\n| Typical question<\/td>\n | “How decisive should religious authority be in public choices?”<\/td>\n | “How does the state regulate religious matters?”<\/td>\n | “Does a god really exist?”<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n To summarize: secularism is a way of life<\/em> and a question of public reason<\/em>; laicism is a principle of institutional separation<\/em>; atheism is a metaphysical position<\/em>. While all three often coexist, they cannot conceptually replace one another.<\/p>\n<\/span>The History of Secularization and Laicism in Turkey<\/span><\/h2>\nIn the late Ottoman period, the Tanzimat (1839) and Islahat (1856) edicts took the first steps toward distancing the apparatus of state from religious foundations. Under the Republic, a sharp legal-institutional break followed:<\/p>\n \n- 1924<\/strong> \u2014 Abolition of the Caliphate and the Unification of Education Law, consolidating education under one authority.<\/li>\n
- 1926<\/strong> \u2014 Adoption of the Turkish Civil Code based on the Swiss Civil Code; positive law supplants religious law in family, inheritance and personal matters.<\/li>\n
- 1928<\/strong> \u2014 Removal of the clause “The religion of the state is Islam” from the Constitution; transition to the Latin alphabet.<\/li>\n
- 1937<\/strong> \u2014 Direct inclusion of laicism in Article 2 of the 1924 Constitution.<\/li>\n
- 1982 Constitution<\/strong> \u2014 Laicism is among the immutable principles whose amendment cannot even be proposed (Art. 4).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
This legal architecture brings Turkey close to a “French-style” strict laicism model: the state reserves certain rights of oversight over religion (via the Diyanet \u0130\u015fleri Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131) while guaranteeing the non-religious functioning of the public sphere. Sociologically, however, Turkey does not fit the classical European secularization thesis: religious practice and secular life often interweave in the daily routine of a single individual. In 2026 Turkey, hybrid practices such as digital piety, conditional fasting and “Ramadan secularism” are current manifestations of this intertwining.<\/p>\n <\/span>The Post-Secular Age and the 2026 Agenda<\/span><\/h2>\nThroughout the 20th century, many thinkers assumed religion would fade. Yet the 21st century is defined by religion’s growing public visibility, the rise of new forms of piety, and the global political weight of religious identities. The sociologist Peter L. Berger, who for years had championed the classical secularization thesis, retracted it in his 1999 essay The Desecularization of the World<\/em>, conceding that modernity and religiosity may rise in tandem.<\/p>\nHabermas’s notion of the “post-secular society” is the philosophical counterpart of this reality: secular institutions and religious citizens may share a common public ground for deliberation without seeing one another as alien. On this view, the secular individual must learn to translate the religious citizen’s arguments, while the religious citizen must learn to share their argument through publicly accessible reasoning.<\/p>\n As of 2026, debates over AI ethics, biomedical limits (gene editing, cloning), and climate justice \u2014 both in Turkey and globally \u2014 have moved far beyond the classical laicism debate, reopening the question of “where does secular morality come from?” Secularity is therefore no longer merely “the line between religion and state” but the question of how plural value systems coexist and negotiate.<\/p>\n <\/span>Secular Life Practices and Modern Identity<\/span><\/h2>\nTo understand how an individual experiences secularization in everyday life, one must look at concrete practices. Choosing secular curricula in education, treating only the civil marriage as sufficient, reducing certain religious elements in funeral rituals, taking the Gregorian calendar as default, raising children with a conscience-based rather than religion-based ethics \u2014 all of these are sociologically secular practices. According to T\u00dc\u0130K’s 2026 life-values surveys, the bulk of the urban middle class defines itself as “believing but not letting religious rules be decisive in daily decisions.” This is the concrete counterpart of Taylor’s “world of multiple options”: belief exists, yet non-religious modes of life are also legitimate, visible and socially acceptable.<\/p>\n The most important cognitive transformation secularization produces is the figure of the individual who builds personal meaning under their own responsibility. When tradition, religious authority, or community no longer single-handedly supply a framework for life, the individual must construct their own values, ethical reference points and horizon of meaning. This is at once a great freedom and the heavy responsibility modern psychology calls the “crisis of meaning.” For precisely this reason, contemporary discussions of secularism extend beyond law and politics into psychology, education, and family policy.<\/p>\n <\/span>Frequently Asked Questions<\/span><\/h2>\n1. Can a secular individual be religious?<\/strong>
