RELIGIÓN Y CULTURA POLÍTICA LIBERAL: SOBRE LAS DISCUSIONES RATZINGER-HABERMAS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolLa idea mas basica de Habermas en su discusion con Ratzinger en el 2004 es que la filosofia actual no tiene mas remedio que abordar el fenomeno de la persistencia de las religiones tambien desde dentro, como desafio cognitivo. En una sociedad postsecular, que no puede menos que contar con la persistencia de las religiones como tal desafio, la filosofia no puede pretender convertirse ya en juez de la verdad o no verdad de los contenidos de la religion, sino que en ella las mentalidades religiosas y seculares habrian de entender el proceso de modernizacion como un proceso de aprendizaje complementario, tomandose mutuamente en serio por razones cognitivas: las religiones haciendo derivar los principios de la cultura politica liberal de la propia moral religiosa, y la cultura politica liberal dando importancia cognoscitiva a las cosmovisiones religiosas sin posponerlas a una cosmovision laicista, y cuidando de que no se produzca una distribucion asimetrica de las �cargas de la tolerancia�. En total coincidencia con Habermas en esa discusion, Ratzinger habla de correlacionalidad entre cultura ilustrada y religion. En el 2006 y 2007 vuelve a producirse entre Habermas y Ratzinger una callada e importante discusion acerca de las bases conceptuales de ese �tomarse mutuamente en serio por razones cognitivas�. EnglishThe basic idea of Habermas in his discussion with Ratzinger in 2004 is that current philosophy has no choice but to address the phenomenon of the persistence of religions but also from within as cognitive challenge. In a postsecular society, which can not fail to have the persistence of religion as such a challenge, philosophy can not pretend to become a judge of the truth or untruth of the contents of religion. However in it, religious and secular mentalities have understand the process of modernization as a complementary learning process, taking each other seriously for cognitive reasons: religion by deriving the principles of liberal political culture's own religious morality and liberal political culture by giving cognitive importance to religious worldviews without postponing them to a secular worldview, while ensuring that there is no asymmetric distribution of the burden of tolerance. In complete agreement with Habermas in that discussion, Ratzinger speaks of correlationality between Enlightenment culture and religion. In 2006 and 2007, a quiet and important discussion between Habermas and Ratzingerabout occured concerning the conceptual foundations of this take each other seriously for cognitive reasons idea.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".