Journal articles on the topic 'Habermas'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Habermas.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Habermas.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Forczek, Ákos. "Habermas Hegel Kant-kritikájáról." Különbség 19, no. 1 (November 25, 2019): 97–125. http://dx.doi.org/10.14232/kulonbseg.2019.19.1.257.
Full textAbstract:
Írásomban egyetlen Habermas-szövegre, a "Találóak-e Hegel Kanttal szembeni ellenvetései a diszkurzusetikára is?" című tanulmányra koncentrálva amellett érvelek, hogy Hegel Kant-kritikájának habermasi interpretációja félrevezető; Hegel a maga módján hathatósabban pártfogolja a kanti gyakorlati észt, mint Habermas. Azt állítom továbbá, hogy azokat a lényegi meglátásokat, amelyek Habermast a kanti kötelességelmélet korrekciójára ösztönzik, valójában Kant is osztja. Tudja, hogy a Sollen rá van utalva (Hegel kifejezéskincsével élve) az objektív szellem aktuális szerveződési formáira, rendezőelveire; és tudja, hogy a Sollen a normamegalapozási eljárás során nem maradhat monologikus. Azaz úgy vélem, hogy Kant politikai etikájának diszkurzuselméleti meghaladása valamivel kisebb lépés, mint ahogyan azt a ’80-as években Habermas gondolja.
2
Bennett, Michael. "Answering the Bioethicists’ Objection." Symposium 24, no. 1 (2020): 92–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/symposium20202415.
Full textAbstract:
Bioethicists criticize Jürgen Habermas’s argument against “liberal eugenics” for many reasons. This essay examines one particular critique, according to which Habermas misunderstands the implications of human evolution. In adopting Hannah Arendt’s concept of “natality,” Habermas seems to fear that genetically modified children will lose the contingency of their births, which would impair their capacity for political action; but according to evolutionary theory, bioethicists argue, this fear is unfounded. I explore this objection by entertaining the hypothesis that Habermas’s argument assumes Arendt’s interpretation of Darwinian evolution in addition to her conception of natality, and then I answer it by contrasting the conceptions of evolution held by Habermas, by Arendt, and by Habermas’s critics. Les bioéthiciens critiquent l’argument de Jürgen Habermas contre « l’eugénisme libéral » pour de nombreuses raisons. Cet essai examine une critique en particulier, selon laquelle Habermas comprend mal les implications de l’évolution humaine : en adoptant le concept de la « natalité » de Hannah Arendt, Habermas semble craindre que les enfants soumis à une modification génétique ne perdent la contingence propre à leur naissance, une perte qui diminuerait leur capacité pour l’action politique, mais selon la théorie de l’évolution, les bioéthiciens soutiennent que cette peur est sans fondement. J’explore cette objection à Habermas en considérant l’hypothèse que, en plus du concept de la natalité, Habermas suppose aussi l’interprétation arendtienne de l’évolution biologique de Darwin, et j’y répond en confrontant cette conception de l’évolution avec la conception propre à Habermas et avec celle des bioéthiciens qui lui ont répondu.
3
Viertbauer, Klaus. "Jürgen Habermas on the Way to a Postmetaphysical Reading of Kierkegaard." European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 11, no. 4 (December 20, 2019): 137. http://dx.doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v11i4.3038.
Full textAbstract:
Habermas’s postmetaphysical reading of Kierkegaard is paradigmatic for his understanding of religion. It shows, why Habermas reduces religion to fideism. Therefore the paper reconstructs Habermas’s reception of Kierkegaard and compares it with the accounts of Dieter Henrich and Michael Theunissen. Furthermore it demonstrates how Habermas makes use of Kierkegaard’s dialectics of existence to formulate his postmetaphysical thesis of a cooperative venture.
4
Shoikhedbrod, Igor. "Still the "Last Marxist"?" Res Philosophica 101, no. 2 (2024): 219–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/resphilosophica20241012115.
Full textAbstract:
Jürgen Habermas’s recent engagement with Marx in Auch eine Geschichte der Philosophie has mostly gone unnoticed by commentators. Habermas is among the few representatives of the Frankfurt School who has consistently stressed the importance of the “Marxian heritage” for a rigorous understanding of critical theory. In this essay, I critically examine two guiding threads in Habermas’s ongoing reconstruction of historical materialism: the relationship between labor and interaction, as well as the emancipatory potential unleashed by the democratic constitutional state. I argue that Habermas’s reconstruction of historical materialism points to several lacunae in Marx’s work, but that it also reveals valuable insights into the latter’s oeuvre that have yet to be adequately addressed by Habermas. I conclude that it is time for Habermas to consciously reclaim the “Marxian heritage.”
5
Haiden, Michael. "Jürgen Habermas." Res Philosophica 101, no. 2 (2024): 191–217. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/resphilosophica20241012123.
Full textAbstract:
Jürgen Habermas has defended Germany’s cautious support for Ukraine against the ongoing Russian invasion. Instead of trying to defeat Russia on the battlefield, he argued that Western nations should seek a compromise with the attacker. Critics worried that this would lead to more suffering than the war, encourage further Russian aggression, and ignore the concerns of the Ukrainian population. However, one question that has not been addressed is if Habermas’s pleas are part of a wider pacifist commitment—and if so, what kind of pacifist he is. Examining Habermas’s writings on the Ukraine War, his cosmopolitan views and his idea of a “constitutionalization of international law,” I argue that Habermas can be called a political pacifist—someone who seeks to abolish the institutions that provide the ultimate causes of war. While one can still criticize his vision, it deserves to be taken seriously as a pacifist account.
6
Marques, Ângela Cristina Salgueiro, and Luís Mauro Sá Martino. "Lendo Habermas com Habermas." Mediapolis – Revista de Comunicação, Jornalismo e Espaço Público, no. 14 (January 20, 2022): 39–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.14195/2183-6019_14_2.