\nYes. Being secular does not mean being atheist. A secular individual may live their personal faith in their own conscience while insisting that public decisions be made on non-religious, reasoned grounds. Most of Turkey’s population fits this profile.<\/p>\n2. Are secularism and laicism the same thing?<\/strong>
\nNo. Laicism speaks more to the structure of the state, secularism more to the individual’s way of life and public reasoning. A state may be laic while the society is not secularized \u2014 and vice versa.<\/p>\n3. Does the Turkish Constitution use the word “secular”?<\/strong>
\nNo. Article 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey enshrines the principle of laicism<\/em>. “Secular” is used more in academic and everyday language.<\/p>\n4. Why has the classical secularization thesis lost its validity?<\/strong>
\nBecause the 21st century has shown that religion does not entirely retreat with modernization. Sociologists like Casanova, Berger and Taylor have demonstrated that religious practice persists in altered forms, and in some geographies has even strengthened.<\/p>\n5. What exactly is a “post-secular” society?<\/strong>
\nHabermas’s term denotes a model of society in which religious and secular citizens negotiate in the same public sphere while mutually recognizing each other’s legitimacy. Mutual translation and equal citizenship are central.<\/p>\n6. Is secularism opposed to religious symbols?<\/strong>
\nNot necessarily. Some readings (French la\u00efcit\u00e9<\/em>) advocate limiting religious symbols in public space; others (the Anglo-Saxon reading) allow wide individual expression. After 2010, Turkey has shifted closer to the Anglo-Saxon reading.<\/p>\n<\/span>Sources<\/span><\/h2>\n\n- T\u00dcB\u0130TAK Encyclopedia, “Secularization” entry \u2014 https:\/\/ansiklopedi.tubitak.gov.tr\/ansiklopedi\/sekulerlesme<\/li>\n
- T\u00fcrk Dil Kurumu, Current Turkish Dictionary<\/em>, entry “secularism” \u2014 https:\/\/sozluk.gov.tr<\/li>\n
- Charles Taylor, A Secular Age<\/em>, Harvard University Press, 2007.<\/li>\n
- Jos\u00e9 Casanova, Public Religions in the Modern World<\/em>, University of Chicago Press, 1994.<\/li>\n
- J\u00fcrgen Habermas, “Notes on Post-Secular Society”, New Perspectives Quarterly<\/em>, 25(4), 2008.<\/li>\n
- Peter L. Berger (ed.), The Desecularization of the World<\/em>, Eerdmans, 1999.<\/li>\n
- Ali Bayer, Secularization and Religion<\/em>, \u0130ksad Publishing, 2022 \u2014 https:\/\/iksadyayinevi.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/SEKULERLESME-VE-DIN.pdf<\/li>\n
- Felsefe.gen.tr, “Secularism” \u2014 https:\/\/www.felsefe.gen.tr\/sekularizm\/<\/li>\n
- Sosyologer, “What Is Secularism? The Concept in Sociology” \u2014 https:\/\/www.sosyologer.com\/sekulerizm-nedir-sosyolojide-sekulerizm-kavrami\/<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
What does “secular” mean, when did secularism emerge, and how does it differ from laicism? From the Latin saeculum root to the 18th-century Enlightenment and the ongoing debates in 2026 Turkey, a complete guide with comparison table, FAQ and academic sources.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":86898,"featured_media":161489,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4601,2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-173618","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-kultur","category-yasam"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/173618","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/86898"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=173618"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/173618\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/161489"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=173618"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=173618"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=173618"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}} |
![\"what](\"https:\/\/ceotudent.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/sekuler-nedir-1024x525.jpg\")
<\/p>\n