Reddit reply in r/AcademicQuran: what do you think about this one — June 6, 2024 · l7ewagr | Ali Shukri Amin

>I preface this by saying that if you do not want to have this discussion here, no problem, but I don't see a better social media platform to discuss this than this website.

Reddit isn't the problem, it's fine for long-form discussion. The issue is that I think we would be better served discussing this over the actual literature and engaging with the texts over a longer time-frame, as opposed to back-and-forth internet comments. Without the background in philosophical literature, the conversation may end up being fruitless, where it could have been more mutually beneficial in the light of the texts. There's too much context that's required.

> And herein lies an issue: we are talking past one another. If I simply type "define secularism" into google, I get: "the principle of separation of the state from religious institutions." Wikipedia's opening sentence is a little different: "Secularism is the principle of seeking to conduct human affairs based on naturalistic considerations, uninvolved with religion."

> It's clear that the word secularism can be used in different ways. I think you should be clear about what you mean when you use the word "secularism". What I refer to is simply the absence of formal intellectual commitance to or operation according to a particular religious worldview/philosophy.

I am referring to secularism as it exists in the real world according to historical considerations, philosophy, and actual application. These definitions you quoted are not actually secularism. This is the problem. The common conceptualization of secularism is ahistorical, contradicting the intellectual history of secularism and its application in the real world. It is highly problematic.

If you assume that secularism is "the separation of church and state" or "conducting human affairs in the absence of religion" you have already made fundamentally incorrect assumptions. Arguing from those premises can only lead to further error. That's not what secularism actually is.

In reality, secularism is a way of life with its own features and assertions about the place of the neoumenon in thinking and reality. It is not in the absence of religion. I think the term religion itself is extremely problematic, as it is a way to compartmentalize belief systems that were integral to day-to-day life for the purpose of making them subservient to secularism. There is no secular-religious dichotomy outside of the secular framework itself.