What is a Secular State

1
What is a Secular State?

• Marcus Johansson
• Linköping, June 2008

2
Background

• (I) A modern democratic state is universally and
  morally required to be secular (the secular
  imperative).

3
Background

• (I) A modern democratic state is universally and
  morally required to be secular (the secular
  imperative).
• (II) The citizens of today are still, in general,
  religious. Moreover, the modern state also
  harbors religious pluralism.

4
Background

• (I) paired with (II) give rise to some tension.

5
Background

• (I) paired with (II) give rise to some tension.
• Thus
• a) It is important to arrive at a precise meaning
  of secular state if we are to assess the
  concept in the context of (II).

6
Background

• (I) paired with (II) give rise to some tension.
• Thus
• a) It is important to arrive at a precise meaning
  of secular state if we are to assess the
  concept in the context of (II).
• b) Given a certain meaning of secular state and
  the context (II), the secular imperative stated
  in (I) must be carefully assessed.

7
Interpretations Arguments

• If the state should be secular,
• then what is a state?

8
Interpretations Arguments

• If the state should be secular,
• then what is a state?

9
Interpretations Arguments

• What does the word secular mean?

10
Interpretations Arguments

• What does the word secular mean?
• From the Latin sæculum, meaning
• age, timespan or generation.
• In the Christian context, it signified the time
  between the Fall and pa???sía, the return of
  Christ a time where the present is interwoven
  with the expected.
• (1)

11
Interpretations Arguments

• What does the word secular mean?
• The secular time made the theologians
  favor a theological separation between the
  Kingdom of God and the Earthly Kingdom. Today,
  however, there is a political preference for a
  practical separation between religion and state.
  This separation is now commonly denoted by the
  term state secularism.
• (2)

12
Interpretations Arguments

• Different interpretations of secular state

13
Interpretations Arguments

• The Confessional Interpretation (i)
• A Secular State (i) def A state which
  explicitly rejects all forms of theism.

14
Interpretations Arguments

• The Confessional Interpretation (i)
• Different versions
• Atheist state Agnostic state Theistic state
• ____________________________________________
• Non-theistic state Non-theistic state
  Theistic state
• SSA WSA WST SST

15
Interpretations Arguments

• The Confessional Interpretation (i) - arguments
• Theism is explicitly rejected by the state
  since...
• (i)a ...the central claim of any theism, the
  existence of a supernatural being or power, is
  simply false. (epistemological argument)
• (i)b ...the citizens wish to have a non-theist
  state. (democratic argument)
• (i)c ...every theism causes harm. (argument from
  harm)

16
Interpretations Arguments

• The Policy Interpretation (ii)
• A Secular State (ii) def A state which through
  laws and policies deny theisms special treatment.

17
Interpretations Arguments

• The Policy Interpretation (ii)
• The Impartial State Version ((ii)imp)
• (ii)imp def A state which through laws and
  policies purposely treats Tx and Ty as equal.
• The Neutral State Version ((ii)neut)
• (ii)imp def A state which through laws and
  policies purposely treats all Ts as equal to
  non-Ts.

18
Interpretations Arguments

• The Policy Interpretation (ii) arguments for
  (ii)imp
• (ii)impa Impartial treatment prevents conflicts.
  (pragmatic argument)
• (ii)impb Theisms are incommensurable.
  (incommensurability argument)
• (ii)impc Making laws regarding religion is
  necessary, since they operate in the public
  sphere. (public domain argument)

19
Interpretations Arguments

• The Policy Interpretation (ii) arguments for
  (ii)neut
• (ii)neuta No law should contain references to
  individual entities. (formal argument)
• (ii)neutb Neutrality prevents conflicts in
  society. (pragmatic argument)
• (ii)neutc Theism belongs to the private sphere.
  (private domain argument)
• (ii)neutd Neutrality is epistemologically
  required. (agnostic argument)
• (ii)neute Non-neutrality impairs democratic
  culture. (argument from democratic culture)

20
Interpretations Arguments

• The Discourse Interpretation (iii)
• A Secular State (iii) def A state in which the
  deliberative process doesnt contain
  authoritative references to any theism.

21
Interpretations Arguments

• The Discourse Interpretation (iii)
• A Secular State (iii) def A state in which the
  deliberative process doesnt contain
  authoritative references to any theism.
• - Robert Audi
• - Jürgen Habermas
• - John Rawls

22
Interpretations Arguments

• The Discourse Interpretation (iii)
• Audis Principle of Secular Motivation (PSM)
• ... one should not advocate or promote any
  legal or public policy restrictions on human
  conduct unless one not only has and is willing to
  offer, but also is motivated by, adequate secular
  reason, where this reason (or set of reasons) is
  motivationally sufficient for the conduct in
  question.
• Audi (1989), p. 284

23
Interpretations Arguments

• The Discourse Interpretation (iii)
• Argument against PSM
• C1(PSM) PSM is a non sequitur given his initial
  premises, not establishing non-theism in
  public discourse.
• C2(PSM) PSM is biased toward non-theistic reason.
• C3(PSM) PSM excludes citizens deeply rooted in
  religion.

24
Interpretations Arguments

• The Discourse Interpretation (iii)
• Habermass account of public deliberation
• Non-theistic reasoning generally accessible
  language is required in political institutions
  only, not of ordinary citizens.
• Religious citizens are suggested to, through a
  learning process, develop an epistemic stance
  which harmonizes their religion with modernity
  and which recognizes the priority of secular
  reasoning in politics.
• Secular citizens are suggested to transcend
  their prejudice of religion as archaic relics.
  

25
Interpretations Arguments

• The Discourse Interpretation (iii)
• Argument against Habermass account
• C1(H) Habermass account is biased toward
  non- theism.
• C2(H) Habermas idealizes the citizen.
• C3(H) The suggested filtering of theistic
  reasons from the political institutions are
  questionable.

26
Interpretations Arguments

• The Discourse Interpretation (iii)
• Rawlss idea of Public Reason (PR)
• ... citizens are to conduct their fundamental
  discussions within the framework of what each
  regards as a political conception of justice
  based on values that others can reasonably be
  expected to endorse and each is, in good faith,
  prepared to defend that conception so
  understood.
• Rawls (1993), p 226
• Proviso Reasons from a comprehensive doctrine
  can be introduced at any time, provided that
  we in due course give public reasons
  supporting our previous argument.

27
Interpretations Arguments

• The Discourse Interpretation (iii)
• Best yet, since PR avoids some of the problems
  which surrounds Audis and Habermass accounts.
• But, PR still fails to establish itself as a
  universal moral requirement, since to tightly
  connected to secular liberalism.

28
Concluding remarks

• NONE of the suggested interpretations manages
  to establish itself as universally morally
  required in a democracy.

29
Concluding remarks

• NONE of the suggested interpretations manages
  to establish itself as universally morally
  required in a democracy.
• SOME of the arguments appears to have some
  force
• - The democratic argument
• - The pragmatic argument
• - The public domain argument
• - The argument from democratic culture

30
Concluding remarks

• While the secular imperative is NOT a universal
  moral requirement, it is still a prima facie
  moral imperative in SOME contexts, where the four
  listed arguments are at play.

31
Concluding remarks

• HOWEVER...
• While the secular imperative has prima facie
  validity, there are prudential arguments against
  the use of the term secular
• a) The concept is redundant its content can be
  perfectly described without reference to
  non-theism (or theism).
• b) The concept is potentially harmful it is
  often confused with atheism and often regarded as
  a non-neutral opponent to religion. The term thus
  provokes conflict.