Social Science Research Council

In a symposium convened by the Institute for Public Knowledge at NYU, the Social Science Research Council and the Humanities Institute at Stony Brook University, Judith Butler, Jürgen Habermas, Charles Taylor, and Cornel West came together last month to discuss the project of “rethinking secularism.” Today we are posting audio and a transcript of the October 22 discussion between Habermas and Taylor, moderated by Craig Calhoun, in which the two leading philosophers discuss the place of religion in the public sphere and whether there are differences in kind between religious and secular reasons. (Listen to the paper presentations that preceded this discussion here. Add your own voice to the discussion here.)

Earlier this month, the Associated Press reported on a controversy that erupted over the decision by Missouri tax authorities to require yoga centers to collect and pay a sales tax on their classes. Yoga instructors have argued that they should be exempt from the tax “because the lessons include spiritual elements.” In this week’s off the cuff feature, we’ve invited a small handful of scholars to comment on the legal and cultural status of yoga and on the right of states to levy taxes on yoga centers.

Talal Asad and Abdullahi An-Na’im both stand at the forefront of the challenging and constructive exchange taking place today between European and Islamic traditions of political, legal, and religious thought. At a recent event organized by Georgetown University’s Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs, the two scholars traded questions and criticisms concerning the concept of human rights. Moderated by José Casanova, the discussion addressed the intrinsic limitations and historical failures of the language of human rights, as well as its formidable capacity to challenge autocratic and state-centric distributions of power, creating openings for democratic contestation and political self-determination. The following is a short excerpt of the conversation, which is available for download in its entirety here (pdf). You can see video from the event at here & there.

When the Dalai Lama visited Washington, D.C. last week, he didn’t stop at the White House, making this the first time since 1991 that the Tibetan leader has visited the capital without meeting with a sitting U.S. president. Aware of his departure from established precedent, President Obama nonetheless made the decision to postpone meeting with the Dalai Lama until after his November summit with Chinese head of state Hu Jintao. What does Obama’s decision say about his strategy regarding the protection of human rights and the competing demands of geopolitical gamesmanship? What do the decision and the strong reactions it has provoked say about the Dalai Lama’s authority as both a religious and a political leader? How does the intrinsic duality of his position play out on the international stage? “Off the cuff” responses from Robbie Barnett, Carole McGranahan, Edward Friedman, and Cameron David Warner.

In last week’s New York Times Sunday Styles section, Allen Salkin reported on the emergence of a “new wave” of spiritual practices and identities among young, urban, professional women. What are we to make of Salkin’s portrait of the self-styled leaders of “a new generation of self-empowerment”? Off the cuff responses to the article from Courtney Bender, Rev. Donna Schaper, Elizabeth McAlister, Mara E. Donaldson, Melani McAlister, Michele Dillon, Carl Raschke, and Kathryn Lofton.

As the fall semester gets underway, our off the cuff question this week has asked a variety of contributors to The Immanent Frame to look back and reflect on what they read this summer. Today’s responses are from Nancy Levene, James K.A. Smith, Rudy Busto, Jason Bivins, Webb Keane, Omar M. McRoberts, Justin Neuman, and Stathis Gourgouris.

Off the cuff is a new feature at The Immanent Frame, in which we pose a question to a handful of leading thinkers and ask for a brief response. As the fall semester gets underway, our question this week asks contributors to look back and reflect on what they read this summer. Today’s responses are from Omri Elisha, David Kyuman Kim, Tomoko Masuzawa, Patrick Lee Miller, John Lardas Modern, and John Schmalzbauer.

Off the cuff is a new feature at The Immanent Frame, in which we pose a question to a handful of leading thinkers and ask for a brief response. As the fall semester gets underway, our question this week asks contributors to look back and reflect on what they read this summer. We will be posting responses throughout the week, beginning today with responses from Colin Jager, Simon During, John Bowen, Kathryn Lofton, and Winnifred Fallers Sullivan.

In conversation with Nathan Schneider, scholar of religion and law Winnifred Fallers Sullivan discusses the failure of the courts to grapple with lived religion, the crisis of prisons in the United States, and why, in some sense at least, we are all religious now.

Off the cuff is a new feature at The Immanent Frame, in which we pose a question to a handful of leading thinkers and ask for a brief response. Our question today concerns the issue of homosexuality in debates about the Anglican Communion, with responses from Mary Anne Case, Eric Fassin, Siobhán Garrigan, Jimmy Casas Klausen, Mary-Jane Rubenstein and Emilie M. Townes.