Towards a decolonized assessment of the religious other

When confronted by the plurality of religions (and the corresponding plurality of claims to truth), believers usually resort either to absolutism or relativism. The absolutist evaluates the religious other in view of criteria with which the latter does not agree. The religious other is thus being colonized by a hegemony (i.e. enforced homogeneity) of standards. In an attempt to transcend this hegemonic colonization, the relativist, on the other hand, simply surrenders the evaluation of the beliefs and practices of the religious other to subjective arbitrariness. This attempt at the decolonization of the religious other defeats itself, in so far as it deprives us of the right to criticise the beliefs and practices of any other, including the colonizing other. Avoiding both absolutism and relativism calls for an interreligious common scale which will, as such, allow the ‘objective’ or non-arbitrary evaluation of religious beliefs and practices. This scale can only, if at all, be identified through an ongoing interreligious dialogue which respects the particularity, individuality and historicity—or, in short, the non-foundational nature—of both religious and meta-religious beliefs. As such, interreligious dialogue constitutes the first step towards an effective decolonization of the religious other.