Full textAbstract:
Como um autor lê sua própria obra décadas após sua publicação? Esta questão é particularmente importante quando se leva em conta que a obra em questão, Mudança Estrutural da Esfera Pública, tornou-se um marco nos estudos de Comunicação Política desde sua primeira publicação em 1962. Este artigo analisa o prefácio do autor à edição de 1990, no qual faz uma extensa revisão e crítica da obra, destacando quatro aspectos: (1) as diferenças do ambiente midiático de 1962, 1990 e hoje; (2) a ambivalência da “esfera pública” como um conceito em cada caso; (3) a tensão entre a comunicação da mídia e a conversa pessoal que permeia o conceito; (4) a problematização da diferença e das assimetrias de poder na constituição da esfera pública. Esses elementos são analisados no contexto de estudos críticos da obra.
7
Couture, Tony. "Feminist Criticisms of Habermas's Ethics and Politics." Dialogue 34, no. 2 (1995): 259–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0012217300014700.
Full textAbstract:
My project is to assess recent objections directed at Jürgen Habermas by Nancy Fraser, Iris Young and Seyla Benhabib. This dispute is significant because it concerns the value of the Enlightenment style, detached criticism promoted by Habermas as compared to new proposals about dissent from a stance connected to social movements. I argue that these feminist criticisms of Habermas's critical theory are compelling and that they require substantial changes in Habermas's thinking.
8
SPECTER, MATTHEW. "HABERMAS'S POLITICAL THOUGHT, 1984–1996: A HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION." Modern Intellectual History 6, no. 1 (April 2009): 91–119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1479244308001959.
Full textAbstract:
Jürgen Habermas (b. 1929) has for decades been recognized as a leading European philosopher and public intellectual. But his global visibility has obscured his rootedness in German political culture and debate. The most successful historical accounts of the transformation of political culture in West Germany have turned on the concept of German statism and its decline. Viewing Habermas through this lens, I treat Habermas as a radical critic of German statism and an innovative theorist of democratic constitutionalism. Based on personal interviews with Habermas and his German colleagues, and by setting the major work alongside his occasion-specific political writings from 1984 to 1996, I interpret Habermas's political thought as an evolving response to two distinct moments in German history: first, the mid-1980s, and second, the revolutions of 1989 and German reunification in 1990. This essay challenges the dominant interpretations of Habermas's mature statement of his political theory. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Democracy (1992), which have described it as marking a distinct break with, and reversal of, the commitments of his earlier work. By contrast, I describe the work as an intellectual summa, consistent with Habermas's previous thought and career, and containing remarkable historical interpretations of two intertwined phenomena: the intellectual and institutional dimensions of the Bonn Republic and Habermas's own biography.
9
Bennett, Michael J. "Habermas’s Interpretation of Arendt in The Future of Human Nature." Philosophy Today 65, no. 3 (2021): 727–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philtoday2021524416.
Full textAbstract:
This article responds to several liberal bioethicists’ criticisms of Jürgen Habermas’s The Future of Human Nature by placing it in the context of his intellectual influences and career-spanning theorization of communicative rationality. In particular, I argue that Habermas’s critics have not grasped his interpretation of Hannah Arendt’s concept of natality. Far from merely ventriloquizing his friend and teacher, Habermas distinguishes his construal of that concept from Arendt’s, which he presents as a naturalistic foil to his concerns about the potential ethical impact of preimplantation genetic interventions. Whereas, according to Habermas, Arendt reasons directly from the biological fact of birth to the capacity for political action, he himself construes natality as implying a “divide between nature and culture” at the level of the “lifeworld.” Identifying Habermas’s interpretation of Arendt in this way explains why Habermas claims not to be a biological determinist and why the bioethicists’ criticism, according to which he is, fails.
10
Tegtmeyer, Henning. "Habermas over genealogie, metafysica en godsdienst." Algemeen Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Wijsbegeerte 113, no. 2 (July 1, 2021): 263–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.5117/antw2021.2.006.tegt.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Habermas on genealogy, metaphysics and religion Habermas’s impressive history of philosophy presents itself both as a comprehensive account of the history of Western philosophy from its beginning to the 19th century and as a genealogy of post-metaphysical thinking. In this paper I argue that this twofold goal creates a serious methodological problem. I also find Habermas’s understanding of metaphysics unclear and partly misguided. If that is correct it has consequences not only for the very notion of post-metaphysical thinking but also for the understanding of the dialogue between philosophy, religion, and modern secular society that Habermas advocates.
11
Diez, Thomas, and Jill Steans. "A useful dialogue? Habermas and International Relations." Review of International Studies 31, no. 1 (January 2005): 127–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0260210505006339.
Full textAbstract:
It is now more than twenty years since Jürgen Habermas's work was first referred to in International Relations (IR) theory. Along with many other continental philosophers and social theorists, Habermas was initially mobilised in the critique of positivism, and in particular neorealism, in IR theory. As such, the interest in Habermas and IR must be located in the first instance within the context of the fourth debate. This Forum section of the Review provides us with the opportunity to take stock and ask whether the dialogue between Habermas and IR has, thus far, been useful in providing new conceptual and methodological tools to analyse international politics and in inspiring new research agendas in IR. We also ask whether the role that dialogue plays within Habermas's work has been useful in formulating a critical theory of international relations.
12
Hedi, Hedi. "Agama dalam Masyarakat Post-Sekularisme Jurgen Habermas." Panangkaran: Jurnal Penelitian Agama dan Masyarakat 3, no. 2 (August 15, 2020): 249. http://dx.doi.org/10.14421/panangkaran.2019.0302-07.
