The Reciprocal Translation Proviso: An Alternative Approach to Public Reason

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 717-744
Author(s):  
George Tyler

AbstractThe role of religion in politics is problematic for liberal legitimacy. Religion is often restrained by a public reason requirement, but this creates cognitive burdens that asymmetrically impact religious citizens creating unequal barriers to accessing the political system, which is itself problematic for liberal legitimacy. Habermas’ institutional translation proviso balances the competing concerns of liberal legitimacy, which aims to offset the asymmetry disadvantaging religious citizens. This paper analyzes the problem and Habermas’ solution. It concludes that Habermas does not alleviate the asymmetry created by the public reason requirement to the greatest extent possible and so does not equalize the barriers to accessing the political system as much as he might. The reciprocal translation proviso provides an alternative that balances the competing components of liberal legitimacy more fully and alleviates the asymmetry and inequality of barriers to political access to the greatest extent possible while preserving the public reason requirement.

2013 ◽  
Vol 146 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gay Hawkins

Is there anything left to say about public value and public service broadcasting (PSB) without lapsing into boosterism, special pleading, or wildly unsubstantiated claims about the role of PSB in making citizens and democracy? This article develops an alternative approach, one that considers publicness not as a pre-given or static value, but as something that has to be continually enacted or performed. Using recent debates in political theory, it examines the processes and ontological effects of what Latour calls ‘making things public’. It makes two assumptions. The first is that there is no such thing as ‘the public’ out there waiting to be addressed; rather, publics have to be called into being The second is that there are a multiplicity of ways in which publicness can be assembled, and the challenge for PSB is to establish why its strategies are better. The example used is the ABC's current affairs discussion show Q&A, which is investigated to see how it generates an ontology of publicness. In what ways is the notion of public address and assembly mobilised? How does the experience of a public as a form of what Warner calls ‘Stranger sociability’ extend from the live audience to the household viewer? In what ways are the notions of public reason and rational discussion enacted and disrupted? And how does this enactment of publicness generate a sometimes poetic, anarchic or ribald shadow reality tweeted in from anonymous participants competing for public attention? Finally, how does it both reproduce and reinvent existing institutional regimes of value within the ABC?


2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 590-612
Author(s):  
Luca Ozzano

AbstractThis article is part of a special issue on the five Muslim democracies. It aims at understanding the role played by religion, and particularly by religiously oriented actors, in Turkey's democratization processes. The first section analyzes the different theoretical approaches to the role of religion in democratization. The second section analyzes the different phases of Turkey's political history since the 1980 coup, taking into account both democratization processes and the role played by religious actors in the political system, and trying to understand the possible relations between the two phenomena.


Author(s):  
E. V. DUNAEVA

The article is devoted to the role of Shiite clergy in the Islamic revolution and in the political life of Islamic Republic of Iran. The author attempts to analize the possibilities of the Islamic regime’s survival in the context of modernizing society. IRI is a special model of the state system that embodies the idea of the Islamic rule of Imam Khomeini. Its political, socioeconomic, legal spheres are based on Islamic principles. The clergy managed to establish almost absolute control over secular institutions. At the same time, the Iranian regime can not be regarded as the only theocratic. It combines Islamic ideas with republican principles and admits democracy as a form of political participation. Iran’s political system combines elements of the modern Islamic theocracy with republican principles. Over nearly 40-years of its existence (since 1979), the political system underwent certain transformations which were caused by the economic and sociocultural development of the society and external factors. The liberalization of the economic sphere and the development of political parties put on the agenda political changes. Liberal-minded clergy relying on the ideas of religious modernism support the strengthening of democratic elements within the Islamic Republic. Some of them are ready to abandon the principle of “velayat-e faqih” or to reduce the authority of the leader in political sphere. They initiated reforms in political and public sphere.However, the clergy standing on the positions of fundamentalism, is not ready to reduce the Islamic component. They condemn the modernization trends intensified in Iranian society in recent years and are trying to bring the country back to the first post-revolutionary decade. However, the society is not ready to share such approaches. During the recent election campaigns Iranians have supported the liberal forces. The events of early 2018 demonstrated the protest potential of the society.This shows the desire of the citizens for further democratization of the political system and secularization of the public life. Although, there are calls for overthrowing the dictatorship of the clergy among the opposition groups in the West and inside the country. Hopes for the democratisation of the regime have not been lost. If external factors do not have a destructive effect, then the implementation of the Iranian model of modernization can become a reality.


Author(s):  
Piedad García-Escudero Márquez

La desconfianza en el sistema político y el descrédito de las instituciones imperante hoy día alcanza también al Parlamento, acusado de un déficit de representación. El art. se plantea, en aras de una posible regeneración de la institución, un diagnóstico de la situación y la búsqueda de soluciones, en particular en la renovación de las funciones parlamentarias y en los mecanismos de transparencia y participación ciudadana, en curso de implantación en las Cámaras españolas como instrumentos para tratar de recuperar la confianza pública y en último término su papel central en el entramado institucional.The prevailing mistrust in the political system and institutions has also reached the parliamentary institution, accused of a lack of representation. The article arises, for the sake of a possible regeneration of Parliament, a diagnosis of the situation and the search for solutions, particularly in the renewal of parliamentary functions and the mechanisms of transparency and citizen participation in course of implementation in the Spanish Chambers, as instruments to try to regain the public trust, and ultimately the central role of Parliament in the institutional framework.


