Complexities of discussing 'religion' in the colonial context

In this meeting we discuss chapter 2 “Disciplining Religion” from the book Orientalism and Religion: Postcolonial Theory, India and ‘the mystic East’ from Richard King. These were some of the main topics and questions raised in the dialogue:

1. Meaning of religion and language 

Question of the concept of religion and its relationship with language. Different understanding on religion based on its etymology. The semantic shift in the meaning of religion also implied a philosophical shift in the meaning of the concept. 

Over-determination of how we think about religion by Christianity and the legacies of Christianity in secularism. Secularism as a product of Enlightenment and response of Christianity, in this sense is a post-Christian narrative. Questions about how we understand secularism beyond its origin today and specially in postcolonial societies. 

2. Modern and colonial construction of religion and its sociopolitical implications 

More than an etymological or epistemological question of the concept of religion the problem is also the consequences and sociopolitical effects with the modern and colonial imposition of religion. 

Another problem is how religion was constructed and characterized by the Enlightenment as backward and in a hierarchical relation with reason. The question about religion is also what were and are the values attached to it? 

Blurred boundaries of what we term as religion and other experiences that come with myths, spiritual beliefs, cosmologies, etc. 

Questions of what is the role of religion in Europe and postcolonial states. 

Problem of secularism. 

Problem of religion been relegated to the private sphere in secular states. What is the situation of immigrants in secular countries? What are the dangers when religion is relegated to the private sphere? But also is important to consider how non-secular state can also be dangerous for minorities. 

3. Questions of methodology, framework and concepts 

Comments about Derridean deconstruction or Foucaultian genealogical method (revealing the fragment of the West) for questioning religion. 

Problem and paradox of attempting to understand religion in postcolonial societies due to their still modern, Christian and colonial framework. 

Question of whether we should move beyond these categories and what does it means to think beyond non-Western categories. 

Should we reformulate Western concepts or think beyond them?

Questions about the category of the West. Reference to Said and Anibal Quijano in the construction of the East, the West and Americas. 

When did postcolonial or critical theories started referring to the West? 

What happen when we think from somewhere else? How do we start doing that? 

Comments about the efforts of the Caribbean Philosophy Association in their project of “Shifting the geographies of reason” and “Creolizing philosophy”.

Question about what it means to think from a place and time. 

How do we think from other geographies and time when we read it from a particular geography and time?  How do we account for how we read those other geographies and time here if we consider important the difference of time and space? 

Problem of falling in either extreme of abstracting and generalizing from different experiences or falling in a historicism that reduce the problem to history and culture. 

To what extent is all history and place? How do we understand place and history? Are we understanding it as context?