Full textAbstract:
This paper aims to illustrate Habermas's thoughts on post-secularism, especially in regards to stretching religion which he believes that after secularism religion should be considered as in the public space. The study uses a political philosophy approach. In his findings, Habermas concluded that the role of religion can no longer be denied its presence in the political space. To minimize religious totalitarianism, Habermas divides public space into formal and informal settings, in which religion and politics appear to influence one to another. According to Habermas, religion can only present in an informal space. If people want to contribute in a formal space, they have to translate religious language into secular language.[Artikel ini menelaah pemikiran Habermas tentang pos-sekulerisme, khususnya berkenaan dengan kelonggaran peran agama yang ia yakini bahwa setelah terjadinya sekularisme, agama harus turut berperan dalam ruang publik. Kajian ini menggunakan pendekatan filsafat politik. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa, Habermas memandang saat ini (era pos-sekularisme) peran agama tidak lagi dapat ditolak kehadirannya di ruang publik. Untuk meminimalisir totalitarianisme agama, Habermas membagi ruang publik menjadi aturan formal dan aturan informal, yang mana agama dan politik saling berkelindan dan mempengaruhi satu sama lain. Menurut Habermas, agama hanya dapat hadir dalam ruang informal. Jika masyarakat yang agamis hendak turut berkontribusi dalam ranah publik formal, mereka harus menerjemahkan bahasa agama mereka menjadi bahasa sekuler.]
13
Sidqi, Ahmad. "THE PROBLEMS OF JÜRGEN HABERMAS’s DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY THEORY." RADIX: Jurnal Filsafat dan Agama 1, no. 01 (May 7, 2023): 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.69957/radix.v1i01.28.
Full textAbstract:
Jürgen Habermas a German philosopher who adopts of Karl Marx’s thought in the social order. However, Habermas does not immediately accept of the raw Marx’s thought. Habermas with rationalism as the epistemology. The Critical Theory criticize the sciences positive as the science of economics, sociology, technology, psychology; and also philosophy. The sciences is not questioned the direction of the process of the community itself. In a critique of the ideology of Habermas through the role of basic ethics and adopt the Immanuel Kant’s thought. Habermas to a blurb about dialectical theory of hermeneutic action through Aufhebung (hermeneutics of philosophy and psychoanalysis). Habermas was critique to postmodernism that universal as hegemony and discriminative to getting a plural morality Habermas's critical theory is a kind of epistemology that seeks to mate between objectivity and subjectivity, between scientists and philosophers, between the ontentic and the articulate. Critical theory also tries to expose the traditional theory, because it positions the object as untouchable, as it is. So difficult to capture its meaning by humans. This makes the object seem very sacred and must be received unanimously. The democracy of Habermas is deliberative democracy. Deliberative democracy aims to find a middle ground between Western liberalism and Asian and Islamic communitism. This assumption is established in a democratic form in the form of an intensive political system and public sphere.
14
Grumley, John. "The road not taken – Márkus on Habermas: In memory of György Márkus." Thesis Eleven 160, no. 1 (September 25, 2020): 34–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0725513620961992.
Full textAbstract:
This paper concerns a little-known debate between Jürgen Habermas and György Márkus. Habermas argued that the Marxian paradigm of production was obsolete in the light of his own proposal for a ‘communicative turn’ in contemporary critical theories that avoids reductivism by focusing on moral learning processes connected to language and communicative interaction. This paper sets out Habermas’s critique of the paradigm of production and Márkus’s rebuttal.
15
Siqueira, Daniel Valente Pedroso de. "Crises sistêmicas e racionalização social como reificação: uma reconstrução da teoria social marxiana." Trilhas Filosóficas 11, no. 3 (April 17, 2019): 53–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.25244/tf.v11i3.3400.
Full textAbstract:
Resumo: Como entender o desenvolvimento teórico e as mudanças históricosociais que impulsionaram a recuperação e alteração da teoria marxiana no século XX e como esta ainda se encontra atuante sobre nosso horizonte social contemporâneo? Fazendo uso da reconstrução crítica de Habermas, a recuperação se inicia com Weber, a passagem por Lukács e na recepção horkheimeriana-adorniana, que tanto influenciou a crítica social do século XX, o presente artigo busca apresentar uma possibilidade de leitura. Palavras-chave: Teoria crítica. Reificação. Marx. Habermas. Modernidade. Abstract: How can we understand the theoretical development and all the socialhistorical changes which drove the incoming recovery and the further alteration of the Marxian theory in the twentieth century and how is it still possible to assumes it on our contemporary societies? Recovering Habermas’s critical reconstruction, which starts with Weber, the next step over Lukács, and the Horkheimerian-Adornian theoretical reception, which has largely influenced twentieth social critic, the aim paper intents to show up a possible reading. Keywords: Critical theory. Reification. Marx. Habermas. Modernity. REFERÊNCIAS ARAUTO, A. “Lukács’ Theory of Reification”. In: Telos, n. 11, 1972. ARGÜELLO, K. O Ícaro da Modernidade: Direito e Política em Max Weber. São Paulo: Acadêmica, 1997. BERNSTEIN, R. J. Habermas and Modernity. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1991. BRAATEN, J. Habermas’s Critical Theory of Society. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1991. COUTINHO, C. N. Lukács: A Ontologia e a Política. In: ANTUNES, R. & RÊGO, W. L. (orgs.). Lukács: Um Galileu no Século XX. São Paulo: Boitempo Editorial, 1996. GIDDENS, A. “Reason without Revolution? Habermas’s Theorie des Kommunikativen Handelns”. In :BERNSTEIN, R. J. Habermas and Modernity. Cambridge, Massaschusetts : The MIT Press, 1991. HABERMAS, J. “Does Philosophy still have a Purpose?”. In: HABERMAS, J. Philosophical-Political Profiles. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1983. HABERMAS, J. The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume I: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Boston: Beacon Press, 1984. HABERMAS, J. Técnica e Ciência como “Ideologia”. São Paulo: Unesp, 2014. HONNETH, A. The Critique of Power: Reflective Stages in a Critical Social Theory. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1997. HORKHEIMER, M. Eclipse da Razão. São Paulo: Centauro Editora, 2002. HORKHEIMER, M. Teoria Tradicional e Teoria Crítica. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1975. HORKHEIMER, M.; ADORNO, T. W. Dialética do Esclarecimento. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar Editor, 2006. LEO MAAR, W. “A Reificação como Realidade Social: Práxis, Trabalho e Crítica Imanente em HCC”. In: ANTUNES, R. & RÊGO, W. L. (orgs). Lukács: Um Galileu no século XX. São Paulo: Boitempo Editorial, 1996. LUKÁCS, G. História e Consciência de Classe: Estudos sobre a Dialética Marxista. São Paulo: WMF Martins Fontes, 2016.MARX, K. A Ideologia Alemã. São Paulo: Boitempo Editorial, 2007. MARX, K. Grundrisse: Manuscritos Econômicos de 1857-1858 & Esboços da Crítica da Economia Política. São Paulo: Boitempo Editorial, 2011. MELO, R. Marx e Habermas: Teoria Crítica e os Sentidos de Emancipação. São Paulo: Editora Saraiva, 2013. MENEZES, A. B. N. T. Habermas e a Modernidade: Uma “Metacrítica da Razão Instrumental”. Natal: EDUFRN, 2009. NETTO, J. P. “Lukács e o Marxismo Ocidental”. In: ANTUNES, R. & RÊGO, W. L. (orgs.). Lukács: Um Galileu no Século XX. São Paulo: Boitempo Editorial, 1996. NOBRE, M. A Dialética Negativa de Theodor W. Adorno: A Ontologia do Estado Falso. São Paulo: Iluminuras/FAPESP, 1998. NOBRE, M. A Teoria Crítica. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar Editor, 2004. PINZANI, A. Habermas: Introdução. São Paulo: Artmed, 2004. REPA, L. A Transformação da Filosofia em Jürgen Habermas: Os Papéis de Reconstrução, Interpretação e Crítica. São Paulo: Editora Singular, 2008. TEIXEIRA, M. Razão e Reificação: Um Estudo sobre Max Weber em “História e Consciência de Classe” de Georg Lukács. Campinas: Unicamp, Dissertação de mestrado, in mimeo, 2010. WELLMER, A. “Reason, Utopia, and the Dialectic of Enlightenment”. In: BERNSTEIN, R. J. Habermas and Modernity. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1991.
16
GRAY, KEVIN W. "Saving 1968: Thinking with Habermas against Habermas." PhaenEx 4, no. 2 (January 3, 2010): 26. http://dx.doi.org/10.22329/p.v4i2.2918.
Full textAbstract:
Taking Habermas’s Die nachholende Revolution as a foil, I contend that in his discussions of 1989, Habermas has misunderstood the nature of the anti-Communist revolutions. Comparing them to his writings on the public sphere and the student protest movements in Germany, I argue that the revolutions do not represent the triumph of capitalism anymore than they represent the triumph of Western democracy. Calling the events catch-up revolutions is to frame the events as the expansion of modernity and nothing more. Rather, the revolutions show that the revolutionaries in Eastern Europe were grappling with the same problem, namely the control of technical subsystems, that the students and revolutionaries of 1968 were. Viewed in the light of Habermas’s writings from the 1960s, we end up better understanding the twin extremes of capitalism and bureaucratic-totalitarianism.
17
Prince, John. "Keeping the Conversation Going: Voluntary Associations in the Public Sphere(S)." Media International Australia 111, no. 1 (May 2004): 145–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1329878x0411100114.
Full textAbstract:
While Jürgen Habermas claims the public sphere — and therefore democracy — is in a state of atrophy, other theorists claim that in recent decades there has been an overwhelming democratisation of our media. For many theorists who support Habermas's arguments, voluntary associations are best suited to reinvigorating a public sphere in decay. Indeed, Habermas himself claims voluntary associations are essential to a properly functioning, democratic public sphere. This paper presents some of the findings of recent research, which considered the facts on the ground and examined at close quarters the operations, activities and communicative structures of voluntary associations. As such, the paper argues against Habermas, contending first that, while less than perfect, the public sphere is essentially not in a state of atrophy, and second, this is due in part to the organisations Habermas valorises — voluntary associations — using the very media he so reviles — mass media.
18
Bernardi, Marcos Roberto de Faria. "Habermas." Tematicas 4, no. 8 (December 12, 1996): 83–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.20396/tematicas.v4i8.12414.
Full textAbstract:
Este artigo pretende analisar a estrutura da teoria habermasiana e de seu instrumental teórico para o estudo do “capitalismo tardio” a partir da teoria das crises contida no A Crise de Legitimação do Capitalismo Tardio, discutindo as dificuldades operacionais que este instrumental teórico pode apresentar para o estudo de dois casos empíricos: a crise do Welfare State e a crise do Estado-Nação.O objetivo primeiro é investigar em que medida a utilização deste aparelho conceitual é efetiva nas análises feitas pelo autor dos dois casos citados. Seguindo-se a isso, colocaremos algumas críticas a respeito de certas dificuldades que a construção teórica de autor pode apresentar no que diz respeito às estruturas do capitalismo avançado, procurando demonstrar que as próprias análises empíricas habermasianas apontam nessa direção.
19
Gray, Kevin W. "Habermas." Symposium 16, no. 1 (2012): 276–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/symposium201216120.
Full text
20
Ferrarese, Estelle. "Habermas." Thesis Eleven 130, no. 1 (August 18, 2015): 58–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0725513615602176.
Full text
21
Meynell, Hugo. "Habermas." American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 65, no. 2 (1991): 189–201. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/acpq199165210.
Full text
22
Fischer, Norman. "Habermas." Teaching Philosophy 8, no. 1 (1985): 70–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/teachphil19858112.
Full text
23
Szabó, Ferenc. "Habermas." Különbség 19, no. 1 (November 25, 2019): 7–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.14232/kulonbseg.2019.19.1.263.
Full text
24
Halpern, Catherine. "Habermas." Sciences Humaines Les Essentiels, HS15 (August 24, 2023): 127–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/sh.hs15.0127.
Full text
25
Wyrębska, Ewa. "Nowoczesne społeczeństwo wobec światopoglądowego pluralizmu. Rola religii w społeczeństwie według Jürgena Habermasa." Etyka 46 (December 1, 2013): 35–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.14394/etyka.529.
