The positivist origins of secularism (laïcité) "à la française" : God is no more public concern

The excellent Quebec periodics Argument published this month (January 2016) on its website an article about secularism and positivism that I submitted  them.  Thanks to them!

http://www.revueargument.ca/article/2016-01-06/658-les-origines-positivistes-de-la-laicite-a-la-francaise--dieu-nest-plus-dordre-public.html

Summary of main points:

 

Québec and Canada have, like many other countries, to deal with the issue of secularism, from reasonable accommodation to unacceptable concessions.  Everywhere,  in France also there is this debate  between Liberals supporting  a  more 'open', more 'modern' secularism, supporters of traditional secularism "à la française" and "uncompromising" Republicans and tenants of the anglo-saxon multiculturalism

According to positivist conception of secularism, secularism is the result of an evolution of mentalities and societies under the law of the three states (Theology, metaphysics, positivist or scientific)

Positivism lays down the principle of a universal evolution of civilization ; inevitably facing not only the results but the methods of modern science, all civilizations will evolve towards a form of secularism.

The separation of the churches and the State (God is no more public concern, but only private matter)) is only one aspect of a more general principle, that of the separation of temporal and spiritual authorities (who acts on opinion), principle which is the real base of freedom - the real anti-totalitarian principle

The theological public order, destroyed, should be replaced; Positivists insist on  the definition and the teaching of a secular morality, which  they think superior to theological morals, for its effectiveness, and also because that man does not do good for fear of divine punishment, but by education and the altruistic feelings culture: "Man is a citizen of  Earth, not Heaven " (Pierre Laffitte) f

For individuals, positivist secularism fulfils the promise of emancipation from the Cartesianism and the Enlightemnts.  It allows the crossing of the great gap, following the word of Auguste Comte, between  “slaves of God  and servants of Humanity”

No society, wrote Auguste Comte,  can live without a "common social doctrine": "In a population where the necessary involvement of individuals in public order can no longer be determined by the moral, voluntary consent granted by everyone to a common social doctrine, the only remaining  expedient,  to maintain  harmony, is the sad alternative of force or corruption”. Secularism is therefore at the heart of the common social doctrine of the Republic, it is not negotiable, and in this sense the secular State is not neutral: it can process the same way doctrines that accept and those who reject secularism, and a number of other related values (such equality of rights between religions, sex, race, sexual orientation, freedom of expression, including blasphemy, freedom of apostasy...) Freedom of expression must be respected, but certainly some  behaviours contrary to our common social doctrine,  and, of course,  threats, pressures, not to mention violence are not tolerable. It is the role of the polticians  to determine empirically if accommodations are desirable and useful, but they can only be very temporary and very limited; in the France of Jules Ferry, they were limited to sometimes wait for the rehabilitation of the classes to remove the crucifix, recently reminded Mona Ozouf

http://www.revueargument.ca/article/2016-01-06/658-les-origines-positivistes-de-la-laicite-a-la-francaise--dieu-nest-plus-dordre-public.html