Publication: Sobre los dos sentidos del concepto habermasiano de sociedad postsecular
Authors
Rodríguez Duplá, Leonardo
item.page.secondaryauthor
item.page.director
Publisher
Universidad de Murcia. Servicio de Publicaciones
publication.page.editor
publication.page.department
DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/daimon/223291
item.page.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Description
Abstract
Habermas se ha valido a menudo de la expresión “sociedad postsecular” para referirse al proceso de aprendizaje mutuo entre la razón ilustrada y la conciencia religiosa en el seno de las sociedades modernas. Esa expresión es utilizada por el pensador alemán en dos acepciones distintas. Una veces la emplea como categoría sociológica descriptiva y otras como categoría filosófica de carácter normativo. En este trabajo rechazamos el uso descriptivo del concepto de sociedad postsecular, haciéndonos eco de las críticas que contra él se han vertido desde la sociología de la religión contemporánea. A la vez, reconocemos el interés que reviste la propuesta normativa de Habermas. Tras exponer el sentido preciso de esa propuesta, examinamos la principal acusación que contra ella cabe formular: la de funcionalismo religioso.
Habermas has often used the phrase “post-secular society” in reference to the process of mutual learning between enlightened reason and religious consciousness that takes place in modern societies. That phrase is used by him in two different senses. Sometimes he uses it as a descriptive sociological notion, sometimes as a normative philosophical category. In rejecting the descriptive use of the concept of a post-secular society, this paper echoes some objections raised by recent work in the sociology of religion. On the other side, a positive value is accorded to Habermas’ normative proposal. After expounding the precise meaning of that proposal, we discuss the main charge that can made against it: the charge of religious functionalism.
Habermas has often used the phrase “post-secular society” in reference to the process of mutual learning between enlightened reason and religious consciousness that takes place in modern societies. That phrase is used by him in two different senses. Sometimes he uses it as a descriptive sociological notion, sometimes as a normative philosophical category. In rejecting the descriptive use of the concept of a post-secular society, this paper echoes some objections raised by recent work in the sociology of religion. On the other side, a positive value is accorded to Habermas’ normative proposal. After expounding the precise meaning of that proposal, we discuss the main charge that can made against it: the charge of religious functionalism.
publication.page.subject
Citation
Daimon. Revista Internacional de Filosofía, nº 70, 2017, 23-39
item.page.embargo
Collections
Ir a Estadísticas
Sin licencia Creative Commons.