Jürgen Habermas

Habermas’ theory of communicative action is explored as an orientation to the question of understanding which negotiates a pathway between two opposing (and complementary) theoretical frameworks—namely, hermeneutical-relational and empirical-analytical frameworks. His perspective grounds speech, action and understanding in the ethics of human relations. In his approach, understanding is fixed by particular events or situations about which intersubjective agreement must be achieved through the offer and acceptance of reasons that simultaneously orient actors to three worlds: the objective, the social and the (...) personal worlds. This approach raises the question as to whether the process of abstracting from the particular event to the general form, through such rational discourse, might create systems of understanding which silence individual expression and naming, particularly if such expression involves an identity that is not shared with others in the group. In other words, is the origin of an event or situation necessarily a null point for all actors? As this question is explored, metaphor comes to the fore as a complementary process of showing that which cannot be grounded in the dominant system of understanding. The pivot role of naming in the formal structure of Godel’s First Incompleteness Theorem for Number Theory demonstrates the challenge to Habermas’ theory. (shrink)

Since Jürgen Habermas' speech for the Peace Price of the German Book Trade in October 2001, secular reason – personified by one of its main protagonists – has been able to debate with religion anew. For the purpose of an unbiased encounter between philosophy and religion, Habermas introduced the term “postsecular” back then in order to emphasize that this dialogue was inevitably necessary, all the more in the face of religiously motivated terrorism. Nonetheless, this willingness to debate was accompanied by (...) the conviction that secular reason itself, as a matter of fact, would be “ideologically neutral”. However, taking the necessity of accomplishing the confrontation with “world” (Weltbewältigung) seriously, the reflection on world view as a whole unveils its implied tasks of granting metaphysical and existential certainty (metaphysische Sicherheit), therefore resulting in the statement that there cannot be a neutral world view at all. Only dialogue as exchange of beliefs generates the general framework within which the discursive issues of world views are separated from their existential aspects, thus enabling a reasonably conducted debate without endangering the existential certainty of its participants. As a consequence, the neutrality of world views exclusively rests in dialogue and is no unique feature of secular reason at all. Eventually, this leads to the reconsideration of the conditions that must be given for an argument to be called “rational”. The article tries to point out that an argument in political contexts, whether given by a religious or a secular person, should only be acknowledged rational if it takes at least all living people – regardless of their group affiliations – into account. (shrink)

an overly long draft of an encyclopedia article forthcoming in History of Continental Thought, Volume 6: Poststructuralism and Critical Theory: The Return of Master Thinkers, ed. Alan D. Schrift (Acumen Press).

Jouissant d'une réputation (méritée) de « pourfendeur » de la modernité libérale issue des Lumières, Alasdaire MacIntyre (né en 1929) est un auteur qui cumule les paradoxes. Philosophe analytique établi, il fait montre d'une sensibilité historique qui étonne chez un virtuose du concept. Tout en voulant promouvoir des formes de vie communautaires autour d'une conception substantielle du « Bien commun », il déclare préférer sur le plan politique les « libéraux » aux « communautariens », à son goût, trop romantiques (...) et prêts à magnifier l'Étatnation moderne. Aristotélicien, il est habité par la volonté toute hégélienne de « saisir son temps dans la pensée ». Échangeant le projet des Lumières, et sa conception d'une raison transcendant lieux et temps, contre une rationalité enracinée dans des traditions historiques, il n'en traite pas moins Burke de « mystificateur ». S'attachant à suivre le cheminement de la pensée de MacIntyre, depuis son œuvre maîtresse Après la vertu (1981), l'article vise à faire connaître un peu mieux au public français un philosophe qui semble défier tout « étiquetage ». Well known as a radical opponent to Modernity, Alasdair MacIntyre (born in 1929) is fond of paradoxes. A well established philosopher of the analytic family, he is however, sensitive to the history of philosophy and to the social sciences. An advocate of « communities » whose members share the same conception of the « common good », he is not a « communitarian ». An Aristotelian, he is also a Hegelian. Although he battled with the Enlightenment's conception of a Reason transcending space and time, he nevertheless considers Burke an inventor of intellectual illusions. Through the analysis of MacIntyre's intellectual development, starting from his masterpiece After Virtue (1981), this article aims at introducing to the French audience an « unclassifiable » philosopher. (shrink)