Full textAbstract:
Celem artykułu jest prezentacja poglądów Jürgena Habermasa na rolę religii w pluralistycznym społeczeństwie postsekularnym. Autorka wskazuje warunki kooperacji, jakie zdaniem Habermasa spełnić mają różne orientacje światopoglądowe, aby możliwa stała się realizacja idei demokracji deliberatywnej, będącej spadkobierczynią Kantowskiej koncepcji państwa. Pokrótce opisane są również obiekcje, jakie względem przedstawionych warunków kooperacji obywateli żywi Habermas oraz jego krytycy.
26
Pramonojati, Gilrandi A. "Mengimplementasikan Dwi Kewarganegaraan Kristen dalam Era Pos-Sekulerisme." Ritornera - Jurnal Teologi Pentakosta Indonesia 1, no. 1 (June 8, 2021): 54–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.54403/rjtpi.v1i1.11.
Full textAbstract:
This article examines the relationship of the Church to politics in post-secularism popularized by Jurgen Habermas. The research method used in this research is literature study. This research finds that, Post-secularism offered by Habermas provides space for the Church to translate the wealth contained in religion into a public message. In the view of post-secularism the Church has an important role to fill in the empty spaces that cannot be achieved by rationality. Habermas's thoughts on post-secularism also serve as a bridge to harmonize faith and rationality, as well as to explain dual citizenship as an unrelated Christian political view.Artikel ini menelaah hubungan Gereja dengan politik dalam pos-sekulerisme yang dipopulerkan oleh Jurgen Habermas. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah studi pustaka. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa, Pos-sekulerisme yang ditawarkan oleh Habermas memberi ruang Gereja untuk menerjemahkan kekayaan yang terkandung dalam agama menjadi pesan publik. Dalam pandangan pos-sekulerisme Gereja mempunyai peran penting untuk mengisi ruang kosong yang tidak dapat dijangkau oleh rasionalitas. Pemikiran Habermas mengenai pos-sekulerisme juga menjadi jembatan untuk menyelaraskan iman dan rasional, sekaligus menerangkan kewarganegaraan ganda sebagai pandangan politik Kristen yang selama ini tidka dimengerti.
27
Mayer, Seth. "Interpreting the Situation of Political Disagreement: Rancière and Habermas." Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy 27, no. 2 (November 26, 2019): 8–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jffp.2019.888.
Full textAbstract:
Although Jacques Rancière and Jürgen Habermas share several important commitments, they interpret various core concepts differently, viewing politics, democracy, communication, and disagreement in conflicting ways. Rancière articulates his democratic vision in opposition to important elements of Habermas’s approach. Critics contend that Habermas cannot account for the dynamics of command, exclusion, resistance, and aesthetic transformation involved in Rancière’s understanding of politics. In particular, the prominent roles Habermas affords to communicative rationality and consensus have led people to think that he cannot grasp the radical forms of political disagreement Rancière describes. While some have viewed Rancière as offering a trenchant challenge to Habermas, I will contend that Rancière’s critique is less compelling than some have thought. Habermasian understandings of third personal speech and aesthetic expression are nuanced and adaptable enough to evade Rancière’s criticisms. I conclude by suggesting that Habermasian theorists have also developed crucial forms of social and political critique that Rancière’s theory systematically excludes.
28
Jakubowski, Radosław. "Rola kategorii równości w modelu społecznych relacji komunikacyjnych Jürgena Habermasa." Rocznik Europeistyczny 2 (September 27, 2016): 187–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.19195/2450-274x.2.12.
Full textAbstract:
Model społecznych relacji komunikacyjnych skonstruowany przez Jürgena Habermasa stanowi podstawę jego teorii prawowicie legitymizowanej władzy politycznej. Kluczową rolę w tym modelu odgrywa kategoria równości, która gwarantuje inkluzję i dostęp obywateli do obiegów komunikacyjnych, będących podwaliną sfery publicznej. Z działań komunikacyjnych Habermas wyprowadza również dyskursywną koncepcję stanowienia prawa, której istotę także stanowi kategoria równości. Zinstytucjonalizowanie zasady równości poprzez medium prawa zapewnia bowiem komunikacyjną reprodukcję mechanizmu demokratycznego. Jest to możliwe dzięki aktywnemu w sferze publicznej społeczeństwu obywatelskiemu, którego działania komunikacyjne nieustannie przekładają się na proces stanowienia prawa odpowiadającego bieżącym potrzebom społecznym.The role of category of equality in Habermas’s model of social communicative relationsHabermas’s model of social communicative relations creates the ground for his theory of legitimized political power with the category of equality as its key component. Category of equality guarantees citizens inclusion and access to communication circuit which constitutes the ground for public dialogue in sphere of communicative actions. Habermas brings out also a discursive concept of law-making as its substance also lies in category of equality. The institutionalization of the equality rule through the law ensures communicative reproduction of democratic mechanism. That is possible by dint of civil society active in public sphere and its communicative activities which invariably transfer to the law-making process meeting the current social needs.
29
WANG, Qin. "哈貝馬斯與莊子的共同陣線？." International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine 14, no. 2 (January 1, 2016): 113–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.141621.
Full textAbstract:
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.Chai attempts to demonstrate how Zhuangzi can be used to supplement Habermas’s arguments against liberal eugenics. He argues that both Habermas and Zhuangzi would view liberal eugenics as falling on the wrong side of the natural/artificial divide. It is debatable whether his interpretation of Zhuangzi as both fatalist and epistemically modest suits this conclusion. In particular, it is doubtful that someone who is suspicious of whether humans can ever have knowledge of nature would be entitled to assert that liberal eugenics is unnatural. Even if this position is possible, it would be one that equally rejects Habermas. Habermas attempts to isolate genetic engineering from acceptable interventions in a person’s life. Daoism, to the extent that it rejects liberal eugenics, would equally view the latter kinds of interventions as misguided. Chai’s Daoist ethics of human enhancement, therefore, could hardly be used to supplement Habermas’s position.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 54 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.
