This paper reviews the debate between Jürgen Habermas and Ernst Tugendhat around the problem of the foundation of morality. In addition to the main criticisms developed by Tugendhat to the ethics of discourse and Habermas’s reply, some of the contributions to this subject by Javier Muguerza are reviewed who, together with Tugendhat, has contributed to developing what I call the new philosophies of the subject.

"The aim of this contribution is to study three central revisions that Habermas has carried out in the course of developing his theory of communicative action, together with some of the criticisms raised by those revisions. A reflection is suggested concerning whether Habermas’ project of grounding a critical theory of society on communicative action is definitively threatened after those revisions.".

This paper deals with the unexpected and singular presence of Baruj Spinoza in the recent History of Philosophy published by Jürgen Habermas. On the matter, from current perspective, spinozist ethics of immanence is considered allows to overcome deontological limits that even today condition the ethics of discourse.

The end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century was an extraordinary period in terms of the formation of the modern philosophical spirit due to the opposing positions that arose in it. Characteristic of this period was the coexistence of an unbridled faith and enthusiasm for technological development together with a no less intense pessimism with respect to the future of society. Throughout the twentieth century several thinkers devoted their time to reflect on technology and its (...) social interrelations. This paper is divided into three parts. The first is intended to be a journey and an approach to the formation of the philosophy of technology as a discipline. The second part situates Habermas in the midst of a constellation of philosophers related to the Frankfurt School. The last part deals with the debate between Habermas and Sloterdijk on the limits of biotechnology facing the 21st century. (shrink)

The aim of this paper is to defend the following thesis: although Habermas’ turn from «utopia of labour» to «utopia of communication» enables him to better understand some social movements that emerged since 1970s, a defence of social State necessarily need to resort to the steering media «money» and «power». In order to prove this thesis, I first place Habermas’ criticism to welfare State in the context of his career. Then, I analyse Habermas’ criticism to the reificating potential of the (...) steering media «power». Lastly, I try to prove that the kind of commitments undertaken by the social State since his configuration in the mid-20th century cannot be satisfied with the media of action coordination that Habermas calls «solidarity». (shrink)

This paper deals with the main importance of gender perspective in Critical Theory. So, first, it exposes some elements of the exchange between Nancy Fraser and Jürgen Habermas on the social activity of childrearing. Then, N. Fraser’s interpretation of the theory of the crisis of capitalism seen from the crisis of care is presented. These issues would help us to understand the complex and dynamic link between the gender order and capitalism.

Habermas shares with Kant the commitment to the posible, the ideal and duty to be moral, and with Hegel, the critique of the abstract carácter of kantian possibility and ought-be, as well as the realistic attention to the conditions of the really posible and the ideal. In this paper I intend to show that the confluence of such motifs, Kantian and Hegelian, in Habermas’ thought allows us to detect the keys to a conception of what should be and the ideal (...) that does justice to the two essential features of what is really posible: the refence to the future and to conditions embedded in the real. (shrink)

In the face of the criticism raised against Habermas distinction between morality and ethics and its universalist foundation of morality, it is argued that the priority of moral objectives results constitutively out of the normative reflection structure of the thinking subject, on which depend both the life objectives and corresponding social order in the specific contexts, as well as the personal ones; expanding, thus, the frame of the structurally constitutive in practical reflection. Additionally, the persistence of the Kantian moral thinking (...) in the foundational architecture of ED is reconsidered. (shrink)

This paper explores the philosophical debate between Muguerza and Habermas, starting with the meeting of the two in the summer of 1994 in Madrid. To this end, some of the core aspects of their respective ethical and legal thoughts are interpreted and apostilled, both in their agreements and in their disagreements. The text focuses on the controversy between two of their apparently irreducible positions. Namely, the “primacy of the moral conscience of the individual”, defended by Muguerza, and the “primacy of (...) the legal law of society”, advocated by Habermas. The paper concludes by suggesting a third approach, which methodically tempers the controversy, in reference to the duality of the “individual” constituted in-intra-societal relationship, and the “society” instituted by individuals-in-inter-relationship. (shrink)