Is tolerance an achievement of secular modernity that religion has always resisted? The Concept of Tolerance in Judaism, Christianity and Islam (De Gruyter, 2026), the seventh volume in the Key Concepts in Interreligious Discourses series, says the answer is more complicated. Edited by Catharina Rachik and Georges Tamer of FAU Erlangen-Nuremberg, the book gives one substantial chapter to each tradition and closes with an epilogue in which the editors compare the three.

Menachem Kellner draws on Maimonides to build a Jewish account of tolerance grounded in epistemological humility. The Torah is true, but no human mind, not even Moses’s, grasps that truth completely. Christian Polke treats tolerance as a virtue practiced in the habits of a community, especially in the confession of sin and in reading scripture critically. Anna Akasoy declines to ask whether Islam is “essentially” tolerant or intolerant. She asks instead why that question keeps being put to Islam, and then traces how Muslims have handled difference across scripture, law, theology, Sufism, and political rule.

In this conversation, Tamer and Rachik discuss the series’ “archaeology of religious knowledge.” They explain why “tolerance” works as an analytical category rather than a historical one, and why the limits of tolerance require public justification. Finally, they argue that naming irreconcilable differences gives interreligious life a sturdier foundation than a manufactured consensus. Taking a cue from Goethe, they make the case for moving beyond tolerance toward recognition.

Iqbal Akhtar teaches in the Departments of Religious Studies and Politics & International Relations at Florida International University and is the Executive Director of The East-West Foundation. He is the author of Covenantal Pluralism: The Geopolitics of Interfaith Religious Freedom (Springer, 2026), available open access at this link.

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Today I’m speaking with Peter N. Miller, historian and president of the American Academy in Rome, about his new book, Research: A Manifesto (Princeton University Press, 2026). Globally, we spend around $3 trillion dollars a year on research, roughly 2% of global GDP. This activity is the source of many breakthroughs and innovations, not only in the sciences but in all domains of life. Without research, we wouldn’t have as detailed an understanding of past events or cures to once-deadly diseases. Research, however, is also a source of skepticism and suspicion. The activity conjures fears of viral lab leaks, misaligned artificial intelligence, deadly weapons of war, and wasting of taxpayer money. Research: A Manifesto presents a history of the idea and activity of research to demystify a process that despite being so prevalent is so little understood. Research is at the heart of our contemporary world, inextricably tied to the forces that drive society. Peter’s research on research is thus invaluable today.

Caleb Zakarin is CEO and Publisher of the New Books Network.

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

From the inside flap:

“

In this lucid and inventive work, Ian Buchanan argues that the pivotal concepts ‘assemblage’ and ‘affect,’ which were separated at birth, need to be reunited. Indeed, it is only by bringing them back together that we can fully understand their meaning. of Assemblage Theory and Affect (Bloomsbury, 2026) proposes three agenda-setting arguments:

1. Affect is a function of desire—its powers are the powers we attribute to desire. As such, like desire it should be considered a psychical agency. The assemblage, the body without organs and the abstract machine are all components of this psychical agency.

2. Affect is a capacitating power—it empowers us to meet life. Affect is not the measure of our response to a given stimulus, it is rather the capacity we have to respond to a stimulus in the way that we do. This is the essential argument of Deleuze and Guattari’s schizoanalytic project which is a kind of survivor’s guide to late capitalism.

3. The capacitating power of affect depends upon the combinations of bodies without organs and abstract machines that we have been able to put together by means of the assemblages available to us. This is what Deleuze means by an ethics of desire.

”

Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University

nathan.smith@yale.edu

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.