30
Fischer, Enno. "The Ethics of Genetic Intervention in Human Embryos: Assessing Jürgen Habermas's Approach." KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy 30, no. 1 (January 1, 2016): 79–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/krt-2016-300108.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract In the near future we may be able to manipulate human embryos through genetic intervention. Jürgen Habermas has argued against the development of technologies which could make such intervention possible. His argument has received widespread criticism among bioethicists. These critics argue that Habermas's argument relies on implausible assumptions about human nature. Moreover, they challenge Habermas's claim that genetic intervention adds something new to intergenerational relationships pointing out that parents have already strong control over their children through education. In this paper a new approach to Habermas's theory is suggested which makes clear that he has a strong point against genetic intervention. A more charitable reading of Habermas with respect to his assumptions concerning human nature is presented. Moreover, Habermas's assumption concerning the power of genetic controlling is evaluated. By means of a close comparison of genetic and educational control it is shown that Habermas's argument relies on much weaker assumptions than generally understood.
31
Matthies-Boon, Vivienne. "Jürgen Habermas and Bush’s Neoconservatives: Too Close for Comfort?" Studies in Social Justice 5, no. 2 (December 24, 2011): 167–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.26522/ssj.v5i2.985.
Full textAbstract:
In his recent political writings, Habermas has opposed his cosmopolitan project to that of the Bushite neoconservatives. However, this article argues that in some respects Habermas's works come closer to the neoconservative agenda than he realizes and that this poses a potential danger of its being appropriated by precisely the camp he opposes. These problems particularly come to the fore in his analysis of Islamic fundamentalism, democracy and the Middle East, but also in his recommendations concerning UN-based internationalism and his appeals to Woodrow Wilson. By tracking these problematic areas in Habermas's work, this article argues that Habermas needs to engage in a more carefully articulated, concrete and empirical analysis if he is to avoid these problems.
32
Gaon, Stella. "Pluralizing Universal “Man”: The Legacy of Transcendentalism and Teleology in Habermas's Discourse Ethics." Review of Politics 60, no. 4 (1998): 685–718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034670500050853.
Full textAbstract:
The central claim of this article is that Habermas's program of discourse ethics fails to “detranscendentalize” the Enlightenment subject. On the contrary, tacit assumptions concerning a transcendental conception of reason and a subject that is teleologically predisposed toward its rightful end are the logical pillars of Habermas's two most crucial claims. First, unless Habermas presupposes an abstract and decidedly unencumbered moral discussant, he cannot maintain his claim concerning the rationality—and hence the unconditionality—of the moral principle he describes. Secondly, unless Habermas begs the question of the proper end of individual and collective development, he fails to support the claim that discourse ethics speaks to the emphatic dimension of moral reason.
33
Martínez, David. "Habermas’s discourse ethics and Hegel’s critique of Kant." Philosophy & Social Criticism 44, no. 9 (April 17, 2018): 997–1014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0191453718769422.
Full textAbstract:
In this article I follow James Gordon Finlayson who claims that a Hegelian criticism applies both to Kant and also to Habermas, namely, the criticism of the will as a tester of maxims. The issue is that Kant cannot connect the will of morality and the will of the particular agent and this leaves the empirical will unaffected. According to Finlayson, Habermas can be charged with this criticism, insofar as he draws a distinction between agent-neutral and agent-relative reasons. The upshot is that in Discourse Ethics the empirical will seems to be left also unaffected by the moral will. In light of an analysis of ideal role taking, and rational discourse, I claim that Habermas can rebut the Hegelian criticism. Nonetheless, I show that these concepts are incompatible with the distinction between agent-relative and agent-neutral reasons. Hence, either the concepts or the distinction have to be removed. Habermas can only afford to discard the distinction, and indeed this modification answers the criticism. The final issue that arises is why does Habermas maintain the distinction? And what would be the consequences for his moral theory if he discards it? At the end of the article I sketch some of the implications and challenges that this alternative could have for Habermas’s Discourse Ethics.
34
Bacevičiūtė, Danutė. "SEKULIARIZACIJA IR SOCIALINĖ RELIGIJOS PRASMĖ." Religija ir kultūra 8 (January 1, 2011): 64–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.15388/relig.2011.0.2753.
Full textAbstract:
Straipsnyje keliamas klausimas apie religiją šiuolaikiniame sekuliarizuotame pasaulyje, o tiksliau – klausiama, ką reiškia šiuolaikiniame pasaulyje nuolat į pirmą planą iškylantys politinis ir etinis religijos aspektai, t. y. socialinė religijos prasmė. Mėginant atsakyti į šį klausimą ir ieškant teorinių tokio požiūrio į religiją ištakų, analizuojamos dviejų filosofų, Immanuelio Kanto ir Jürgeno Habermaso, religijos interpretacijos, kuriose religijos prasmė įžvelgiama jos socialinėje paskirtyje. Kanto moralinės religijos projektas bei Habermaso pastangos užmegzti sekuliaraus proto ir religijos dialogą, siekiant įveikti visuomenės dezintegraciją, straipsnyje interpretuojami ne vien kaip religijos fenomeno redukcija į socialinę plotmę ir religijos prasmės pasisavinimo veiksmas. Pastebima, kad abu mąstytojai susiduria su socialinės kontingencijos patirtimi kaip fenomenu ar veikiau profenomenu, kuris pats galbūt ir nėra labai aiškus, bet pasirodo kaip grindžiantis socialinę religijos prasmę. Todėl straipsnyje daroma išvada, kad sekuliarizacijos sąlygomis akcentuojama socialinė religijos prasmė reiškia ne tik religijos prasmės pasisavinimą (imanentizavimą), bet ir atskleidžia socialinį santykį kaip tokį, kuris šaukiasi religinės prasmės (transcendencijos imanencijoje).Pagrindiniai žodžiai: Kantas, Habermasas, socialinė religijos prasmė, socialinė kontingencija.SECULARIZATION AND SOCIAL SENSE OF RELIGIONDanutė Bacevičiūtė SummaryThis article deals with the question of religion in contemporary secular world, to be precise – the main questions are: what mean political and ethical aspects of religion which are in the focus of contemporary secular world, and what is the social sense (meaning) of religion? The author tries to answer these questions and to find theoretical origins of such attitude toward religion by analyzing the interpretations of religion in Immanuel Kant and Jürgen Habermas. Both philosophers envisage the sense of religion in its social purpose. Kantian project of moral religion and Habermas’ endeavor to overcome social disintegration, reviving the dialog between reason and religion, have been interpreted not only as the process of reduction of religion into social plane and an act of appropriation of the religious. One can see that both thinkers encounter the social contingency as the phenomenon (or prophenomenon) which itself is not very clear but appears as grounding the social sense of religion. Therefore the author comes to conclusion that social sense of religion in the secular situation means not only appropriation of the religious (immanentization) but also reveals social relationship as that which calls for religious sense (transcendence in immanence).Keywords: Kant, Habermas, social sense of religion, social contingency.