Presentazione del curatore italiano (C.Corradetti): È possibile conciliare il pluralismo culturale con la dimensione pubblica della deliberazione? Partendo dall’analisi critica di Rawls e Habermas, James Bohman offre una risposta innovativa alla questione dell’accordo democratico. In tale proposta, parallelamente al rigetto di soluzioni meramente strategiche, viene riabilitata la nozione di compromesso morale nel quadro di un accordo normativo. Mantenendo fede ad una prospettiva composta da elementi normativi e fattuali, l’autore si propone di ampliare le opportunità democratiche nella riconciliazione tra conflitti culturali (...) profondi propri delle società contemporanee. L’elemento civico partecipativo risulta essere dunque una componente essenziale per la produzione di una sfera pubblica vibrante. Ne emerge una ricostruzione convincente volta non solo a respingere le critiche degli scettici sulle reali possibilità d’inclusività democratica, ma diretta soprattutto a suggerire un più efficace modello deliberativo per la garanzia della stabilità sociale. Questo testo è diventato ormai un riferimento internazionale classico nella discussione sul tema della deliberazione pubblica. L’autore ha inoltre sviluppato in ambito post-nazionale il suo modello deliberativo senza tuttavia ridiscutere i fondamenti concettuali della sua proposta teorica qui enunciati.Vista la rilevanza del tema e considerata la centralità del testo proposto, sembrerebbe dunque auspicabile rendere il testo disponibile anche al lettore italiano. (shrink)

En aras del universalismo y en contra del totalitarismo, la ética discursiva ha mostrado con Jürgen Habermas un déficit práctico al negar a la filosofía moral la posibilidad de reflexionar sobre las condiciones alienantes del diálogo desde un ethos concreto. Este artículo analiza el modo en que la teoría de la resonancia formulada por Hartmut Rosa permite revitalizar el debate sobre las condiciones que pueden minar las bases para el diálogo en las sociedades aceleradas sin apoyarse en el concepto de (...) ethos, sino en el de modo de relacionarse con el mundo [Modus der Weltbeziehung]. (shrink)

For the sake of universalism and against totalitarianism, discursive ethics has shown with Jürgen Habermas a practical deficit by denying moral philosophy the possibility of reflecting on the alienating conditions for dialogue through a specific ethos. This article examines how Hartmut Rosa's theory of resonance can revitalise the debate on the conditions that can undermine the basis for dialogue in accelerated societies, based not on the concept of ethos, but on the concept of mode of world-relationship [Modus der Weltbeziehung].

O artigo apresenta o interesse crescente de Habermas pelo tema da religião a partir das noções de secularismo e pós-secularismo. Retomando aspectos fundamentais da teoria habermasiana da religião, destaca-se que a passagem do secularismo ao pós-secularismo descortinou novos eixos temáticos de seu pensamento, não sendo o paradigma pós-secular um contraponto ao horizonte pós-metafísico e secular da modernidade, mas à sua autocompreensão secularista. Palavras-chave: Habermas. Secularismo. Pós-secularismo.

O objetivo deste artigo é, ao fazer memória dos cem anos da Escola de Frankfurt e assumindo como interlocutor Jürgen Habermas, discutir dois temas importantes para nosso contexto: as questões da liberdade e da religião. Em primeiro lugar, trata-se de verificar o que significa dizer ser livre em sentido próprio. Veremos que para Habermas apenas a autonomia da vontade torna possível afirmar a liberdade em sentido próprio. Em seguida, considerando o papel da religião da esfera pública, trata-se de perguntar em (...) que medida ela pode contribuir, ou não, para a formação da vontade autônoma dos cidadãos no Estado de Direito Democrático. Isso significa questionar em que medida a religião estaria apta a contribuir para o processo de integração das sociedades atuais caracterizadas pelo pluralismo e pela coexistência de crentes, não-crentes e crentes de denominações religiosas distintas que possuem o mesmo direito ao reconhecimento e à participação no espaço público. Palavras-chave: Autonomia. Pluralismo. Pretensão à Verdade. Integração Social. (shrink)

Reading Habermas: Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere provides comprehensive guidance to understanding the complex methodologies of Habermas's global academic best seller. This timely guide parallels Habermas's publications from 2021 and 2022 about a new structural transformation of political will-formation caused primarily by the digital dominance of social media platforms.

In this reflection I draw out Richard J. Bernstein’s claim that he was a ‘scavenger’ and put it to use in revisiting main themes of his engagements with pragmatism, hermeneutics, Hegel, and critical theory. This piece is included in a memorial issue of Dewey Studies on Bernstein.