Author(s):  
Will Jennings

“Mechanisms of representation” relate to the organization of politics and its consequences, and the processes through which interests or preferences are represented in the political system and the outcomes of public policy. This article explores a diverse set of mechanisms through which politics is organized, and through which the preferences or interests of the public, voters, groups, and economic interests are either advanced or obstructed. Traditional approaches of political science often adopted a narrow focus on the formal democratic qualities of elected government and the pluralism of the political system in incorporating different interests or preferences into the decision-making process and policy outcomes. Later waves of research sought to explore bias in mechanisms of representation, such as the disproportionate influence of interest groups in the governmental process and the power of agenda setting in determining which issues make it onto the decision-making table and when. Nevertheless, there continues to be considerable interest in the role of formal political institutions in determining the performance of representative democracy, how political parties act as vehicles for representation, and how elections can provide mandates to governments and enable voters to reward or punish political parties or candidates for the quality of their representation or performance. Indeed, a growing field of enquiry identifies a direct link between the preferences of the public and their representatives, either in the representation of constituency opinion or in the responsiveness of the political system as a whole. Despite this pervasive concern throughout the discipline of political science with the functioning of democratic politics, important changes in modern states, economies, and societies occurring outside elected institutions also shape representation, particularly as executive governance and politics has assumed increasing importance. The conventional understanding of mechanisms of representation is built upon shifting sands, with the emergence of the “regulatory state” and the decline of traditional distributive and command activities of government, and with ever more “networked,” “nonhierarchical,” and “transnational” modes of governing—often by unelected authorities. These changing institutional arrangements also reflect a response to the rise of risk as a focus of organization, as traditional social and economic cleavages are redrawn and reconstructed around questions of risk—often manmade, created through scientific innovation or economic progress. These changes point toward the changing battleground for representation both of public and political interests and the increasing importance of understanding questions of bureaucratic politics and control, transnational regulation, the management of risk, and the preoccupation of officeholders with the avoidance of blame. Mechanisms of representation shed light on all these things and more, encompassing the role of institutions in reflecting public or private interests in the decision-making process.


2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 165-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward C. Holland

Using results from a 2010 survey conducted in the Republic of Buryatia, this paper compares the responses of Russians and Buryats on questions of religious practice and belief, as well as the role of religion and religious organizations in the political sphere of contemporary Russia. Buryats more commonly identify with a religion and more frequently attend religious services in comparison to Russians living in the republic. There is greater consonance between the two groups on the public role of religion, with both Russians and Buryats generally supportive of the recent extension of religious education into schools and the creation of national holidays for all traditional religions, among other issues.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-217
Author(s):  
Tomasz Sochański

This study aims to highlight the role of education in a democratic society in the political philosophy of Nicolas de Condorcet. Condorcet refuted legitimising political power on the idea of general will and postulated to replace it with the notion of reason and probability of truth. This assumption tightly linked the wellbeing of democracy with a public education system which, on the one hand, was to prepare citizens to take an active role in the public sphere, and on the other, allow them to improve the political system in which they function in accordance with the progress of the human spirit.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
Petrus Tan

<p><em>This article tries to elaborate the relationship between post-secularism, democracy and the public role of religion. The facts of religion’s global revival show the failure of secularization thesis about the disappearance of religion from the public sphere. In political philosophy and social sciences, this phenomenon is called post-secularism. In this article, post-secularism is understood as a phenomenon of religion’s revival in the public sphere or the legitimacy for public role of religion. This understanding is especially necessary  to encourage religion in addressing political, social and humanitarian issues. However, this understanding does not ignore the fact that religion often becomes a scandal and terror for democracy. Therefore, in this article, post-secularism also needs another understanding, namely as "awareness of a reciprocal learning process" between religion and secularity, religious and secular citizens, faith and reason, religious doctrine and public reason. The last model of post-secularism is urgently needed in Indonesia.</em><strong><em></em></strong></p><p><strong><em>Key words</em></strong><em>: Post-secularism, secularization, religion, democracy.</em></p>


Author(s):  
Hedi Hedi

This paper aims to illustrate Habermas's thoughts on post-secularism, especially in regards to stretching religion which he believes that after secularism religion should be considered as in the public space. The study uses a political philosophy approach. In his findings, Habermas concluded that the role of religion can no longer be denied its presence in the political space. To minimize religious totalitarianism, Habermas divides public space into formal and informal settings, in which religion and politics appear to influence one to another. According to Habermas, religion can only present in an informal space. If people want to contribute in a formal space, they have to translate religious language into secular language.[Artikel ini menelaah pemikiran Habermas tentang pos-sekulerisme, khususnya berkenaan dengan kelonggaran peran agama yang ia yakini bahwa setelah terjadinya sekularisme, agama harus turut berperan dalam ruang publik. Kajian ini menggunakan pendekatan filsafat politik. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa, Habermas memandang saat ini (era pos-sekularisme) peran agama tidak lagi dapat ditolak kehadirannya di ruang publik. Untuk meminimalisir totalitarianisme agama, Habermas  membagi ruang publik menjadi aturan formal dan aturan informal, yang mana agama dan politik saling berkelindan dan mempengaruhi satu sama lain. Menurut Habermas, agama hanya dapat hadir dalam ruang informal. Jika masyarakat yang agamis hendak turut berkontribusi dalam ranah publik formal, mereka harus menerjemahkan bahasa agama mereka menjadi bahasa sekuler.]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document