Thinking Our Common World. Conditions of Intercultural Coexistence in Jürgen Habermas andEilert Herms

不同的文化和宗教如何在同一个世界中共存？在我们这个联系日益紧密的世界里，越来越多的社会问题需要全球化的答案。人们可能会想到气候变化、金融市场监管和安全政策等问题。国际社会必须共同解决这些问题。但是在什么基础上可以解决这些问题呢？有些人认为，由于文化的冲突，很难或不可能达成共识（塞缪尔·亨廷顿），而另一些人则认为，人类是通过普遍的理性联系在一起的。那么，我们能思考和争论一个共同的世界吗？我的工作旨在通过观察宗教与理性的相互关系来分析使共存成为可能的条件。为此，我分析了哲学家哈贝马斯（j<s:1> rgen Habermas）和神学家赫尔姆斯（Eilert Herms）的著作，他们的立场可以被视为在根本上相互对立。对于哈贝马斯来说，交往理性是核心，因为它连接并使我们能够在普遍的基础上交换我们的论点。一方面，宗教对哈贝马斯来说变得越来越重要，因为他认为宗教在维系社会的过程中扮演着重要的角色。但它们对交流理由和论点的交际过程没有影响。从一开始，这种对话语理性的公开运用就是针对整个人类的。到目前为止，它对于“后国家星座”的全球宪法的平等与和平发展是必不可少的（哈贝马斯）。对赫尔姆斯来说，我们对世界的看法是由我们对生活的看法决定的，而我们对生活的看法又以宗教经验为基础。人类最基本的区别是宗教差异。理性的运用总是依赖于这种差异。没有一个普遍的理由可以引导我们走向一个平等的社会。我们需要理解并解决我们之间的分歧。因此，全球化的难题只能通过尊重人性的本质来解决，这对赫尔姆斯来说意味着理解宗教观在政治、经济甚至科学中所起的基本作用。我自己的作品试图结合这些主角的见解，表明宗教和理性可能是相互竞争的力量，但它们也有互补的作用。特殊性和普遍性都是人类理解和能动性的核心要素，都在塑造共同世界的过程中发挥着重要作用。在这个不断发展的世界——社会——中，关于如何处理我们的宗教差异的讨论是给平等主义与和平共处一个机会的唯一可能方式。

How can different cultures and religions coexist in one world? In our increasingly connected world a growing number of societal issues require globalized answers. One may think of problems like climate change, the regulation of financial markets and security policies. The world-community must tackle these problems together. But on what basis can these be addressed? Whereas some posit that a common understanding is difficult or impossible due to the clash of cultures (Samuel Huntington), others argue that humanity is connected through universal reason. So can we think and argue for a common world?My work aims at analyzing the conditions of making coexistence possible by looking at the interrelationship of religion and reason. For this purpose I analyse the works of the philosopher Jürgen Habermas and the theologian Eilert Herms whose positions can be seen as opposing each other in a fundamental manner. For Habermas communicative reason is central for it connects and enables us to exchange our arguments on a universal basis. Religions on the one hand have become more important to Habermas as he sees that they play a fundamental role in holding societies together. But they are not of influence to the communicative process in the exchange of reasons and arguments. From the start this public use of discursive reason is aimed at humanity as a whole. Insofar it is essential for the egalitarian and peaceful development of a global constitution for the ¿postnational constellation¿ (Habermas). For Herms our outlook on the world is defined by our vision of life, which in turn is based on religious experience. The most basic distinction of human beings is religious difference. The use of reason is always dependent on this difference. There is no universal reason which can guide us toward an egalitarian society. We need to understand and work through our differences. Hence the difficult issues of globalization can only be dealt with in respecting the nature of humanity, which for Herms means understanding the fundamental role religious outlooks play in politics, economics and even science. My own work attempts to combine the insights of these protagonists by showing that religion and reason may be rivaling forces, but they also have complementary roles. Both the particular and the universal are core elements of human understanding and agency, both play essential parts in the process of shaping a common world. The discursive exchange of arguments about how our religious differences can be dealt with in the growing world-society is the only possible manner of giving egalitarian and peaceful coexistence a chance.