The Myth of the Secular

This is a very interesting discussion of may issues, including our distinction between the "secular" and "religious". It's a great introduction to both subjects.

CBC "Ideas" On The Myth of the Secular

Here are a few things I took from the discussion ...
  • Use of the term "religion" as a noun, referring to a body of dogma, a bright line between "believers" and "non-believers" etc. is relatively modern. It comes from Europe in the 16th century and accounts for a lot of misunderstanding.
  • Motivation behind being a "religious" Muslim and how it's quite different from what we imagine.
  • "Religious" communities as global alternatives to the modern moral view which has it's moral horizon at a national border
  • A fascinating discussion of fundamentalism in general
  • Discussion of nationalism as a religion, especially when it comes to sacrifice, such as our willingness to die to defend a transcendental concept
  • Comparison of American and Canadian nationalism-as-religion. Our lack of enthusiasm vs American fanatical nationalism doesn't make us come out looking so bad.
  • The idea of "norms" of behavior in a way that echoes McIntyre's "practices" -- how we are continually balancing requirements of competing "norms".  This is not and cannot be a totally free choice (Kant), but it is a choice nonetheless.
  • And so forth ...
This is a 7-part series, so you are bound to run across a few a wise men and women and a few total idiots. I'll let you decide for yourself who is who :)

Looking for a copy of Integral Pluralism: Beyond Culture Wars by Fred Dallmayr that won't break my very strained book budget. In Part 7, Dallmayr discusses the political nature of the dialogue between secularism and religion AND sees it as a special case of all the issues we seem to be unable to discuss with any civility. He oozes common sense.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Facebook and Bing - A Killer Combination

A Process ...

Warp Speed Generative AI