MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060070353 · doi:10.1353/gso.2010.0001

Democracy After Secularism

2010· article· en· W2060070353 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
I. M. Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Good Society · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecularismDemocracySkepticismSecularizationEntitlement (fair division)PoliticsSociologyEpistemologyHegelianismPhilosophyLawReligious studiesPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Democracy After Secularism Ian Ward (bio) My contribution to this symposium of The Good Society is a philosophical promissory note. It asserts, without demonstrating entitlement to, a number of claims about religion and late-modern democratic politics, claims whose value I am attempting to redeem in a larger work.1 For present purposes, it is my hope that readers will find them plausible, but only to the degree necessary to elicit spirited conversation. My principal claim is that commonplace understandings of democracy and secularism in contemporary political theory need to be critiqued together, and that the juxtaposition of the two terms suggested by "After" is an especially fruitful starting point for such an exercise. I use the term "after" not in a chronological sense, as if I wanted to designate one period of time that followed another. This usage does have considerable currency in discourse about religion and politics, particularly surrounding talk of the "return" or "resurgence" of religion in the wake of the decline of an "age of secularization." I believe, however, for reasons that will become clear in what follows, that scholars ought to greet such talk with considerable skepticism. Instead, I want to use it in a manner evocative of that employed by W. E. B. Du Bois' masterpiece of democratic theory and religious studies, The Souls of Black Folk. Du Bois' manner of philosophizing involved moving dialectically between what he called the "thought"—the dominant received view about some matter—and what he called the "afterthought"—a critical perspective that is tacitly implied by, and in turn undermines, the dominant manner of thinking.2 What would it mean, in this context, to treat secularism as the "thought," and democracy the "afterthought?" In other words, what do secularism's explicit avowals imply about democracy, religion, and the public sphere? What might a self-critical philosophical inventory of these implications look like? And what could such an inventory teach us about the ethics of democratic citizenship under conditions of religious pluralism and globalization? My answers to these questions strike both critical and constructive notes. On one hand, I argue that secularism, as a kind of analytical frame, narrows and flattens our perceptions of the political complexities, possibilities and risks associated with religious diversity in public life. On the other, I propose an alternative picture, one I hope will broaden and deepen these perceptions. This alternative demands a fundamental reorientation of certain anxieties of citizenship: away from religion, constructed as an object of political fascination and fear, and toward intelligent discernment of patterns of domination, whose dimensions—religious and secular, public and private, global and local—are more complex, interwoven and fine-grained than usually appreciated. What follows is simply a cursory overview of the scholarly landscape such a contribution to political ethics traverses. Religion and Anxieties of Late-Modern Democratic Citizenship One of the most salient facts about democracy is that it is marked by complex and fluid patterns of religious difference. This fact is at once obvious and striking. Its obviousness becomes apparent enough through a casual glance over the contemporary global democratic terrain. A French President enters the National Assembly—the first such occasion in nearly two centuries—to declare the wearing of the burqa a threat to the integrity of the Republic. Malaysia is shaken by an intense controversy over the long-standing practice of that country's Malay and Arabic-speaking Christians of employing "Allah" to designate "God" in their bibles. The politics of India, the world's largest democracy, continues to be transformed by the Bharatiya Janata Party's political mobilization of Hindu nationalism. Lebanon's electoral politics are organized and contested along confessional lines. Poland's postcommunist democracy is being shaped, in large part, in the crucible of disputes about the Roman Catholic Church's role in that country's past and future political life. Canada, Australia, Denmark, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom are currently sites of bitter and divisive debates concerning the presence of small Muslim minorities in their midst. Turkey's efforts to join the European Union have challenged notions of Europe as a secular descendant of Western Christendom. And in the United States, it is hard to...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0000.006
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Good SocietySame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207