Genesis and validity of the concept of the secular

Project management: Prof. Dr. Dr. Matthias Lutz-Bachmann and Prof. Dr. Thomas Schmidt

In their self-descriptions, secular society and religion are necessarily and constitutively related to each other in such a way that they constitute their counterpart as the Other, to which they simultaneously refer as an indispensable semantic resource and threat to their identity. Every abstract and one-sided attempt to proclaim either the unstoppability of secularization or the indispensability of religion therefore evokes the counter-reaction of the abandonment of this abandonment.

The view that modernization is to be equated with the necessary disappearance of religiosity has been strongly criticized in recent years. However, the denial and relativization of this thesis and the loudly proclaimed “return of religions” (Martin Riesebrodt) has itself been disputed. As early as the 1960s, sociologists of religion criticized the overly narrow theoretical framework of classical secularization theory. Since the nineties of the 20th century, a differently accentuated criticism of the classical secularization thesis has emerged. It is formulated from the perspective of positions that define the “secularization-resistant” significance of religion more in terms of its politically active role and less in terms of its social integration function.

The question of religion therefore not only occupies the philosophy of religion, religious studies or theologies in the present day, but also increasingly political philosophy. This is not only related to political, social or cultural developments in Western societies, which give religion a greater significance in the public sphere than was to be expected in the light of classical secularization theories following Max Weber, but also to changed premises within the debates of philosophy itself.
The first focus of one sub-project was the investigation of the post-secularity thesis. Post-secularism, according to Habermas, is dedicated to the analysis and explanation of the growing awareness in secularized societies today that religion is not disappearing from a society that is continuing to modernize, as the widely held secularization thesis states.
A second focus of this sub-project aimed to examine post-secularism in the context of post-colonial theory. The question here was: How should the theoretical study of religion under conditions of secularization be understood from a postcolonial perspective?
The third sub-project dealt with the challenges that the talk of post-secularity, as understood by Habermas and Taylor, poses for the justification of political orders, i.e. secular, liberal democracies, from the perspective of normative political philosophy.
After reconstructing Habermas’ and Taylor’s conception of post-secularism in the first sub-project, it was then problematized by contrasting these conceptions with Talal Asad’s programmatically different design. In particular, the epistemological dichotomy of secularity/religiousness was reconstructed and critically scrutinized.

In addition, in the second sub-project, the discussion of the question of universalism and particularism with regard to the concept of postsecularism showed that the inter-contextual expansion and application of the concept of postsecularism should be sought at the global level, and not against the background of normative secularization shaped by universalism. The results of the second sub-project were discussed at a highly regarded international workshop entitled “Postsecularism in a Global Context: New Perspectives on the Place of Religion in Postsecular Societies” (Goethe University, September 4-5, 2015), which was attended by representatives from Africa, Central and North America, Asia and Europe. The forthcoming publication of these results will summarize which context-specific experiences contribute to a theoretical engagement with religion in a postcolonial context and what significance they have for politics in a postcolonial context.

In the third sub-project, a position was developed that integrates the question of religiosity and secularity of political interpretations and contributions to the debate into a theory of pluralism that does not select “appropriate” and “inappropriate” interpretations along liberal democratic lines. Without attempting to understand religious patterns of interpretation as “reasonable” or “rational”, the question was posed as to the space that cannot be reduced to reason in the justification of political orders. It was suggested that the question of reason and what cannot be reduced to reason should be formulated in such a way that the question is not about the reasonableness and rationality of beliefs, aesthetic experiences etc., but about whether it can be reasonable to refer to what cannot be reduced to reason when justifying political decisions.

The most important publications in this project:

Lutz-Bachmann, Matthias (ed.): Post-secularism. A discussion of a controversial term (Normative Orders Vol. 12), Frankfurt am Main: Campus, 2015.

Lutz-Bachmann, Matthias and Michael Kühnlein (eds.): Missing virtue? On the philosophy of Alasdair MacIntyre , Berlin: Berlin University Press, 2015.

Schmidt, Thomas and Annette Pitschmann (eds.): Religion and Secularization. An interdisciplinary handbook Stuttgart: Metzler, 2014.

Okeja, Uchenna B.: Normative Justification of a Global Ethic: A Perspective from African Philosophy, Lanham/Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield, 2013.

Winandy, Julien: Normativity in conflict. On the relationship between religious convictions and political decisions , Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2013.

people in this project:

Project management / contact person

Lutz-Bachmann, Matthias, Prof. Dr. Dr.

Schmidt, Thomas, Prof. Dr.

Project staff

Okeja, Uchenna, Dr.

Winandy, Julien, Dr. des.