David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy and Social Criticism 25 (2):1-25 (1999)
This paper seeks to show that the proposition of 'double contingency' introduced by Parsons and defended by Luhmann and Habermas is insufficient under the conditions of contemporary communication societies. In the latter context, the increasing differentiation and organization of communication processes eventuated in the recognition of the epistemic authority of the public, which in turn compels us to conceptualize a new level of contingency. A first step is therefore taken to capture the role of the public in communication societies theoretically by what may be called 'triple contingency'. Since the process of the definition of reality and its outcome, to which the response of the public is central, is best seen in constructivist terms, attention is also paid to relevant methodological and epistemological questions. Key Words: cognitive turn communication constructivism double contingency Habermas Luhmann observation Parsons situationalism the third point of view.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Robert Gascoigne (2001). The Public Forum and Christian Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
Mark Whipple (2005). The Dewey-Lippmann Debate Today: Communication Distortions, Reflective Agency, and Participatory Democracy. Sociological Theory 23 (2):156-178.
Hsin-I. Liu (2006). The Impossibility of the Public. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 2:119-124.
May Thorseth (2008). Reflective Judgment and Enlarged Thinking Online. Ethics and Information Technology 10 (4):221-231.
Drew Pierce (2007). Toward a Critique of Systematically Distorting Communication Technology: Habermas, Baudrillard, and Mass Media. Philosophical Explorations 22:89-102.
Bryan Renne (2008). Public and Private Communication Are Different: Results on Relative Expressivity. Synthese 165 (2):225 - 245.
Dirk-Martin Grube & Peter Jonkers (eds.) (2008). Religions Challenged by Contingency: Theological and Philosophical Approaches to the Problem of Contingency. Brill.
Drew Pierce (2006). Toward a Critique of Systematically Distorting Communication Technology. Social Philosophy Today 22:89-102.
Piet Strydom (2001). The Problem of Triple Contingency in Habermas. Sociological Theory 19 (2):165-186.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #146,014 of 1,101,075 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #290,337 of 1,101,075 )
How can I increase my downloads?