This paper is concerned with the problem of speaking past one another due to an asymmetry of the interlocutors' backgrounds. When individuals with different levels of relative privilege interact, the party with relative privilege may fail to engage with what is being communicated. I take up critical Gadamerian hermeneutics to ask how we, as individuals with relative privilege, can 'unstop' our ears so that the burden of explanation does not (unfairly) remain on those we hurt by our mishearing/non-hearing. I offer (...) two methods to achieve this 'unstopping': 'critical self-knowledge' through Quassim Cassam's 'Vice Epistemology' framework and 'critical world-knowledge' through the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory (Max Horkheimer and Jürgen Habermas, specifically). I then take up contemporary critical hermeneutics (Lorenzo Simpson) to show how, through the application of the critical methods, one might be able to achieve a useful, cross-cultural dialogue. This is imperative given our inexorably multi-cultural world today. (shrink)

A ética do discurso justifica o conteúdo de uma moralidade que salienta a simetria entre os sujeitos e a solidariedade entre todos. Para Habermas “a solidariedade é a outra face da justiça” (1999, p. 42), ou seja, são duas faces da mesma moeda. Esta é uma afirmação chave em relação ao conteúdo cognitivo do âmbito moral. A validade das normas pressupõe uma fundamentação normativa estruturada linguisticamente, de forma a vincular a justiça com a solidariedade. A ênfase está em uma razão (...) prática capaz de fundamentar princípios igualitários e universalistas da moral e do direito (2009, p. 63). A legitimação do estado de direito deve preservar sua neutralidade ideológica, alicerçada em uma moral racional, isto é, laica (ou secular). Com isso, as exigências normativas devem ser aceitas por todos em uma sociedade pluralista, formada por cidadãos de diferentes credos e, inclusive, por não crentes (HABERMAS, 2009, p. 69). (shrink)

This article argues about John Rawls' paradigm shift in contemporary political philosophy. In the article, this paradigm is defined as democratic insofar it claims, among other things, to leave enough room for democratic deliberations and citizens’ political autonomy. On this specific issue, Rawls and Habermas dialogue is still particularly fruitful. Both authors believe that contemporary political philosophy must be modest in some relevant theoretical and methodological aspects but they disagree on which of these aspects should be more or less modest. (...) This article argues that when we look for the legitimate boundaries of the contemporary political philosophy, Rawls and Habermas projects should be seen as closely complementary to one another. On the one hand, the article partially agrees with Habermas’ objections to Rawls that political philosophy should not be too modest in providing orientations for the normative grounds of the political justification. On the other hand, against Habermas, the article remains on Rawls's side on the idea that political philosophy cannot be agnostic regarding the substantive and distributive issues of social justice. (shrink)

This paper is an attempt to discuss Jürgen Habermas' thoughts of the relationship between right and power. Habermas neither advocates the separation of right and power as liberals, nor advocates the absolute integration of the two as republicans. In his view, the right to be the outcome of citizens’ spontaneous interaction must rely on coercive political power to enter into force. At the same time, political power can only obtain the legitimacy of existence in accordance with the principle of “people’s (...) sovereignty” of the discourse theory, and this legitimacy foundation is precisely reflected in the right system of communication cycle. In short, right and power restrict each other and depend on each other. (shrink)

Este artigo propõe investigar o confronto de Jürgen Habermas com Immanuel Kant e Carl Schmitt sobre os fundamentos de um projeto jurídico-político cosmopolita. Para isso, percorrendo o trajeto de Habermas entre A inclusão do outro (1996) e Sobre a constituição da Europa (2011), explora-se como ocorre esse enfrentamento e qual seu papel estratégico na conformação de um modelo jurídico-político pós-nacional. Diante disso, nota-se que Habermas, ao reivindicar o legado kantiano, tem de enfrentar os contrapontos teóricos levantados pelo pensamento de Carl (...) Schmitt quanto à autocompreensão política da modernidade. Assim, pode-se situar um eixo de fundamentação do projeto político cosmopolita e também o papel desempenhado por Schmitt no quadro mais amplo dos debates políticos e filosóficos do presente. (shrink)

This paper situates Hannah Arendt’s concept of natality between the rival concerns of Habermasian critical theory and Gadamerian hermeneutical philosophy. I argue that natality is simultaneously emancipatory and hermeneutically grounded. This is to say that Arendt affirms the possibility of reflectively disrupting precedents set by tradition, even as she refrains from overestimating the emancipatory powers of critical reflection. Through comparison with Habermas and Gadamer, it emerges that Arendt conceives of repetition and revolution as jointly constitutive of human natality. At bottom, (...) natality is not simply an innate capacity for newness, but rather refers to the site of an irreducible confrontation between past and future. (shrink)

