David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Inquiry 43 (3):319 – 340 (2000)
Discourse ethics is originally conceived as a programme of philosophical justification of morality. This depends on the formal derivation of the moral principle (U) from non-moral principles. The moral theory is supposed to fall out of a pragmatic theory of meaning. The original programme plays a central role in Habermas's social theory: the moral theory, if true, provides good evidence for the more general theory of modernization. But neither Habermas nor his followers have succeeded in providing a formal derivation. This essay shows how and why Habermas's proposed derivation is impossible. As if aware of the lacuna, Habermas has recently suggested that (U) can be derived by 'abduction' rather than deduction. The proposal draws heavily on modernization theory; hence the only justification for (U) now available to him rests on premises drawn from that theory. The original programme of the justification of morality has thus given way to the weaker programme of the philosophical elucidation of morality. Further, since Habermas's moral theory is no longer justified independently of modernization theory, but at least partly by it, the moral theory cannot without circularity provide evidence for the modernization theory.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
James Gordon Finlayson (2005). Habermas's Moral Cognitivism and the Frege-Geach Challenge. European Journal of Philosophy 13 (3):319–344.
Pablo Gilabert (2005). A Substantivist Construal of Discourse Ethics. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 13 (3):405 – 437.
Dirk Ulrich Gilbert & Michael Behnam (2009). Advancing Integrative Social Contracts Theory: A Habermasian Perspective. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 89 (2):215 - 234.
Nick O'Donovan (2012). Does Deliberative Democracy Need Deliberative Democrats|[Quest]| Revisiting Habermas|[Rsquo]| Defence of Discourse Ethics. Contemporary Political Theory 12 (2):123.
James Gordon Finlayson (2007). The Habermas–Rawls DisputeRedivivus. Politics and Ethics Review 3 (1):144-162.
Similar books and articles
Farid Abdel-Nour (2004). Farewell to Justification: Habermas, Human Rights, and Universalist Morality. Philosophy and Social Criticism 30 (1):73-96.
W. S. K. Cameron (2009). Tapping Habermas's Discourse Theory for Environmental Ethics. Environmental Ethics 31 (4):339-357.
Frederick Doepke (1990). The Endorsements of Interpretation. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 20 (3):277-294.
Mathieu Deflem (ed.) (1996). Habermas, Modernity, and Law. Sage Publications.
Logi Gunnarsson (2000). Making Moral Sense: Beyond Habermas and Gauthier. Cambridge University Press.
Kenneth MacKendrick (2000). The Moral Imaginary of Discourse Ethics. Critical Horizons 1 (2):247-269.
G. Khan (2012). Politics and Morality in Habermas' Discourse Ethics. Philosophy and Social Criticism 38 (2):149-168.
Hugh Baxter (2011). Habermas: The Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Stanford Law Books.
David M. Rasmussen & James Swindal (eds.) (2002). Jürgen Habermas. Sage Publications.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #78,298 of 1,088,832 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,666 of 1,088,832 )
How can I increase my downloads?