From Immanent Frame to Immanent Logics: Developing Ch. Taylor’s Secularization Theory
Abstract
This article develops Ch. Taylor’s secularization theory. Taylor’s framework enables to analyze secularization as a phenomenon that can coexist with high levels of personal religiosity and significance of religion in society. This perspective aligns with Taylor’s concept of “secularity‑3”, which views secularization as a transformation in the conditions of belief and disbelief. He articulates these new conditions through the notion of immanent frame. However, critics of "A Secular Age" have raised concerns regarding the applicability of Taylor’s theory to non‑Western contexts; its reliability as a sociological framework for understanding secularization in contemporary society; its accuracy as a historical research; the opportunity to interpret Taylor’s project as biased by religious apologetics. This article posits that such criticisms stem from ambiguities in the philosophical underpinnings of Taylor’s methodology. While he aims to delineate a pre‑ontological background, he overlooks the fact that such descriptions cannot be universally applicable, even within localized cultural contexts, as they elevate the pre‑ reflexive to a reflexive level. To address these issues, the article advocates for a shift from the concept of immanent frame to that of immanent logics, drawing on Wittgenstein’s rule‑following concept. This approach allows for a more pluralistic understanding of secularity, avoiding claims to provide a universal interpretation of the world and the self in the secular age. The article concludes by discussing the implications of this shift for both the historical study of secularization and current normative reflection.
Keywords
Supporting agencies: The study was funded by the Russian Science Foundation — research project No. 24–78– 10104 ‘The problem of dialogue between Christian tradition and secular modernity in Russian religious philosophy: prospects for post-secular theory’, https://rscf.ru/ project/24–78–10104/
References
1. Бейкер Г. П., Хакер П. М.С. Скептицизм, правила и язык. М.: Канон+, 2008.
2. Бергер П. Л. Десекуляризация мира: общий обзор // Религиозная жизнь. 02.12.2023 [https://religious-life.ru/2023/12/berger-desecularization-of-the-world/, доступ от 02.10.2024].
3. Вебер М. Основные социологические понятия // Социологическое обозрение. 2008. Т. 7. № 2. С. 89–127.
4. Витгенштейн Л. Философские исследования // Философские работы. Часть I. М.: Гнозис, 1994. С. 75–319.
5. Волков В. В. «Следование правилу» как социологическая проблема // Социологический журнал. 1998. № 3/4. С. 13–27. EDN: PZQJVN
6. Волков В. В. Проблема необратимости // Социологическое обозрение. 2023. Т. 22. № 2. С. 9–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/1728–192x-2023–2–9–28; EDN: AAPWDO
7. Глухов А. А. Философская ясность: Хайдеггер равно Гитлер // Логос. 2018. Т. 28. № 3. С. 91–120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22394/0869–5377–2018–3–91–117; EDN: XYZLAT
8. Крипке С. А. Витгенштейн о правилах и индивидуальном языке. М.: Канон+, 2010.
9. Лейбниц Г. В. Монадология // Сочинения в четырех томах. Т. I. М.: Мысль, 1982. С. 413–429.
10. Павлов И. И. Контексты философии и намерения философов: в защиту интеллектуально-исторического подхода к историко-философскому исследованию // Философия. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2024. Т. 8. № 3. С. 209–247.
11. Рорти Р. Витгенштейн, Хайдеггер и реификация языка // Мартин Хайдеггер: сб. статей. СПб.: РХГИ, 2004. С. 323–344.
12. Сокулер З. А. Проблема следования правилу: где недостающая масса? // Следование правилу: рассуждение, разум, рациональность. СПб.: Алетейя, 2014. С. 423–436. EDN: TKWZDZ
13. Тейлор Ч. Секулярный век. М.: ББИ, 2017.
14. Узланер Д. А. Картография постсекулярного // Постсекулярный поворот. Как мыслить о религии в XXI веке. М.: Изд-во Института Гайдара, 2020. С. 178–211.
15. Узланер Д. А. Конец религии? История теории секуляризации. М.: ИД ВШЭ, 2019.
16. Уинч П. Идея социальной науки и ее отношение к философии. М.: Русское феноменологическое общество, 1996.
17. Феррандо Ф. Философский постгуманизм. М.: ИД ВШЭ, 2022.
