后世俗视角的挑战。尤尔根·哈贝马斯谈宗教和公共演讲

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 N/A PHILOSOPHY TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE Pub Date : 2009-06-01 DOI:10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038080
P. Loobuyck, S. Rummens
{"title":"后世俗视角的挑战。尤尔根·哈贝马斯谈宗教和公共演讲","authors":"P. Loobuyck, S. Rummens","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, Jurgen Habermas has joined the debate on the acceptability of religious reasons in the public debate. Discussing both the exclusionist position of Robert Audi and the inclusionist position of Nicholas Wolterstorff, Habermas ultimately advocates a middle ground position which, in many respects, resembles the view of John Rawls. In this paper, we analyze the specificity of Habermas's account of the post-secular public sphere and situate his current views in the larger context of his work. In the final sections, we argue that Habermas, in spite of his increasingly open stance towards religion, still fails to fully appreciate the proper nature of religious faith and, therefore, still underestimates the presumably ineliminable tension between public reason and religion.","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2009-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"De uitdaging van het postseculiere perspectief. Jürgen Habermas over religie en de publieke rede\",\"authors\":\"P. Loobuyck, S. Rummens\",\"doi\":\"10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038080\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recently, Jurgen Habermas has joined the debate on the acceptability of religious reasons in the public debate. Discussing both the exclusionist position of Robert Audi and the inclusionist position of Nicholas Wolterstorff, Habermas ultimately advocates a middle ground position which, in many respects, resembles the view of John Rawls. In this paper, we analyze the specificity of Habermas's account of the post-secular public sphere and situate his current views in the larger context of his work. In the final sections, we argue that Habermas, in spite of his increasingly open stance towards religion, still fails to fully appreciate the proper nature of religious faith and, therefore, still underestimates the presumably ineliminable tension between public reason and religion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53935,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038080\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038080","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

最近,尤尔根·哈贝马斯(Jurgen Habermas)加入了关于公共辩论中宗教原因可接受性的辩论。哈贝马斯在讨论了罗伯特·奥迪的排他主义立场和尼古拉斯·沃特斯托夫的包容主义立场后,最终主张了一种在许多方面类似于约翰·罗尔斯观点的中间立场。在本文中,我们分析了哈贝马斯对后世俗公共领域的描述的特殊性,并将他当前的观点置于他的作品的更大背景中。在最后部分,我们认为,尽管哈贝马斯对宗教的态度越来越开放,但他仍然没有充分认识到宗教信仰的本质,因此,他仍然低估了公共理性与宗教之间可能无法消除的紧张关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
De uitdaging van het postseculiere perspectief. Jürgen Habermas over religie en de publieke rede
Recently, Jurgen Habermas has joined the debate on the acceptability of religious reasons in the public debate. Discussing both the exclusionist position of Robert Audi and the inclusionist position of Nicholas Wolterstorff, Habermas ultimately advocates a middle ground position which, in many respects, resembles the view of John Rawls. In this paper, we analyze the specificity of Habermas's account of the post-secular public sphere and situate his current views in the larger context of his work. In the final sections, we argue that Habermas, in spite of his increasingly open stance towards religion, still fails to fully appreciate the proper nature of religious faith and, therefore, still underestimates the presumably ineliminable tension between public reason and religion.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: In het Tijdschrift voor Filosofie verschijnen thematische bijdragen, historische en kritische studies, literatuuroverzichten, boekbesprekingen en kronieken. Het staat open voor alle actuele stromingen in en voor discussies op de verscheidene domeinen van de filosofie. Het Tijdschrift voor Filosofie bevat bijdragen van filosofen uit verschillende landen. Het besteedt in het bijzonder aandacht aan het wijsgerige leven in Nederland en Vlaanderen en wil op wetenschappelijk niveau het wijsgerig gesprek in het Nederlands bevorderen. Elke bijdrage wordt ‘dubbel blind’ beoordeeld door tenminste twee deskundigen, afkomstig van verschillende universiteiten.
期刊最新文献
Een zee in het midden van de wereld : Afrikaans-Europese migratie, zwarte filosofie en het einde van de witte mythologie De nieuwe poortwachters van de waarheid Vieweg, Klaus: Hegel. Der Philosoph der Freiheit. Biographie. München: C.H. Beck 2019 "The Constructivist Turn in Political Representation" redactie: Lisa Disch, Nadia Urbinati, Mathijs van de Sande Free will skepticism, just deserts and justice without retribution an interview with Farah Focquaert
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1