35
Harnowo, Tri. "PENERAPAN TEORI DISKURSUS HABERMAS SEBAGAI ALTERNATIF PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA." Mimbar Hukum - Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada 32, no. 1 (February 15, 2020): 55. http://dx.doi.org/10.22146/jmh.45145.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractAccording to Habermas's discourse theory, communicative actions justified through validity claim can build a common understanding and social collaboration. Mediation is one form of dispute resolution through a negotiation process to obtain a mutual agreement facilitated by a neutral third party oriented to common interests by maintaining good relations between the parties in the future. Communication techniques such as listening actively, asking questions, and reframing statements are important skills that mediators must possess. This conceptual paper analyzes the interaction between Habermas's discourse theory and the concept of mediation. Habermas's discourse theory can be a basic framework of analysis for mediators to predict the creation of consensus, identify statements based on validity claims, and search for common understanding options. IntisariMenurut teori diskursus Habermas, tindakan komunikatif yang dijustifikasi melalui klaim kesahihan dapat membangun suatu pemahaman bersama dan kerjasama sosial. Mediasi merupakan salah satu bentuk penyelesaian sengketa melalui proses perundingan untuk memperoleh kesepakatan bersama difasilitasi oleh pihak ketiga netral yang berorientasi pada kepentingan bersama dengan menjaga hubungan baik para pihak di masa mendatang. Teknik komunikasi seperti mendengar aktif, bertanya, dan membingkai ulang pernyataan merupakan keahlian penting yang harus dimiliki oleh mediator. Artikel ini menganalisis interaksi antara teori diskursus Habermas dan penerapannya dalam teknik mediasi. Teori diskursus Habermas dapat menjadi kerangka dasar analisis bagi mediator untuk memprediksi terciptanya konsensus, mengidentifikasi pernyataan-pernyataan berdasarkan klaim kesahihan dan mencari opsi-opsi kesepakatan bersama.
36
Jezierska, Katarzyna. "With Habermas against Habermas. Deliberation without Consensus." Journal of Deliberative Democracy 15, no. 1 (April 23, 2019): 13. http://dx.doi.org/10.16997/jdd.326.
Full text
37
M. Ied Al Munir. "DARI KRITIS KE TINDAKAN KOMUNIKATIF." Rausyan Fikr: Jurnal Ilmu Studi Ushuluddin dan Filsafat 19, no. 1 (August 22, 2023): 157–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.24239/rsy.v19i1.1320.
Full textAbstract:
Jürgen Habermas’s Theory of Communicative Action is important to respond to modernity, rationality, and capitalism. This theory departs from the refinement of the Critical Theory stagnation promoted by the Frankfurt School's first generation with the characters Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, and Herbert Marcuse. Therefore, this study aims to describe the efforts that have been made by Habermas, both to find the cause of the stagnation of the Critical Theory and to improve it. This research is qualitative research with a literature background so data collection is done by reading the works of Habermas and other related works. Data analysis of the collected data was carried out using historical and interpretation methods. This study found that the Critical Theory proposed by Horkheimer, Adorno, and Marcuse stagnated because they interpreted rationality as instrumental rationality. Meanwhile, Habermas’s refinement of Critical Theory led to the formation of the Critical Theory in a modified form, namely the Theory of Communicative Action. In this case, Habermas’ Theory of Communicative Action provides a solution in the form of additional elements of communication for the Critical Theory and sees rationality as communicative rationality that allows interaction between subjects in social life.
38
Neal, Patrick. "Habermas, Religion, and Citizenship." Politics and Religion 7, no. 2 (November 13, 2013): 318–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1755048313000618.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractWhat is the appropriate place for religious argument in the public realm of a liberal-democratic polity? The primary competing positions have been a “liberal” account and a “revisionist” response arguing for a greater role for religious argument in liberal democracy than the liberal position is ordinarily understood to allow. Liberals and their revisionist critics disagree about whether restraints on religious arguments and justifications are justified and desirable. Jürgen Habermas has intervened in this debate with a provocative account of the place of religion in the public sphere. Habermas presents his account as an alternative to both the liberal and the revisionist perspectives, and purports to do justice to the legitimate claims of each without falling prey to the failings of either. This article critically analyzes Habermas's interesting proposal and argues that it does not succeed.
39
Powell, Jason L. "Modernity, Communicative Action and Reconstruction of Rationality." International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 27 (May 2014): 177–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ilshs.27.177.
Full textAbstract:
Associated with the Frankfurt School, Jurgen Habermas's work focuses on the modern foundations of social theory and epistemology, the analysis of advanced capitalistic societies and democracy, the rule of law in a critical social-evolutionary context, and contemporary politics, particularly German politics. Habermas's theoretical system is devoted to revealing the possibility of reason, emancipation, and rational-critical communication latent in modern institutions and in the human capacity to deliberate and pursue rational interests. Habermas is known for his work on the concept of modernity, particularly with respect to the discussions of rationalization originally set forth by Max Weber. He has been influenced by American pragmatism and action theory. This paper sets out to explore the problems and possibilities of communicative action and the reconstruction of rationality which Habermas claims was lost in postmodern genre.