18. Филиппов А. Ф. Элементарная социология. Введение в историю дисциплины. М.: Рипол-классик, Панглосс, 2019.
19. Хабермас Ю. Модерн — незавершенный проект // Политические работы. М.: Праксис, 2005. С. 7–31.
20. Хабермас Ю. Против «воинствующего атеизма». «Постсекулярное» общество — что это такое? // Исламский портал. 04.01.2011 [https://www.islam-portal.ru/communication/stat/100/1411/, доступ от 02.10.2024].
21. Хайдеггер М. Бытие и время. М.: Ad Marginem, 1997.
22. Ямпольская А. В. Феноменология в Германии и Франции: проблемы метода. М.: РГГУ, 2013. EDN: SCGQJN
23. Bell, D. (2024) Communitarianism, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 07.06.2024 [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/communitarianism/, accessed on 02.10.2024]. Browne, C. and Lynch, A. (2018) Taylor and Politics: A Critical Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748691937.001.0001
24. Crittenden, P.J. (2009) “A Secular Age: Reflections on Charles Taylor′s Recent Book”, Sophia 48 (4): 469–478.
25. Eisenstadt, S. (2000) “Multiple Modernities”, Daedalus 129 (1): 1–29.
26. Gifford, P. (2019) The Plight of Western Religion: The Eclipse of the Other‑Worldly. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190095871.001.0001
27. Inglehart, R.F. (2021) Religion’s Sudden Decline. What’s Causing It, and What Comes Next? New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197547045.001.0001; EDN: CVCEKM
28. Kasselstrand, I., Zuckerman, P., Cragun, R. T. (2023) Beyond Doubt. The Secularization of Society. New York: New York University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9781479814305.001.0001
29. Kinsey, J. (2010) “A Secular Age — By Charles Taylor”, Philosophical Investigations 33 (1): 75–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9205.2009.01400.x
30. Koenig, M. (2016) “Beyond the Paradigm of Secularization?”, in G. Vanheeswijck, C. Jager, and F. Zemmin (eds.) Working with a Secular Age: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Charles Taylor’s Master Narrative, pp. 23–48. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
31. McKenzie, G. (2017) Interpreting Charles Taylor’s Social Theory on Religion and Secularization: A Comparative Study. Cham: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978–3–319–47700–8
32. Pollack, D. and Rosta, G. (2017) Religion and Modernity. An International Comparison. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198801665.001.0001
33. Putnam, H. (1996) “On Wittgenstein’s Philosophy of Mathematics”, Aristotelian Society Supplementary 70: 243–264.
34. Raza, S. (2023) “Max Weber and Charles Taylor: On Normative Aspects of a Theory of Human Action”, Journal of Classical Sociology 23 (1): 97–136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468795x221080770; EDN: XXDORL
35. Taylor, Ch. (1989) Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
36. Taylor, Ch. (1992) “The Politics of Recognition”, in A. Gutmann (ed.) Multiculturalism and “The Politics of Recognition”, pp. 25–73. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
37. Taylor, Ch. (1995) “To Follow a Rule”, in Philosophical Arguments, pp. 165–180. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
38. Taylor, Ch. (2007) A Secular Age. Cambridge (MA) and London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
39. Taylor, Ch. (2010) “Challenging Issues about the Secular Age”, Modern Theology 26 (3): 404–416. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468–0025.2010.01615.x
40. Taylor, Ch. (2012) “What Was the Axial Revolution?”, in R. N. Bellah and H. Joas (eds.) The Axial Age and Its Consequences, pp. 30–46. Cambridge (MA) and London: Harvard University Press.
41. Zemmin, F. (2016) “An Annotated Bibliography of Responses to A Secular Age”, in G. Vanheeswijck, C. Jager, and F. Zemmin (eds.) Working with a Secular Age: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Charles Taylor’s Master Narrative, pp. 385–419. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
42. Zweerde, E. van der (2014) “On the Political (Pre-)Conditions of Philosophical Culture”, Transcultural Studies 10 (1): 63–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/23751606–01001006
Review
For citations:
Pavlov I.I. From Immanent Frame to Immanent Logics: Developing Ch. Taylor’s Secularization Theory. State, Religion and Church in Russia and Worldwide. 2025;43(2):238–265. (In Russ.)
Views:
33
Email this article 