This article discusses Jürgen Habermas’s latest book Auch eine Geschichte der Philosophie from the specific angle of what the section on Rawls indicates about the overall philosophical project pursued by Habermas. This tiny element within the imposing architecture reveals a structural problem that affects Habermas’s program for a detranscendentalization of reason. After a general premise, Habermas’s appraisal of Rawls’s work is reconstructed and critically examined. Then, in the guise of a Rawlsian rejoinder, a problematic understanding of pluralism is shown to (...) undergird Habermas’s overlooking of the ground-breaking potential of the normativity of ‘the reasonable’ and ‘the most reasonable’. Finally, this neglect is argued to be indicative of a deeper lacuna: namely, a missing confrontation with Wittgenstein’s rival path to a postmetaphysical, intersubjective, detranscentendalized reason. That lacuna, finally, invites a closer scrutiny of the overall genealogical picture and its central opposition between two pathways to the postmetaphysicization of reason. (shrink)

This article discusses Jürgen Habermas’s latest book Auch eine Geschichte der Philosophie from the specific angle of what the section on Rawls indicates about the overall philosophical project pursued by Habermas. This tiny element within the imposing architecture reveals a structural problem that affects Habermas’s program for a detranscendentalization of reason. After a general premise, Habermas’s appraisal of Rawls’s work is reconstructed and critically examined. Then, in the guise of a Rawlsian rejoinder, a problematic understanding of pluralism is shown to (...) undergird Habermas’s overlooking of the ground-breaking potential of the normativity of ‘the reasonable’ and ‘the most reasonable’. Finally, this neglect is argued to be indicative of a deeper lacuna: namely, a missing confrontation with Wittgenstein’s rival path to a postmetaphysical, intersubjective, detranscentendalized reason. That lacuna, finally, invites a closer scrutiny of the overall genealogical picture and its central opposition between two pathways to the postmetaphysicization of reason. (shrink)

This article discusses Jürgen Habermas’s latest book Auch eine Geschichte der Philosophie from the specific angle of what the section on Rawls indicates about the overall philosophical project pursued by Habermas. This tiny element within the imposing architecture reveals a structural problem that affects Habermas’s program for a detranscendentalization of reason. After a general premise, Habermas’s appraisal of Rawls’s work is reconstructed and critically examined. Then, in the guise of a Rawlsian rejoinder, a problematic understanding of pluralism is shown to (...) undergird Habermas’s overlooking of the ground-breaking potential of the normativity of ‘the reasonable’ and ‘the most reasonable’. Finally, this neglect is argued to be indicative of a deeper lacuna: namely, a missing confrontation with Wittgenstein’s rival path to a postmetaphysical, intersubjective, detranscentendalized reason. That lacuna, finally, invites a closer scrutiny of the overall genealogical picture and its central opposition between two pathways to the postmetaphysicization of reason. (shrink)

Preview:/Review: Marcin Kilanowski, The Rorty-Habermas Debate: Toward Freedom as Responsibility,, 304 pages./ The American philosopher Richard Rorty and the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas engaged in a lengthy discussion over the years on a range of issues, particularly as these issues involved the nature of liberal, democratic society following the horrors of Auschwitz. The two thinkers came from different philosophical traditions with Rorty associated with analytical philosophy and pragmatism and Habermas with Continental philosophy, the Frankfurt School, and critical theory. Both philosophers (...) saw themselves as “postmetaphysical,” rejecting traditional philosophical questions about the nature of reality and knowledge. Marcin Kilanowski, Professor of Law at Nicholas Copernicus University in Poland, offers a detailed discussion of the Rorty-Habermas debate. His book is intended for a broad audience beyond academic philosophers. He presents an exposition of both Rorty’s and Habermas’ thought, together with a comparison with those of John Dewey, who influenced them both. Kilanowski then compares and contrasts the thought of Rorty and Habermas with the goal of showing large areas of agreement, even though they philosophized in seemingly different ways. Kilanowski also suggests lessons that may be learned from the Rorty-Habermas debate about the nature of politics and democracy. He does so through the concept of freedom and through the development of a view he calls “freedom as responsibility.” The review examines Kilanowski’s study of the Rorty-Habermas debate and concludes that Kilanowski succeeds in his aim of showing the convergence between the two thinkers. The review also suggests that Kilanowski’s work may have a broader application in that it suggests how dialogue between different philosophical traditions may be developed and understood. As in Kilanowski’s book, the review also questions the “postmetaphysical” stance adopted by both Rorty and Habermas. (shrink)

