitive basis for the post-metaphysical thinking. Accordingly, he thinks it is rational to be an interpreter for reason and philosophy when they get along with faith and religion.Though there are inner relations among them, above-mentioned three perspectives are not parallel. Analyses from perspectives of sociology and philosophy support validity claims with theoretical bases which have be made from perspective of politics.The structure arrangement of this dissertation conforms to the inner relations among three perspectives in general. The first chapter analyzes the theory of secularization and the concept of post-secular society. In post-secular society, the contradiction between public influence and political appealing of religion and secular institutional political sphere is the fundamental one, which makes him pay close attention to the issue of religion in the public sphere. The public sphere is regarded as a new social base on which religion can make its public influence and take its social role.The second chapter explores the question which Habermas takes for granted that what conditions are necessary if public sphere will be a new social base for religion in the post-secular society. In fact, religion cannot enter into every paradigm of public sphere. In addition, this chapter analyzes the dialectical relationship between religion and public sphere.In Chapter 3 and Chapter 4, I discuss the question that what practical and cognitive achievement religious and secular citizens must make if they expect that religion can enter into public sphere effectively. His analyses of religious tolerance, cultural rights, politics of recognition and institutional translation proviso are all aiming at clarifying that question. These analyses include the dimensions of philosophy and linguistics of his religious thought. Therefore, I will discuss the philosophical and linguistic foundation of the theory of communication action and discourse ethics.In the final chapter, I analyze the concrete meaning of practical dimension and political purport of Habermas’s religious thought by a comparative study that compares his religious thought with three main modern theological schools who advocate the public influence of religion, namely political theology, civil religion and public theology. Then, I expound several groups of dichotomy because they provide theoretical framework for his religious thought.In the conclusion, I define the character of Habermas’s religious thought and religious view. Then, I will clarify some criticism of his religious thought. Finally, I expound several questions in his religious thought.