What distinguishes Habermas from Rawls on religion in the public sphere is not Habermas’s slightly amended view of public reason, but his willingness to entertain the idea that religion has a positive and substantive role to play in public debate.
The Immanent Frame
-
Recent posts
- The Vatican Spring?
- by The Editors
- Prayer, imagination, and the voice of God—in global perspective
- by Steven Barrie-Anthony
- Confused parchments, infinite socialities
- by John Lardas Modern
- Reconciliation in the real world
- by Daniel Philpott
- Reconciliation and the pursuit of peace
- by Alex Bellamy
Popular posts
- The Vatican Spring? 3 comment(s)by
- Prayer, imagination, and the voice of God—in global perspective 4 comment(s)by
- Is there anybody out there? (Pink Floyd and Charles Taylor) 0 comment(s)by
- Opportunity at the SSRC 0 comment(s)by
- Placing childhood sexual abuse in historical perspective 1 comment(s)by
Recent comments
- Valentina Napolitano on The Vatican Spring?
- Paul Williams on The Vatican Spring?
- Matthew Knowles on The Vatican Spring?
- Caroline Williams on Is religion free?
- Jeanie Arnold on The problem with the history of toleration
Recent discussions
-
here & there
- Opportunity at the SSRC
- by The Editors
- Digital publishing and the academic study of religion
- by Wei Zhu
- CFP: Bridging Voices
- by Wei Zhu
- Religion and the Public Sphere internship at the Social Science Research Council
- by The Editors
- Citizenship and minorities in Egypt
- by Wei Zhu
-
Popular tags
-
academia
American politics
atheism
Barack Obama
belief
books
Catholicism
Charles Taylor
Christianity
church and state
democracy
Egypt
Evangelicalism
history
human rights
international affairs
Islam
law and religion
philosophy
politics
public sphere
religion in the U.S.
religious freedom
Rethinking secularism
science
secularism
secularity
secularization
spirituality
theology
Archives
-
Subscribe to the RSS feed for The God Delusion
Loading
About | Contributors
| Follow Us:
