Pour voir les autres types de publications sur ce sujet consultez le lien suivant : Habermas, Jürgen, Political and social views.
Articles de revues sur le sujet « Habermas, Jürgen, Political and social views »
Créez une référence correcte selon les styles APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard et plusieurs autres
Consultez les 50 meilleurs articles de revues pour votre recherche sur le sujet « Habermas, Jürgen, Political and social views ».
À côté de chaque source dans la liste de références il y a un bouton « Ajouter à la bibliographie ». Cliquez sur ce bouton, et nous générerons automatiquement la référence bibliographique pour la source choisie selon votre style de citation préféré : APA, MLA, Harvard, Vancouver, Chicago, etc.
Vous pouvez aussi télécharger le texte intégral de la publication scolaire au format pdf et consulter son résumé en ligne lorsque ces informations sont inclues dans les métadonnées.
Parcourez les articles de revues sur diverses disciplines et organisez correctement votre bibliographie.
1
Sharbaugh, Patrick E., et Dang Nguyen. « Make Lulz, Not War : How Online Remix and Meme Culture are Empowering Civic Engagement in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam ». Asiascape : Digital Asia 1, no 3 (30 juillet 2014) : 133–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22142312-12340010.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Although social media platforms have garnered much attention in recent years for their putative role in dramatic social and political movements around the world, scholars such as Clay Shirky and Ethan Zuckerman have suggested that the real potential of such tools for change exists in the way they empower citizens to publicly articulate and debate an array of conflicting views throughout society. In this view, social media matters most not in the streets and squares but in the social commons that Jürgen Habermas termed the public sphere. New image-based social media platforms and creative practices in Vietnam appear to be emerging as powerful tools in this regard, offering a voice to a citizenry who, since 1975, have lived under an authoritarian, and not clearly delineated, legal order restricting the opinions and views eligible for public expression.In 2013, Vietnamese netizens turned to the digital techniques of remix and memetic culture to indirectly express and debate sentiment on issues of often sensitive social and political relevance. Using two recent case studies, we argue that this widespread practice constitutes a culturally-specific form of civic and political engagement that appears to be exerting a subtle but real influence upon the state in this rapidly developing Southeast Asian nation.
2
Morris, Martin. « Deliberation and Deconstruction : Two Views on the Space of a Post-National Democracy ». Canadian Journal of Political Science 34, no 4 (décembre 2001) : 763–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008423901778080.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Theorists of deliberation and deconstruction each claim commitments to a more open and legitimate democracy than existing liberal democracy. Eschewing traditional foundations such as natural law, historical inheritance, or the constitutive formation of the nation, they seek to develop a theory of democracy that is more inclusive in conditions of social diversity and complexity. This article investigates the meaning of the open political space that fosters the democratic experience under such conditions. First, a sociologically informed political theory, such as Jürgen Habermas' powerful if flawed attempt, is required to conceive participation in the democratic political sphere. Drawing on Jacques Derrida and others, the author then argues that deconstructive insights that introduce an openness to the non-identical contribute to a more complete democratic theory, offering a crucial mode of democratic inclusion of the other and an acknowledgment of difference that might assist in reforming current institutions. Thus a blend of Habermasian orientation toward deliberation and deconstruction's ethical sensibilities presents a promising development of democratic possibilities.
3
Alikberov, A. K. « Modern theories of religion viewed through the prism of the system-communication approach ». Minbar. Islamic Studies 12, no 1 (4 juin 2019) : 15–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2019-12-1-15-33.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article offers an analysis of the most influential modern theories of religion. The theory of secularization is associated with the classical theory of modernization. The theory of individualization of religion is associated with theories of social action, albeit indirectly. Likewise, it is connected with the theory of communicative action by Jürgen Habermas, and there is also a direct association with theories of individualization and privatization. The theory of the market model of religion is directly associated with the theory of the market for demand and supply, and the theory of post-industrial society is associated with the theory of secularization indirectly. In addition, various theories are gaining recognition. Among them is the postsecularism associated with the theory of postindustrial society, as well as postnonclassical (postmodernist and postpositivist) approach. Modern theories of religion are analysed from the point of view of the emerging system-communication approach, which is based upon the communicative approach theory by Jürgen Habermas, and the theory of self-reference social systems by Niklas Luhmann. The author suggests, while being within the framework of the neoclassical model of scientific rationality, to move away from the theories by Habermas and Luhmann. He suggests a new understanding of religious communication, in terms of its logical interconnection and interdependence with other forms of communication, primarily social, political, ethnic and cultural.
4
OLIVEIRA, Frederico Antonio Lima, et Jeferson Antonio Fernandes BACELAR. « LIMITES CONSTITUCIONAIS DO PRINCÍPIO POLÍTICO DO BEM COMUM À REALIZAÇÃO DA IGUALDADE EM SOCIEDADES COMPLEXAS COMO A BRASILEIRA ». Revista Juridica 3, no 56 (5 juillet 2019) : 211. http://dx.doi.org/10.21902/revistajur.2316-753x.v3i56.3574.
Texte intégralRésumé :
RESUMOA ideia central deste estudo é traçar alguns possíveis parâmetros para a limitação do princípio político do bem comum numa sociedade complexa como a brasileira. Objetiva-se relacionar a busca da igualdade no estado brasileiro com os limites necessários à realização do bem comum, estabelecendo a prevalência de interesses em coalisão na esfera pública em análise, ante as nossas flagrantes iniciativas desestatizantes. Vale-se como referencial teórico de Jürgen Habermas quanto à esfera pública, revendo-se a literatura com a doutrina de John Finns. Tem-se uma pesquisa básica, exploratória, bibliográfica, com abordagem qualitativa e descritiva, a fim de se obter as conclusões necessárias.PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Bem Comum; Igualdade; Estado Social; Sociedade Complexa; Esfera Pública.ABSTRACTThe central idea of this study is to outline some possible parameters for limiting the political principle of the common good in a complex society such as Brazil. The objective is to relate the search for equality in the Brazilian state with the necessary limits to the realization of the common good, establishing the prevalence of interests in coalition in the public sphere under analysis, in view of our flagrant destatizing initiatives. It is worth as theoretical reference of Jürgen Habermas as far as the public sphere, being reviewed the literature with the doctrine of John Finns. We have a basic, exploratory, bibliographic research, with a qualitative and descriptive approach, in order to obtain the necessary conclusions.KEYWORDS: Common Good; Equality; Social State; Complex Society; Public Sphere.
5
PEFFER, RODNEY G. « SYMPOSIUM ON GLOBALIZATION AND JUSTICE : INTRODUCTION ». Economics and Philosophy 22, no 1 (mars 2006) : 113–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0266267105000726.
Texte intégralRésumé :
For over half a century in more than a dozen books and 600 philosophical articles Kai Nielsen has developed and defended a radically egalitarian theory of social justice as well as a political vision demanding a democratic, humane form of socialism and, on an international level, a federative world socialist government embodying these values. In Globalization and Justice Nielsen applies his acute analytical abilities and his substantive theories and views to the present ongoing reality of corporate, capitalist globalization, arguing that this sort of globalization is unjust in that it further disadvantages the developing world. He then argues for an alternative sort of globalization, a process that he believes could and should have, as its end goal, a democratic and humane socialist government and society on a world-wide scale. Along the way he compares his theory and vision to those of such other major contemporary thinkers as John Rawls, Jürgen Habermas, G.A. Cohen, and Richard Rorty representing, respectively, liberal egalitarianism, critical theory, analytical Marxism (at least formerly), and post-modern eclecticism.
6
Ebijuwa, Temisanren. « The Public Sphere, Deweyan Democracy and Rational Discourse in Africa ». Dialogue and Universalism 31, no 9999 (2021) : 67–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/du202131supplement37.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The quest for a decent political order in many societies is imperative today because of the heterogeneous nature of our social existence and the complexity of our ever increasing socio-economic and political experiences. Since the public sphere is a domain of freedom exemplified by dialogical engagements, the outcome of such encounter must involve the intelligible thoughts of all discussants with the sole aim of dealing with the concerns and commanding the commitment of all to the decisions reached. In this study, it is argued that Deweyan democracy as an alternative theory of rational inquiry is relevant for engaging the present sordid condition of many Africans democratic practice and policy outcomes. As a rational procedure, it is averred that John Dewey’s emphasis on epistemic properties of democratic discourse makes the proceduralist account of democracy superfluous and exposes the weakness of the content of democratic discourse in political actions and decisions. The study also contend that given the consensual state of Dewey’s epistemic thought, Jürgen Habermas theory rather than expanding the space of epistemic democracy stifled it because of his insistence on the force of a better argument in the resolution of conflicting concerns of dialoguers. The study therefore, argues for Dewey’s democracy as an alternative mode of political order since it does not undermine the views of the citizens but gives room for the activation a certain set of attitude that can challenge prevailing opinions and accepts the views that do not embrace conventional wisdom—a procedure that is necessary for the growth and development of our democratic space.
7
Heath, Joseph. « Rebooting discourse ethics ». Philosophy & ; Social Criticism 40, no 9 (12 août 2014) : 829–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0191453714545340.
Texte intégralRésumé :
In this article I argue that the conception of discourse ethics that Jürgen Habermas advances in his seminar paper, ‘Discourse Ethics: Notes on a Program of Philosophical Justification’, is subject to significant revision in later work. The central difference has to do with the status of the universalization principle and its relationship to the ‘rightness’ validity claim. The earlier view is structured by a desire to provide a weak-transcendental defense of the universalization principle. The later revision, however, essentially undercuts the basis of this argument, because it severs the conception of practical discourse from the analysis of speech acts. As a way of responding to the difficulties this creates, I propose a ‘reboot’ of the discourse ethics program. This involves reverting to the earlier, more Durkheimian and less Kantian, formulation of the theory. The result is a program that is no longer encumbered by sterile debates about the correct formulation of the universalization principle, but can plausibly claim to provide insight into the role that language-dependence plays in the development and entrenchment of increasingly pro-social behavior patterns within our institutions.
8
Medina-Vicent, María. « Responsabilidad Social de Género y obligatoriedad moral = Gender Social Responsibility and moral obligatoriness ». FEMERIS : Revista Multidisciplinar de Estudios de Género 2, no 1 (17 janvier 2017) : 30. http://dx.doi.org/10.20318/femeris.2017.3546.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Resumen: La igualdad entre mujeres y hombres debe ser integrada en la gestión de las empresas. Y es que se trata de una exigencia social válida y vigente que afecta a todas las esferas sociales, desde la política a la economía. Desde nuestro punto de vista, una gestión basada en la ética dialógica habermasiana puede ser el modo más acertado para que las empresas se comprometan con esta tarea. Dicho modelo nos aporta las claves para una gestión empresarial que convierta la igualdad en un valor irrenunciable de la cultura corporativa. En esta línea, la demanda por la ética empresarial y la igualdad de género ha sido incorporada en la agenda política y económica de la Unión Europea, entendida centralmente como un recurso para aumentar la competitividad de los países miembros. Así pues, analizaremos el riesgo que conlleva este discurso de la rentabilidad, a la vez que abordamos la potencialidad de la ética empresarial dialógica y de la Responsabilidad Social de Género para impulsar la igualdad de género en la empresa. Palabras clave: igualdad de género, ética empresarial, responsabilidad social de género. Abstract: The equality between women and men need to be integrated into the business management. It is a valid and current social demand which involves all social fields, from politics to economy. From our point of view, business management based on the Discourse Ethics of Jürgen Habermas can be the most successful way for companies to achieve this aim. This model gives us the key to promote a business management where equality becomes an inalienable value of corporate culture. In this line, the demand for business ethics and gender equality has been incorporated into the political and economic agenda of the European Union, understood as a resource to enhance the competitiveness of member countries. Thus, we will analyze the risk associated with this profitability discourse, while we address the potential of the dialogic ethics for business and the Gender Social Responsibility concept to promote gender equality in companies. Keywords: gender equality, business ethics, gender social responsibility. doi: https://doi.org/10.20318/femeris.2017.3546
9
Кочанович, Лешек. « DIALOGUE FOR SPACE, SPACE FOR DIALOGUE ». ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics, no 4(26) (22 novembre 2020) : 90–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.23951/2312-7899-2020-4-90-97.
Texte intégralRésumé :
В статье рассматриваются основные проблемы современной демократии, особенно городской демократии. Массовые протесты и демонстрации свидетельствуют о том, что существующие механизмы либеральной демократии перестали выполнять свою роль. В статье анализируются причины такого положения вещей. Также приводятся причины, по которым демократия в городе имеет особое значение для понимания функционирования демократического общества. Далее описываются три концепции демократии, которые имеют особое значение. Это: прагматическая концепция, концепция коммуникативной деятельности и концепция неконсенсусного диалога и неконсенсусной демократии. Эта третья концепция была разработана автором статьи. Он понимает демократический диалог как средство понимания, а не согласия. Таким образом, демократия заключается в том, чтобы лучше понять конкурента, а не в достижении с ним соглашения. Однако для того, чтобы эта форма демократии работала, необходимо соответствующее образование на всех уровнях. In the past years it has become clear that liberal democracy is in crisis and that this crisis is first of all visible in the public sphere and in the public space. The new social movements in many countries have re-defined the public space introducing to it elements which have not been so far present in the public sphere, for instance, demonstrations which turned into long-lasting meetings, performances, artistic activities, and so on. Moreover, it has turned out that the crisis touched not only the liberal system of institutions but also the civil society and the party system that had been a backbone of liberal democracy. The aim of the article is thus to look at human space/city space as a machine for communication, or, strictly speaking, a machine for understanding. The article has been inspired by the views of American pragmatists, mainly John Dewey’s and George Herbert Mead’s as well as Mikhail Bakhtin’s concepts of dialogue and carnival. I think that taking such a standpoint would lead to better understanding the new social movements in city space. The four models of communication in the city space are discussed in the article. The first model is taken from the philosophy of American pragmatism. Its main features are: the close relationship between politics and everyday life, and the concept of democracy as a form of life of a community. The pragmatists also put stress on dialogue/communication as an activity which forms social life as well as our mind and self. The second model is Jürgen Habermas’s concept of communicative action. Habermas states that the possibility of an agreement is inscribed in the very structure of language if certain conditions are fulfilled. He calls these conditions “the ideal communicative situation.” The continuators of Habermas’s theory have developed it into the idea of “deliberative democracy”, i.e., democracy which is a permanent discussion of the most important social and political issues. The third model is associated with Bakhtin’s notion of dialogue as a phenomenon which permeates all human interactions. Finally, I propose my model of communication which is based on my concept of dialogue as a vehicle of understanding rather than vehicle of agreement. Starting from the last model I discuss the question of the role of the university in the democratic society. My idea is that the humanities should give up any ambition to universality and instead they should facilitate mutual understanding. Therefore, their function has changed radically. Traditionally, they serve to maintain national or religious identity and/or promote individual perfection. Now, they should prepare people to enter a dialogical relationship with the Other.
10
Finlayson, James Gordon. « Happy Birthday Jürgen Habermas ». Studies in Social and Political Thought 29 (2 septembre 2019) : 32–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.20919/sspt.29.2019.115.
Texte intégralRésumé :
[No abstract] First paragraph: Habermas turned ninety on June 18th 2019. Over the last six decades he’s been Germany’s foremost social theorist, philosopher, public intellectual, and journalist. His political writings currently stretch to twelve volumes. Cue a host of different public events across Germany celebrating his life and work. Cue also the usual paeans and panegyrics, and, as anyone who has followed the on-line discussion will know, some remarkably harsh criticism.
11
Carleheden, Mikael, et René Gabriëls. « An Interview with Jürgen Habermas ». Theory, Culture & ; Society 13, no 3 (août 1996) : 1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026327696013003001.
Texte intégral
12
Winter, Rainer. « On the Contemporary Relevance of Jürgen Habermas’ Social Theory ». Theory, Culture & ; Society 37, no 7-8 (27 octobre 2020) : 5–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276420959438.
Texte intégralRésumé :
This introduction discusses the contemporary relevance of Jürgen Habermas’ social theory following the publication of his recent work, Auch eine Geschichte der Philosophie (2019). It deals with his key topics and interventionist style of thinking. The essence of Habermas’ critical theory is its unwavering commitment to the utopia of communicative reason.
13
Ivanov, D. « Jürgen Habermas’ Post-marxism and Dialectics of Social Development ». Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, no 6 (juin 2019) : 26–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/s013216250005479-9.
Texte intégral
14
Chernilo, Daniel. « Jürgen Habermas : Modern social theory as postmetaphysical natural law ». Journal of Classical Sociology 13, no 2 (mai 2013) : 254–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468795x13477294.
Texte intégral
15
Greve, Jens. « Jürgen Habermas : Wahrheit und Rechtfertigung. Philosophische Aufsätze ». KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 53, no 1 (mars 2001) : 166–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11577-001-0009-2.
Texte intégral
16
Blau, Judith R. « Group Enmity and Accord ». Social Science History 24, no 2 (2000) : 395–413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0145553200010208.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Social theory provides two opposing views about the role played by mass communications in modernizing America. Mass society theorists, including José Ortega y Gasset (1932), George Seldes (1938), and Joseph Bensman and Bernard Rosenberg (1963), and also critical theorists, especially Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno (1991 [1944]) and Jürgen Habermas (1989), maintained that the mass press weakens authentic forms of community, whereas, in contrast, Chicago School sociologists, especially Robert Park(1971 [1922]), contended that the newspaper, notably the ethnic press, buffers the individual against the brutalizing effects of the city’s impersonality and disorganization.Instead of encouraging reflective and rational thought, the commercial press, according to Habermas (1989: 195), is both emblem and harbinger of the decay of civil society as it reinforces the totalizing processes of modernity and offers the public crass and stultifying banalities.
17
Mayer, Seth. « Interpreting the Situation of Political Disagreement : Rancière and Habermas ». Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy 27, no 2 (26 novembre 2019) : 8–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jffp.2019.888.
Texte intégralRésumé :
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.
18
van der Burg, Wibren. « Jürgen Habermas on Law and Morality : Some Critical Comments ». Theory, Culture & ; Society 7, no 4 (novembre 1990) : 105–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026327690007004007.
Texte intégral
19
Haacke, Jürgen. « The Frankfurt School and International Relations' on the centrality of recognition ». Review of International Studies 31, no 1 (janvier 2005) : 181–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0260210505006376.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The works of Jürgen Habermas have amounted to an inspiration to many within IR. His writings on communicative rationality and communicative action are widely regarded as a useful counterpoint to the emphasis on instrumental rationality and strategic action. Also, Habermas has greatly influenced the development of Critical International Theory. However, as other contributions in this Forum demonstrate, IR scholars have at times found it difficult to apply Habermas to service their specific social scientific inquiries. In particular, it has been difficult to unequivocally locate communicative action in diplomatic exchanges or international negotiations. It is partly for this reason that the contributions of the so-called ‘Third Generation’ of Frankfurt School scholars have attracted increasing interest. Axel Honneth's attempts to reconstruct insights in relation to the struggle for recognition into a social theory (with critical intent) have to date been of particular importance in this context. Indeed, given the perceived difficulties in ‘applying’ Habermas, there appears to be an emerging trend to end the honeymoon with Habermas in favour of a reorientation toward Honneth.
20
White, Stephen K. « Foucault's Challenge to Critical Theory ». American Political Science Review 80, no 2 (juin 1986) : 419–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1958266.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Power, subjectivity, otherness, and modernity are concepts that contemporary political theorists increasingly find to be closely interwoven. In search of an adequate comprehension of the interrelationships among these concepts, I examine the work of Michel Foucault and Jürgen Habermas. I argue that Foucault, although he is provocatively insightful on a number of key points, ultimately provides a less satisfactory account than Habermas. The core problem is Foucault's inability to conceptualize juridical subjectivity, something which is necessary if he is going to connect his notion of aesthetic subjectivity with his endorsement of new social movements.
21
García, Ana Pamela. « El problema de la opinión pública en el pensamiento sociológico de Habermas, Luhmann y Bourdieu : disquisiciones políticas, comunicacionales e ideológicas sobre un fenómeno ¿democrático ? » Revista Temas Sociológicos, no 18 (26 octobre 2016) : 143. http://dx.doi.org/10.29344/07194145.18.258.
Texte intégralRésumé :
ResumenSe discute aquí el carácter de la “opinión pública” como categoría conceptual en el marco de las perspectivas de Jürgen Habermas, Niklas Luhmann y Pierre Bourdieu. Sus lecturas sobre este fenómeno psico-socio-político y comunicativo, todavía polémico dentro del debate sobre las formas sociales de la democracia representativa, se abordan considerando: primero, la relación de continuidad de sus propuestas con las principales tradiciones de la teoría social contemporánea; segundo, su potencialidad crítica para un esclarecimiento sociológico de la relación entre opinión pública y “medios masivos de comunicación”; tercero, sus diferentes concepciones del “espacio público” como categoría central oresidual en la comprensión del sentido de la acción social.Palabras clave: opinión pública, medios masivos, espacio público, sociología política, democracia.The problem of public opinion in the sociological thought of Habermas, Luhmann and Bourdieu: political, communicational and ideologicaldisquisitions on a “democratic?” phenomenonAbstractThis paper discusses the character of “public opinion” as a conceptualcategory within the perspectives of Jürgen Habermas, Pierre Bourdieu and Niklas Luhmann. Their literature about this psycho-socio-political andcommunicative phenomenon, still controversial in the discussion on thesocial forms of representative democracy, are addressed considering: First,the relationship of continuity of their proposals with the main traditions ofcontemporary social theory; second, its critical potential for a sociologicalclarification of the relationship between public opinion and “mass media”;third, their different conceptions of “public space” as a central or residualcategory in understanding the meaning of social action.Keywords: public opinion, mass media, public space, political sociology,democracy.O problema da opinião pública no pensamento sociológico de Habermas, Luhmann e Bourdieu: discussões políticas, comunicacionais e ideológicos sobre um fenômeno ¿democrático?ResumoDiscute-se aqui o caráter da “opinião pública” como categoria conceitualno marco das perspectivas de Jürgen Habermas, Niklas Luhmann ePierre Bourdieu. Suas leituras sobre este fenômeno psico-sócio-político ecomunicativo, ainda polêmico dentro do debate sobre as formas sociais dademocracia representativa, abordam-se considerando: primeiro, a relação de continuidade de suas propostas com as principais tradições da teoria social contemporânea; segundo, sua potencialidade crítica para um esclarecimento sociológico da relação entre a opinião pública e “meios massivos de comunicação”; terceiro, suas diferentes concepções do “espaço público”como categoria central ou residual na compreensão do sentido da ação social.Palavras-chave: opinião pública, meios massivos de comunicação, espaçopúblico, sociologia política, democracia.
22
García, Ana Pamela. « El problema de la opinión pública en el pensamiento sociológico de Habermas, Luhmann y Bourdieu : disquisiciones políticas, comunicacionales e ideológicas sobre un fenómeno ¿democrático ? » Revista Temas Sociológicos, no 18 (26 octobre 2016) : 143. http://dx.doi.org/10.29344/07196458.18.1142.
Texte intégralRésumé :
ResumenSe discute aquí el carácter de la “opinión pública” como categoría conceptual en el marco de las perspectivas de Jürgen Habermas, Niklas Luhmann y Pierre Bourdieu. Sus lecturas sobre este fenómeno psico-socio-político y comunicativo, todavía polémico dentro del debate sobre las formas sociales de la democracia representativa, se abordan considerando: primero, la relación de continuidad de sus propuestas con las principales tradiciones de la teoría social contemporánea; segundo, su potencialidad crítica para un esclarecimiento sociológico de la relación entre opinión pública y “medios masivos de comunicación”; tercero, sus diferentes concepciones del “espacio público” como categoría central oresidual en la comprensión del sentido de la acción social.Palabras clave: opinión pública, medios masivos, espacio público, sociología política, democracia.The problem of public opinion in the sociological thought of Habermas, Luhmann and Bourdieu: political, communicational and ideologicaldisquisitions on a “democratic?” phenomenonAbstractThis paper discusses the character of “public opinion” as a conceptualcategory within the perspectives of Jürgen Habermas, Pierre Bourdieu and Niklas Luhmann. Their literature about this psycho-socio-political andcommunicative phenomenon, still controversial in the discussion on thesocial forms of representative democracy, are addressed considering: First,the relationship of continuity of their proposals with the main traditions ofcontemporary social theory; second, its critical potential for a sociologicalclarification of the relationship between public opinion and “mass media”;third, their different conceptions of “public space” as a central or residualcategory in understanding the meaning of social action.Keywords: public opinion, mass media, public space, political sociology,democracy.O problema da opinião pública no pensamento sociológico de Habermas, Luhmann e Bourdieu: discussões políticas, comunicacionais e ideológicos sobre um fenômeno ¿democrático?ResumoDiscute-se aqui o caráter da “opinião pública” como categoria conceitualno marco das perspectivas de Jürgen Habermas, Niklas Luhmann ePierre Bourdieu. Suas leituras sobre este fenômeno psico-sócio-político ecomunicativo, ainda polêmico dentro do debate sobre as formas sociais dademocracia representativa, abordam-se considerando: primeiro, a relação de continuidade de suas propostas com as principais tradições da teoria social contemporânea; segundo, sua potencialidade crítica para um esclarecimento sociológico da relação entre a opinião pública e “meios massivos de comunicação”; terceiro, suas diferentes concepções do “espaço público”como categoria central ou residual na compreensão do sentido da ação social.Palavras-chave: opinião pública, meios massivos de comunicação, espaçopúblico, sociologia política, democracia.
23
García, Ana Pamela. « El problema de la opinión pública en el pensamiento sociológico de Habermas, Luhmann y Bourdieu : disquisiciones políticas, comunicacionales e ideológicas sobre un fenómeno ¿democrático ? » Revista Temas Sociológicos, no 18 (26 octobre 2016) : 143. http://dx.doi.org/10.29344/07196458.18.258.
Texte intégralRésumé :
ResumenSe discute aquí el carácter de la “opinión pública” como categoría conceptual en el marco de las perspectivas de Jürgen Habermas, Niklas Luhmann y Pierre Bourdieu. Sus lecturas sobre este fenómeno psico-socio-político y comunicativo, todavía polémico dentro del debate sobre las formas sociales de la democracia representativa, se abordan considerando: primero, la relación de continuidad de sus propuestas con las principales tradiciones de la teoría social contemporánea; segundo, su potencialidad crítica para un esclarecimiento sociológico de la relación entre opinión pública y “medios masivos de comunicación”; tercero, sus diferentes concepciones del “espacio público” como categoría central oresidual en la comprensión del sentido de la acción social.Palabras clave: opinión pública, medios masivos, espacio público, sociología política, democracia.The problem of public opinion in the sociological thought of Habermas, Luhmann and Bourdieu: political, communicational and ideologicaldisquisitions on a “democratic?” phenomenonAbstractThis paper discusses the character of “public opinion” as a conceptualcategory within the perspectives of Jürgen Habermas, Pierre Bourdieu and Niklas Luhmann. Their literature about this psycho-socio-political andcommunicative phenomenon, still controversial in the discussion on thesocial forms of representative democracy, are addressed considering: First,the relationship of continuity of their proposals with the main traditions ofcontemporary social theory; second, its critical potential for a sociologicalclarification of the relationship between public opinion and “mass media”;third, their different conceptions of “public space” as a central or residualcategory in understanding the meaning of social action.Keywords: public opinion, mass media, public space, political sociology,democracy.O problema da opinião pública no pensamento sociológico de Habermas, Luhmann e Bourdieu: discussões políticas, comunicacionais e ideológicos sobre um fenômeno ¿democrático?ResumoDiscute-se aqui o caráter da “opinião pública” como categoria conceitualno marco das perspectivas de Jürgen Habermas, Niklas Luhmann ePierre Bourdieu. Suas leituras sobre este fenômeno psico-sócio-político ecomunicativo, ainda polêmico dentro do debate sobre as formas sociais dademocracia representativa, abordam-se considerando: primeiro, a relação de continuidade de suas propostas com as principais tradições da teoria social contemporânea; segundo, sua potencialidade crítica para um esclarecimento sociológico da relação entre a opinião pública e “meios massivos de comunicação”; terceiro, suas diferentes concepções do “espaço público”como categoria central ou residual na compreensão do sentido da ação social.Palavras-chave: opinião pública, meios massivos de comunicação, espaçopúblico, sociologia política, democracia.
24
Calloni, Marina, Michele Nicoletti et Stefano Petrucciani. « Filosofia, pensiero post-metafisico e sfera pubblica in cambiamento. Intervista a Jürgen Habermas ». Rivista Italiana di Filosofia Politica, no 1 (3 décembre 2021) : 137–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.36253/rifp-1441.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Habermas is one of the most eminent contemporary systematic thinkers and the author of the theory of communicative action. From the 1960s to the present, Habermas has published on philosophy and social theory, reflected upon law and democracy, and participated in public debates on current issues. The interview aims at retracing the main themes of his thought, underlining the indissoluble and persisting link which joins philosophy with politics and public engagement. The interview also emphasizes the main developments of his thought, including about the role of religion in contemporary societies, mentioned in his recent work on “A History of Philosophy”. Another crucial topic is the idea of the public sphere as developed by Habermas from his early studies up to the analysis on the ongoing structural change of public opinion due to the instrumental use of social media in the digital age. Habermas advocates an idea of philosophy as post-metaphysical and specialistic – fallibilistic and at the same time interdisciplinary – knowledge, which contributes clarifying arguments to current discussions. The recent debate on the Covid 19 pandemic, as well as on the urgent environmental challenges, becomes an opportunity to understand how philosophy – as critical and self-reflective knowledge – can defend the discursive and normative principles, which are constitutive of the democratic State and the rule of law. Philosophy even has a role to play in addressing the crisis of institutional politics and the emergence of conspiracy populisms, but also in the exponential increase of social inequalities. Finally, Habermas recalls his consistent link since the 1960s with the Italian philosophical and political debate and scholars.
25
Gerbaudo, Paolo. « Theorizing Reactive Democracy ». Democratic Theory 9, no 2 (1 décembre 2022) : 120–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.3167/dt.2022.090207.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The diffusion of social media has profoundly transformed the nature and form of the contemporary public sphere, facilitating the rise of new political tactics and movements. In this article, I develop a theory of the social media public sphere as a “plebeian public sphere” whose functioning is markedly different from the traditional public sphere, described by Jürgen Habermas. Differently from Habermas’ critical-rational publics, this social media public sphere is dominated by online crowds that come together in virtual gatherings made visible by a variety of social media reactions and metrics that measure their presence. It can be best described as a “reactive democracy,” a plebiscitary form of democracy in which reactions are understood as an implicit vote indicating the mood of public opinion on a variety of issues.
26
Diez, Thomas, et Jill Steans. « A useful dialogue ? Habermas and International Relations ». Review of International Studies 31, no 1 (janvier 2005) : 127–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0260210505006339.
Texte intégralRésumé :
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.
27
Reyes, Giovanni E., Mark Govers et Dirk Ruwaard. « Social Inclusion and Social Leverage Foundations : A Theoretical Review ». Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 9, no 6 (1 novembre 2018) : 19–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/mjss-2018-0158.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Abstract The main aim of this research is to present a theoretical review regarding the theory of social inclusion and social leverage. In this research, four fundamental and complementary approaches are taken into account: (i) the theory of growing capacities and increasing opportunities as essential aspects of Amartya Sen's theory of human development; (ii) the perspective and factors of the current process of globalization; (iii) Douglass North's neoinstitutionalist approach to social and political conditions; and (iv) foundations of the legitimacy theory from Jürgen Habermas. These considerations made possible a more comprehensive consideration that goes beyond the strictly economic elements, to complement the standpoint with other elements, including those of public policy analysis.
28
Latysh, Yurii. « WHY DON’T LEFT PUBLIC INTELLECTUALS UNDERSTAND UKRAINE ? (CASES OF NOAM CHOMSKY AND JÜRGEN HABERMAS) ». European Historical Studies, no 21 (2022) : 69–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2524-048x.2022.21.5.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article considers the attitude of left public intellectuals to the Russian-Ukrainian war. A brief analysis of the concept of “public intellectual”, the roles and functions of intellectuals in society is made. Based on the study of public speeches of famous philosophers and influential intellectuals Noam Chomsky (USA) and Jürgen Habermas (Germany), their views on the causes and possibilities of ending the Russian-Ukrainian war, as well as the circumstances of their reproduction of individual Russian narratives, were analyzed. The conclusions show that Noam Chomsky and Jürgen Habermas see the role of the public intellectual in the position of a critical dissident. They have traumatic memories of World War II, using of nuclear weapons, and the Cold War. Therefore, they seek to avoid a recurrence of these events. Chomsky wants to keep the chance for Europe as a “third power” between the United States and Russia and for the space of security from the Atlantic to Vladivostok. Habermas seeks to preserve the post-national and post-heroic mentality of the Germans as a guarantee of the revival of German militarism, which led to two world wars. Chomsky focuses on the problems of the global world order (and because of this he is ready to sacrifice Ukraine to the idea of a single European security space). Habermas is primarily concerned with internal German issues and fears the influence of an overly national Ukraine. He supports the Social Democrats and the moderate policies of Chancellor Olaf Scholz. Ukraine is not in the center of their attention, although they have sympathy for Ukraine. Russia abuses the fears of intellectuals, especially of a nuclear war. But they cannot be branded as agents of the Kremlin. We need to look for arguments for these authoritative and wise people how to make Ukraine interesting for them.
29
Joas, Hans. « Faith and Knowledge : Habermas’ Alternative History of Philosophy1 ». Theory, Culture & ; Society 37, no 7-8 (2 novembre 2020) : 47–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276420957746.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Jürgen Habermas’ philosophical oeuvre so far contained only few references to thinkers prior to Kant. The publication of a comprehensive history of Western philosophy by this author, therefore, came as a surprise. The book is not, as many had anticipated, a book about religion, but about the gradual emancipation of “secular” “autonomous” rationality from religion, although in a way that preserves a normative commitment to Christianity. While welcoming this attitude and praising the achievements of this book, this text is also critical with regard to Habermas' understanding of faith and hints at several shortcomings of the historical argument resulting from this deficient presupposition.
30
Ocampo, Sergio Pignuoli. « Una reconstrucción metateórica y arquitectónica del programa sociológico de Jürgen Habermas ». Papers. Revista de Sociologia 105, no 1 (26 juillet 2019) : 83. http://dx.doi.org/10.5565/rev/papers.2566.
Texte intégral
31
Outhwaite, William. « The Crisis of the European Union : A Response by Jürgen Habermas ». Theory, Culture & ; Society 30, no 3 (mai 2013) : 128–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276412474329.
Texte intégral
32
McCormick, John P. « Three Ways of Thinking “Critically” about the Law ». American Political Science Review 93, no 2 (juin 1999) : 413–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2585404.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Radical criticisms of liberalism's method of legal adjudication focus on its excessive formalism, its tendency to foster indeterminacy, and its naive maintenance of the separation of political from legal concerns. I examine these arguments as they appear in the work of Carl Schmitt, on the Right, and the Critical Legal Studies (CLS) movement, on the Left. Jürgen Habermas has recently attempted to refute the positions of these most scalding twentieth-century critics of liberal adjudication. I argue that by so extensively engaging these theorists, and in fact liberalism itself, on their own grounds, Habermas has abandoned some of the distinctive strengths of what he previously practiced as a critical social theory in his new reflexive or discourse theory of law.
33
Michalska, Anna. « What Brandom won’t make explicit ». Philosophy & ; Social Criticism 44, no 1 (19 décembre 2017) : 41–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0191453717723191.
Texte intégralRésumé :
In this contribution, I refer to a discussion between Jürgen Habermas and Robert Brandom on the latter’s normative pragmatics as advanced in Making it Explicit. Parting with Habermas, I intend to show that though both normative pragmatics and formal pragmatics postulate similar discursive ideals, the former, as compared with the latter, is not a particularly well-calibrated critical tool. I argue that whereas Brandom focuses on making conceptual norms explicit, and takes mutual recognition among participants to a linguistic practice for granted, Habermas proposes a universal frame of reference (to oneself, each other, and the world), which delineates what should be taken as a paradigm case of perception and (inter-)action, and thus a normative standard according to which all kinds of human endeavors can be judged. Thus construed, the formal frame of reference points to possible perceptual distortions along any of the three dimensions: the subjective, social, and objective worlds.
34
Doughty, Howard A. « A Rational Society ? » International Journal of Adult Education and Technology 11, no 1 (janvier 2020) : 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijaet.2020010101.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Within the past century in North America, Europe, and elsewhere, brief episodes of student political activism and protest have alternated with much longer periods of apparent apathy and social conformity (fringe elements of artistic bohemianism notwithstanding). This article looks to the ideological origins of student protest in the Marxist tradition and to the relationship among generational protest, critical theory and the influence of Jürgen Habermas on the evolving issues of democracy, social justice, and environmental sustainability. While Marx remains central to the critique of capitalist economics and the exploitation of workers under capitalism, Habermas opens the path to a more expansive, communication-based understanding of domination with implications for transformative education that will contribute to a social change based on a wider platform than social class, including issues of ecology and social justice in a comprehensive approach to human emancipation.
35
Sultana, Ronald G. « Rousseau’s chains : Striving for greater social justice through emancipatory career guidance ». Journal of the National Institute for Career Education and Counselling 33, no 1 (1 octobre 2014) : 15–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.20856/jnicec.3303.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Drawing on a typology proposed by social philosopher Jürgen Habermas, this article outlines the way career theory, practice and research can be informed by technocratic, hermeneutic, and emancipatory rationalities. The paper builds on this typology by considering Tony Watts’ analysis of the socio-political ideologies underpinning career guidance, showing how, despite the in-built tendency for some models to be more socially reproductive in scope, all approaches can engage with emancipatory forms of practice. The paper echoes Watts’ observation that career practitioners cannot avoid the inherently normative and political nature of their interventions in people’s lives, a fact that calls for a fundamental commitment to promoting social justice.
36
Ky Dong, Tran. « The theory of communicative action of Jürgen Habermas with religious issues in the public sphere ». Science & ; Technology Development Journal - Social Sciences & ; Humanities 4, no 1 (4 avril 2020) : First. http://dx.doi.org/10.32508/stdjssh.v4i1.536.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article summarizes the main arguments in J. Habermas’ theory of communicative action, identifying three functions that communicative action can perform: to be used to convey information, to establish social relationships with others, and to express one’s opinions or feelings. By analyzing the category of “communicative rationality” with religious issues in the public sphere, in relation to language, discourse ethics, it is shown that the public sphere is the environment where dialogues in all areas take place to meet the needs of citizens. (According to Habermas, Kant was the first philosophy to give to public sphere “its completed theoretical structure” in a text of political philosophy, entitled “What is Enlightenment?”).
Religions may not directly influence politics, but still, have the function of directing in society. J. Habermas determines that religion cannot be restricted to the private sphere, but must actively participate in the public sphere, where interactions and dialogues take place, as a catalyst for the process of solidarity to exist, to bring a new life force to the world. It is the place for members of society to have conversations and engage with each other.
The theory of communication by J. Habermas is timely contemplation with a deeply humane spirit.
37
Skopin, Denis. « The ngo ‘Soldiers’ Mothers’ in Russia and its Activities : Interpreted Through the Concept of ‘Human Dignity’ ». Comparative Sociology 15, no 6 (23 novembre 2016) : 724–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15691330-12341408.
Texte intégralRésumé :
This paper offers an interpretation of the activity of the Russian ngo ‘Soldiers’ Mothers’ which provides legal assistance to soldiers and their families. This ngo attracts significant attention in Russia and some authors have already suggested explanations of its work from anthropological and sociological perspectives. This paper interprets the ‘Mothers’ through the concept of human dignity as understood by the German sociologist and philosopher Jürgen Habermas. As argued by Habermas, dignity is a communicative structure that makes the passage from morality to law and, therefore, the social dialogue possible. It is shown that dignity occupies a crucial place in the work of the activists of the organization, which forms a link between private and public spheres. This paper is based on interviews with the activists of the ‘Soldiers’ mothers’ of St. Petersburg.
38
Golovin, N. « Jürgen Habermas on the Powers of Social Communication : the 90th Anniversary of the German Sociologist ». Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, no 6 (juin 2019) : 15–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/s013216250005478-8.
Texte intégral
39
Gallego Saade, Javier. « La sociología subyacente al liberalismo político. La crítica de Habermas a Rawls ». Derecho y Justicia, no 3 (8 août 2018) : 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.29344/07196377.3.1391.
Texte intégralRésumé :
ResumenSe repasan algunos elementos de la crítica de Jürgen Habermas a la teoría política de John Rawls. Se sugiere uncontraste entre las propiedades de los sujetos que cada unodesarrolla en sus obras: la capacidad de orientarse al entendimiento, por un lado, y la capacidad de actuar razonablemente, por el otro. Cada una se trata como contrapeso a laacción estratégica y a la racionalidad en sentido estricto,respectivamente. Se sugieren hacia el nal ciertos alcancesde la crítica, en relación a la tradición losóca en que sesitúa el debate.Palabras clave: Liberalismo político; Teoría del discurso; razonabilidad; acción comunicativa; contractualismo social.AbstractSome elements of Jürgen Habermas' critique of John Rawls' political theory are reviewed. A contrast is suggested between the properties of subjects that each one develops in his work: action oriented to understanding, on the one hand, and the capacity to act reasonably, on the other.Each is treated as counterweight to strategic action, and rationality in the strict sense, respectively. Towards the end the scope of the critique is related to the philosophical tradition in which the debate takes place.Keywords: Political liberalsim; Discourse theory; reasonableness; communicative action; social contractualism
40
Neckel, Sighard. « The refeudalization of modern capitalism ». Journal of Sociology 56, no 3 (26 juin 2019) : 472–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1440783319857904.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Jürgen Habermas once investigated the structural transformation of the modern public using the term ‘refeudalization’. He reconstructed how, in the course of the development of economic monopolies, pre-bourgeois forms of power again penetrated the public sphere. It is not only the fact that the social sciences today speak again of a crisis of the public sphere, however, that gives Habermas’ concept of ‘refeudalization’ new relevance. On the contrary, a social change is taking place in numerous areas of present-day society which, in the course of a neoliberal modernization of the economy, is once again re-creating pre-modern social forms, hierarchies and power structures. This does not take place as a relapse into past social forms, but as a paradoxical result of social transformations that generate the old as the new and thereby produce ‘neo-feudal’ patterns in the distribution of wealth, recognition and power. In this paper ‘refeudalization’ is presented as a key concept for understanding the development of modern capitalist societies today. It will be shown that the dichotomy of ‘progressive’ and ‘regressive’ forms of transformation of capitalism must be complemented by more complex models of paradoxical social change.
41
Rochberg-Halton, Eugene. « Jürgen Habermas's Theory of Communicative Etherealization:The Theory of Cornmunicative Action, Jiirgen Habermas ». Symbolic Interaction 12, no 2 (novembre 1989) : 333–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/si.1989.12.2.333.
Texte intégral
42
Feola, Michael. « Excess Words, Surplus Names : Rancière and Habermas on Speech, Agency, and Equality ». Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy 27, no 2 (26 novembre 2019) : 32–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jffp.2019.889.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Rancière treat speech as the medium for politics and, likewise, both diagnose the pathologies that follow from blockages on civic speech. That said, these broad commonalities give rise to significant divides regarding the social ontology of language, the forms of power that attend linguistic exchange, and how speech informs democratic agency. Ultimately, the essay will argue that Rancière highlights the political deficits within deliberative commitments to democratic values. In doing so, his challenge yields broader insights for a democratic politics of speech and the linguistic resources that facilitate such a politics.
43
Wickham, Gary. « Post-nationalism, sovereignty and the state ». Journal of Sociology 57, no 1 (mars 2021) : 47–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1440783321993535.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The term ‘post-national formations’ is a product of some of the recent work of Jürgen Habermas. In using this term, Habermas highlights what he regards as a laudatory trend in social and political research. This is the trend away from an intense focus on the role of nation-states – a role he believes to be unconducive to progressive politics – and towards a focus on the role of new configurations – a role he believes to be much more conducive to this type of politics. ‘Post-national formations’, then, is the term Habermas uses to describe new non-state configurations he has identified. He is confident these configurations will eventually break free of the supposed yoke of the nation-state and usher in a new era of progressivism. This article is not concerned with the post-national formations literature per se. Rather, it is concerned with this literature’s failure to take into account the full history of both the nation-state and the notion of sovereignty that helps the nation-state to function. In pursuing this concern, the article draws material from various sources to offer a short historical defence of the sovereign state.
44
Marinopoulou, Anastasia. « Some Social Perspectives of the Notions of the Political and Politics in Max Horkheimer and Jürgen Habermas ». Philosophical Inquiry 29, no 1 (2007) : 112–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philinquiry2007291/28.
Texte intégral
45
Chen, Xunwu. « Inclusion of the Other : Studies in Political Theory (Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought) - By Jürgen Habermas ». Journal of Chinese Philosophy 34, no 3 (7 août 2007) : 447–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6253.2007.00428.x.
Texte intégral
46
Komaromi, Ann. « Samizdat and Soviet Dissident Publics ». Slavic Review 71, no 1 (2012) : 70–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.5612/slavicreview.71.1.0070.
Texte intégralRésumé :
In this article Ann Komaromi proposes a new critical look at the history of Soviet dissidence by way of samizdat and the idea of a private-public sphere. Samizdat is defined in a less familiar way, as a particular mode of existence of the text, rather than in terms of political opposition or a social agenda. This allows for a broader view of dissidence that includes familiar phenomena like the civil rights or democratic movement, along with relatively little known national, cultural, musical, artistic, poetic, and philosophical groups. The multiple perspectives of Soviet dissidence correspond to a decentered view of a mixed private-public sphere that resembles Nancy Fraser's modification of Jürgen Habermas's classic public sphere. This model of a private-public sphere provokes new questions about unofficial institutions and structures, the dialectic between private and public impulses in Soviet samizdat, and the relationship of dissidents to foreign individuals and organizations. The empirical basis for this analysis is a survey of Soviet samizdat periodicals from 1956 to 1986.
47
Siqueira, Daniel Valente Pedroso de. « Crises sistêmicas e racionalização social como reificação : uma reconstrução da teoria social marxiana ». Trilhas Filosóficas 11, no 3 (17 avril 2019) : 53–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.25244/tf.v11i3.3400.
Texte intégralRésumé :
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.
48
Anievas, Alexander. « Critical Dialogues : Habermasian Social Theory and International Relations ». Politics 25, no 3 (septembre 2005) : 135–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9256.2005.00238.x.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The works of Jürgen Habermas have been a theoretical inspiration for many students of international relations (IR). To date, however, the majority of critical IR approaches drawing from the Habermasian perspective have done so on purely philosophical grounds. This article will thus explore the utility of the social-theoretical aspects of Habermas's work for critical inquiries into world politics. To this end, it will examine four main elements of his work: the theory of communicative action; public sphere; lifeworld/system architecture; and discourse ethics. It will be argued that adopting the Habermasian conceptual apparatus provides a social-theoretical route to explaining the contradictory and often paradoxical nature of international relations in the epoch of ‘globalisation’. While various constructivist approaches to IR have recently offered more socially-oriented applications of Habermas's theoretical framework, the majority of these studies have done so from predominately non-critical standpoints. This article will thus seek to explore the utility of Habermas's work in offering a critical social theory of world politics.
49
O’Neill, Shane. « The Equalization of Effective Communicative Freedom : Democratic Justice in the Constitutional State and Beyond ». Canadian Journal of Law & ; Jurisprudence 17, no 1 (janvier 2004) : 83–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0841820900003829.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The fundamental political concern of liberalism has been to secure equal liberties for all citizens. There has, however, been no agreement among liberals on the extent to which this project depends, both normatively and practically, on the democratization of society. Socialism, on the other hand, has been fundamentally concerned with the realization of emancipated forms of life. But socialists too have disagreed with one another on the extent to which political structures of democratic self-government are central to the revolutionary task of emancipation. Social democracy, as a tradition, has involved the attempt to show how these core political projects of the modern era, liberalism and socialism, are mutually interdependent. The most appropriate emancipatory project for late modern, increasingly complex societies, from a social-democratic perspective is to create and maintain a social structure that can deliver equal and effective liberties for all citizens. This achievement is to be best understood in republican terms, as the realization of a democratic form of life in which free and equal citizens engage one another in the collective task of autonomous self-governance. Jürgen Habermas has been one of the most significant intellectual contributors to the development of the idea of social democracy as an emancipatory project. Over several decades from the early 1960s to the present, Habermas has set about recasting critical social theory in terms of a theory of communicative action. The main legal and political implications of this critical perspective are outlined in his discourse theory of democracy Habermas considers the realization of rights through the democratic self-organization of legal communities to be the normative core of emancipatory politics in the modern era.
50
Pešić, Milena. « Development of discourse as an instrument of critical social analysis ». Socioloski pregled 54, no 4 (2020) : 1260–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/socpreg54-29402.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Since the concept of discourse has become almost indispensable in the contemporary research of a large number of social and political phenomena, and as such represents a transdisciplinary instrument of social analysis and critique, it is of indisputable importance to indicate what its theoretical-methodological relevance consists of. For that purpose, the genesis of this polyvalent concept is given in this paper through the developmental presentation of various analytical levels of its consideration within the context of general frameworks of scientific insights relevant for its theoretical operationalization. Particular analytical attention was given to the concepts of Michel Foucault and Jürgen Habermas, not only because those are two of the most influential discourse theories in the twentieth century, but also because the differences between them offer a more comprehensive insight into the importance of this concept.