The secular as epistemic category and secularism as doctrine need separating analytically

Evidence

What is the connection between “the secular” as an epistemic category and “secularism” as a political doctrine? Can they be objects of anthropological inquiry? What might an anthropology of secularism look like? This book attempts, in a preliminary way, to address these questions. — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 16

Categorization

• DEFINE: Frames the book’s core distinction between the secular (epistemic) and secularism (political doctrine).
• QUESTION: The reader is building a bridge to Cooper; Asad’s framing question anchors what the anthropology-of-secularism approach will supply.
• XREF: connects to: Secularism is not a neutral doctrine but a modern construct redefining religion and politics — Nadim N. Rouhana and Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, When Politics Are Sacralized:…, 295; Secularism can only arise from within theological discourse, not against it — Nadim N. Rouhana and Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, When Politics Are Sacralized:…, 375