A Religious Repair for Communicative Reason? Habermas's Return to Religion and Its Theological Reception
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This article analyzes the shift in Jürgen Habermas's writing on religion and reflects on its significance for theology. The discussion shows that the change in Habermas's thought is related to his emerging sense that communicative rationality is insufficient to ground moral action. This development is illuminated by demonstrating how his more recent work reverses his criticism of the relationship that Horkheimer establishes between the idea of God and the concept of truth. Moreover, tensions in Habermas's treatment of religion's “semantic content” are shown to result in what he himself would call a “performative contradiction.” With reference to theological receptions of Habermas by Adams and Junker-Kenny, the article concludes that the promise of a fruitful dialogue between Habermas and theologians has never been greater, but that such a conversation will be enriched by returning to the writings on religion by the first generation of the Frankfurt school.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it