Intelligibility, moral loss and injustice
In Liberalism's Religion, I analyse the specific conception of religion that liberalism relies upon. I argue that the concept of religion should be disaggregated into its normatively salient features. When deciding whether to avert undue impingements on religious observances, or to avoid any un...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2019
|
| _version_ | 1797054783333335040 |
|---|---|
| author | Laborde, C |
| author_facet | Laborde, C |
| author_sort | Laborde, C |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | In Liberalism's Religion, I analyse the specific conception of religion that liberalism relies upon. I argue that the concept of religion should be disaggregated into its normatively salient features. When deciding whether to avert undue impingements on religious observances, or to avoid any untoward support of such observances, liberal states should not deal with ‘religion’ as such but, rather, with relevant dimensions of religious phenomena. States should avoid religious entanglement when ‘religion’ is epistemically inaccessible, socially divisive and/or comprehensive in scope. In turn, states should show special deference to religious observances insofar as they exhibit what I call integrity – whether personal or collective. The upshot of this interpretive strategy is that liberal law need not recognise religion as such. As a result, there are gaps between the liberal construal of disaggregated religion and the lived experience of religion as a uniquely integrated experience. Are these gaps morally regrettable? Are they unjust? |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-06T19:02:06Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:13e21fcf-c91d-4eac-9d87-4b8929e73e64 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-06T19:02:06Z |
| publishDate | 2019 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:13e21fcf-c91d-4eac-9d87-4b8929e73e642022-03-26T10:16:27ZIntelligibility, moral loss and injusticeJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:13e21fcf-c91d-4eac-9d87-4b8929e73e64EnglishSymplectic Elements at OxfordWiley2019Laborde, CIn Liberalism's Religion, I analyse the specific conception of religion that liberalism relies upon. I argue that the concept of religion should be disaggregated into its normatively salient features. When deciding whether to avert undue impingements on religious observances, or to avoid any untoward support of such observances, liberal states should not deal with ‘religion’ as such but, rather, with relevant dimensions of religious phenomena. States should avoid religious entanglement when ‘religion’ is epistemically inaccessible, socially divisive and/or comprehensive in scope. In turn, states should show special deference to religious observances insofar as they exhibit what I call integrity – whether personal or collective. The upshot of this interpretive strategy is that liberal law need not recognise religion as such. As a result, there are gaps between the liberal construal of disaggregated religion and the lived experience of religion as a uniquely integrated experience. Are these gaps morally regrettable? Are they unjust? |
| spellingShingle | Laborde, C Intelligibility, moral loss and injustice |
| title | Intelligibility, moral loss and injustice |
| title_full | Intelligibility, moral loss and injustice |
| title_fullStr | Intelligibility, moral loss and injustice |
| title_full_unstemmed | Intelligibility, moral loss and injustice |
| title_short | Intelligibility, moral loss and injustice |
| title_sort | intelligibility moral loss and injustice |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT labordec intelligibilitymorallossandinjustice |