This article contains reflections on the further structural transformation of the public sphere, building on the author’s widely-discussed social-historical study, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, which originally appeared in German in 1962 (English translation 1989). The first three sections contain preliminary theoretical reflections on the relationship between normative and empirical theory, the deliberative understanding of democracy, and the demanding preconditions of the stability of democratic societies under conditions of capitalism. The fourth section turns to the implications of digitalisation (...) for the account of the role of the media in the public sphere developed in the original work, specifically to how it is leading to the expansion and fragmentation of the public sphere and is turning all participants into potential authors. The following section presents empirical data from German studies which shows that the rapid expansion of digital media is leading to a marked diminution of the role of the classical print media. The article concludes with observations on the threats that these developments pose for the traditional role of the public sphere in discursive opinion and will formation in democracies. (shrink)

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)

Pretende-se é elucidar alguns aspectos da teoria pragmática da linguagem de Habermas tal como apresentada no primeiro capítulo de Facticidade e validade relacionando as teses apresentadas nessa parte do livro a teses apresentadas sobretudo na segunda parte de Pensamento pós-metafísico a fim de elucidar com como a teoria discursiva do direito e da democracia apresentada em 1992 tem seu ponto de apoio em uma concepção específica da linguagem. Essa estratégia permite examinar os pressupostos normalmente deixados à sombra nas discussões da (...) teoria do direito e da democracia de Habermas, assim como permite responder a algumas objeções dirigidas a essa teoria. (shrink)

This book offers the first in-depth treatment in English language of Habermas’s long-awaited work on religion, Auch eine Geschichte der Philosophie, published in 2019. Charting the contingent origins and turning points of occidental thinking through to the current "postmetaphysical" stage, the two volumes provide striking insights into the intellectual streams and conflicts in which core components of modern self-understanding have been forged. The encounter of Greek metaphysics with biblical monotheism has led to a theology of history as salvation, expanding in (...) bold arcs from Adam’s Fall to Christ and the Last Judgement. The reconstruction of key turns in the relationship between faith and knowledge ends, however, with locating the uniqueness of religion in "ritual" and defining reason as inherently secular. The book exposes the sources and trajectories, analysed by Habermas with great erudition, to different assessments in biblical studies, theology, and philosophy of subjectivity. Apart from Paul and Augustine, key lines of continuity are identified in the Gospels, early patristic theology, Duns Scotus and Schleiermacher that retain the internal connection of faith to autonomous freedom. (shrink)

Examining the work on dialogue done by Gadamer, Habermas and Derrida, this article shows the theoretical depth and complexity of this concept. Drawing together different views, its highlights the stakes of the competing understandings of this topic. The diversity in their individual conceptualisations of dialogue gives an insight into the wealth of conceptual resources that is hidden in this word. This piece reads selected pieces from these thinkers through the lens of the concept of dialogue — building and refining a (...) definition of what dialogue could mean. (shrink)

Since the publication of Between Facts and Norms, Habermas’s concept of communicative power has been the topic of significant discussion. This article contributes to this conversation by examining Habermas’s account of what makes communication powerful. I argue that Habermas’s conception of communicative power describes a nonviolent and noninstrumental mode of acting and being with others in language. This mode of engagement underwrites a conception of power that is structurally different from willing, one that builds meaningful worlds and forms those engaging (...) in communicative procedures. In drawing out this aspect of Habermas’s conception, I show that he is not a rationalist and proceduralist whose account of communicative procedures protects decision-making from irrational aesthetic powers. Rather, he presents communication as a mimetic achievement, a set of aesthetic practices and experiences that affectively alter its participants. With this position, Habermas makes an important contribution to and not just against the analysis of the aesthetic dimensions of political life. In casting communication as a mimetic achievement, Habermas presents an account of how communication opens worlds and forms subjects. Yet since these aspects of communication arrive in linguistic form, he can also examine affective and aesthetic experiences within discursive procedures. We can understand world-opening and aesthetic formation as an essential part of democratic politics while also identifying the perspectives and resources by which actors can reflect on and critically evaluate whether an opinion is justified or whether a political project is worth pursuing. (shrink)

This paper aims to raise some arguments used by Habermas in his Postmetaphysical Thinking so that we can from this make a critical assessment of the role he claims to the problem of subjectivity in the light of his thesis of individuation by socialization. First, we will present the theoretical and historical assumptions on which the Habermasian project is based, for example, Habermas' use of Mead's social theory, and then compare it to the tradition to which it was opposed. We (...) will then try to clarify certain trends of the time, reinforced mainly by Habermas' theory, such as the notion of reducing subjectivity to socialization, comparing them with the main elements of the metaphysical theories of subjectivity that had dominated the discourse of modernity. As we will see, the midpoint that bifurcates both perspectives will be the attitude with which each one behaves in the face of problems arising from the reflexive circle of subjectivity, thematizing the possibility of a non-propositional knowledge. (shrink)