40
Morris, Martin. "On the Logic of the Performative Contradiction: Habermas and the Radical Critique of Reason." Review of Politics 58, no. 4 (1996): 735–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034670500020441.
Full textAbstract:
Jürgen Habermas levels the charge of performative contradiction as a scathing rebuke of inconsistency in his recent engagements with post-Nietzschean and Frankfurt critical theory. Focusing on this aspect of Habermas's critique of Theodor W. Adorno, the article argues against Habermas that Adorno's radical critique of reason actually pursues consistency in its radical critique of reason. It is contended that while Adorno's radical critique of reason may be total, it is not thereby hopeless and “aporetic” as critique. At root Adorno's critical theory may embody a “performative contradiction,” but this does not mean his project is necessarily incoherent or inconsistent.
41
Kakasur, Nadia Omer. "The Communicative Action of Habermas." Journal of University of Raparin 9, no. 5 (December 29, 2022): 389–413. http://dx.doi.org/10.26750/vol(9).no(5).paper18.
Full textAbstract:
Jürgen Habermas wants to establish the theory of communicative action, in a time where society is under influence of Instrumental mind. In other terms the authoritarian mind of the authoritarian through and capitalists in markets controlling companies, state authorities and the society.
Habermas intends to visualize the theory of Communicative action. The theory of a social criticism that based on Anthropology, linguistics, ethics, politics, social principles, philosophy and other principles, in order to point out the characteristics of intellectuals socio-institutionally, that consist of restriction and limit the human and nature, treating it as means.
This theory is to serve a critical-social analyses and to hold characteristics of intellectuals socio-institutionally, to have the ability breaking through the intellectuals socio-institutionally, that being for ages in the western intellectuals, aiming not only the individuals open up to each other, but to reach the level of fruitful understanding, to establish a intellectuals status and only by this is able to integrate the scattered parts of society, which the communicative is a social act and aiming toward (Social integration).
Therefore, to give a broader sense of this theory, our study presented in the following section: The Theory of Communicative Action, The role of Discourse Theory, Habermas’s Cosmopolitanism, Habermas’s Discourse Theory.
42
Hilabi, Igo Ilham, Andhika Rahmat Saputra, Chalimatuz Sa'diyah, and Siti Nurhasanah. "Communicative Action: Correlation Of Leadership Principles In The Viewpoint Of Muhammad Rasulullah And J. Habermas." Technium Social Sciences Journal 22 (August 9, 2021): 350–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.47577/tssj.v22i1.4169.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to briefly review the thoughts of Jurgen Habermas, a German philosopher at the Frankfurt School with his critical philosophy, especially regarding social thought, by comparing it with the concept of spiritual leadership in Islam as reflected by the leadership characteristics of the Prophet Muhammad SAW. Data processing uses descriptive analysis with a deconstruction paradigm, looking more sharply to provide new and critical meanings to the interpretation of Habermas's thoughts. The text is understood and rearranged from a different point of view. After finding the philosophical foundation and structure of Habermas' thought, the researcher compares his thoughts to the concept correlation of the Leadership of the Prophet Muhammad SAW so as to find Habermas' intentions related to Communicative Action and the rational development of society. The results of this study prove that Habermas's idea has a similar concept to Islamic spiritual leadership in a brief conceptualization that reflects the character and values that adhere to humanity, equality of emancipatory values and prioritizing communication in deliberation and solidarity that can lead to great ideals Naturalism is welfare in Habermasian Communicative Action. The spiritual implications of Islamic leadership are addressed using a democratic method and prioritizing the social side so that it has a purpose for the development of society.
43
Davenport, John. "How Lincoln Scooped Habermas." Res Philosophica 101, no. 2 (2024): 323–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/resphilosophica20241012124.
Full textAbstract:
In opposing Stephen Douglas’s alleged popular right to choose a slave constitution, Abraham Lincoln developed a rudimentary conception of the normative presuppositions of democratic rights that prefigures the theory of popular sovereignty articulated by Jürgen Habermas. While Lincoln was influenced by a civic republican conception of natural rights, and referred to personal autonomy in arguing that some political choices violate the grounds of collective self-governance rights, both Lincoln—as read by Jaffa—and Habermas conceive human rights not as trans-political principles but as linking moral norms with the rule of law (or coordination through political power in general). The comparison shows that Habermas’s approach to the co-originality of civil liberties and democratic rights implies that legitimate secession, revolution, and primary constituent authority must be oriented toward creation of a just legal order. This enriched linkage approach explains why the right to democracy, like the right to basic liberty, is inalienable.
44
Warnke, Georgia, and David M. Rasmussen. "Reading Habermas." Philosophical Quarterly 42, no. 166 (January 1992): 129. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2220466.
Full text
45
Marsh, James L. "Reading Habermas." International Philosophical Quarterly 33, no. 4 (1993): 480–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/ipq199333449.
Full text
46
Marsh, James L. "Jürgen Habermas." International Philosophical Quarterly 42, no. 4 (2002): 542–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/ipq200242458.
Full text
47
Faught, Jim, and Michael Pusey. "Jurgen Habermas." Contemporary Sociology 19, no. 2 (March 1990): 319. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2072655.
Full text
48
Howard, Dick. "Habermas citoyen." Esprit Août-sptmbr, no. 8 (2015): 94. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/espri.1508.0094.
Full text
49
Heller, Ágnes. "On Habermas." Thesis Eleven 143, no. 1 (December 2017): 8–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0725513617740934.
Full text
50
Turner, Charles. "Jürgen Habermas." European Journal of Political Theory 3, no. 3 (July 2004): 293–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1474885104043585.
Full text