Abstract
The task of this paper is to argue against the opponents of Habermas’ institutional translation proviso. The opponents argue against Habermas on the grounds that 1) religious utterances are like cultural differences, ethnic differences and philosophical differences, 2) there are numerous cultures with their distinct religious potential truth contents that are not scientifically demonstrable. The latter argument is based on Occult/Paranormal experiences which are realities of life, hence should be allowed into the public sphere. However, this paper argues that religious utterances as Habermas articulates them are not equiparable to cultural, ethnic and philosophical differences and also that, Occult/Paranormal experiences are restricted to few adepts in it, hence, lacking general accessibility. In mind of our increasingly pluralistic society, there is need for common understanding of religious potential truth contents for general agreement and unity of purpose. Hence, we say that anyone who wants to bring religious potential truth contents into the public sphere seems to have no option other than to translate them into secular language for common understanding. It is based on common understanding that participants in the public sphere enter into a meaningful rational-critical debate resulting in mutual agreement.
Highlights
In recent times, the phenomena of public sphere and religion seem to have taken the centre stage in intellectual discourse and many intellectuals have joined the fray in the bid to provide a philosophical principle that will provide a comfy place for religion in the world’s volatile pluralistic society
Nwoye help provide a comfortable place for religion in our world that Habermas postulated his principle of institutional translation proviso which means that religious potential truth contents must be “translated” in the course of informal public sphere into secular reasons that have general accessibility or language shared by all, before they are transferred to governmental institutions like parliament, court, etc
This paper will argue against the critics’ claim of inadequacy of Habermas’s institutional translation proviso with a discourse based on “Ogwu” phenomenon found in Igbo traditional religion under the general canopy of Occult/Paranormal experiences
Summary
The phenomena of public sphere and religion seem to have taken the centre stage in intellectual discourse and many intellectuals have joined the fray in the bid to provide a philosophical principle that will provide a comfy place for religion in the world’s volatile pluralistic society. D. Nwoye help provide a comfortable place for religion in our world that Habermas postulated his principle of institutional translation proviso which means that religious potential truth contents must be “translated” in the course of informal public sphere into secular reasons that have general accessibility or language shared by all, before they are transferred to governmental institutions like parliament, court, etc. This paper will argue against the critics’ claim of inadequacy of Habermas’s institutional translation proviso with a discourse based on “Ogwu” (an aggressive, harmful medicine) phenomenon found in Igbo traditional religion under the general canopy of Occult/Paranormal experiences. The paper concludes with meaningful recommendations for peaceful co-existence in pluralistic society
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
