Graduate studies at Western
Philosophy and Social Criticism 26 (6):21-45 (2000)
|Abstract||This article takes issue with the formalism problem arguably pertaining to Habermas's conception of communicative rationality and discursive justification. Beginning with the Hegelian premises of Habermas's theory of mutual understanding and communicative rationality, the article proceeds to make Kant's doctrine of reflective judgement fruitful for a critique of Habermas's restriction of reasons to discursively articulated endorsements, the 'force of the better reasons'. The argument consists in showing that discursive justification must rely upon endorsements of particulars exhibited in right judgements, and that such endorsements must be expressed or articulated to yield public manifestations of discursive orientations and commitments, constituting what is referred to as 'communicative experience'. On the account presented here, the rational significance of particulars is revealed in the expressive attitude that allows or admits non-discursive constraints to the conception of rational justification. The promise of such an account - as premised upon Kant's insights in his third Critique - consists in its capability to avoid the one-sided formalism of discursive rationality, incorporating ethical, expressive and aesthetic dimensions to our rational self-conception. Key Words: aesthetic experience communicative experience concrete other discourse-ethics ethical life feminism Habermas Hegel Kant morality rational justification reflective judgement world-disclosure.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
G. Khan (2012). Politics and Morality in Habermas' Discourse Ethics. Philosophy and Social Criticism 38 (2):149-168.
Ali Mesbah, Religion, Rationality, and Language : A Critical Analysis of Jürgen Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action.
Arash Abizadeh (2007). On the Philosophy/Rhetoric Binaries: Or, is Habermasian Discourse Motivationally Impotent? Philosophy and Social Criticism 33 (4):445-472.
Pablo Gilabert (2006). Considerations on the Notion of Moral Validity in the Moral Theories of Kant and Habermas. Kant-Studien 97 (2):210-227.
Eva Erman (2006). Reconciling Communicative Action with Recognition: Thickening the ‘Inter’ of Intersubjectivity. Philosophy and Social Criticism 32 (3):377-400.
Piet Strydom (2006). Intersubjectivity – Interactionist or Discursive? Reflections on Habermas’ Critique of Brandom. Philosophy and Social Criticism 32 (2):155-172.
Lawrence B. Solum (1989). Freedom of Communicative Action. Northwestern University Law Review 83 (1):54-135.
David M. Rasmussen & James Swindal (eds.) (2002). Jürgen Habermas. Sage Publications.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #29,898 of 739,396 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,396 )
How can I increase my downloads?