The Philosophical Significance of Binary Categories in Habermas's Discourse Ethics

Article English OPEN
Susen, S. (2009)
  • Publisher: Globic Press
  • Subject: HM | polsoc

The philosophical programme associated with the discourse ethics of Jürgen Habermas has been widely discussed in the literature. The fact that Habermas has devoted a considerable part of his work to the elaboration of this philosophical programme indicates that discourse ethics can be regarded as a cornerstone of his communication-theoretic approach to society. In essence, Habermas conceives of discourse ethics as a philosophical framework which derives the coordinative power of social normativity from the discursive power of communicative rationality. Although there is an extensive literature on Habermas’s communication-theoretic account of society, almost no attention has been paid to the fact that the theoretical framework which undergirds his discourse ethics is based on a number of binary conceptual divisions. It is the purpose of this paper to shed light on the philosophical significance of these binary categories in Habermas’s discourse ethics and thereby demonstrate that their complexity is indicative of the subject’s tension-laden immersion in social reality.
  • References (128)
    128 references, page 1 of 13

    Abbas, Andrea and Monica McLean. 2003. “Communicative Competence and the Improvement of University Teaching: Insights from the Field,” British Journal of Sociology of Education 24, 1: 69-81.

    Alexy, Robert. 1998. “Jürgen Habermas's Theory of Legal Discourse.” Pp. 226-233 in Michel Rosenfeld and Andrew Arato (eds.), Habermas on Law and Democracy: Critical Exchanges. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Apel, Karl-Otto. 1990 [1985]. “Is the Ethics of the Ideal Communication Community a Utopia? On the Relationship between Ethics, Utopia, and the Critique of Utopia.” Pp. 23- 59 in Seyla Benhabib and Fred R. Dallmayr (eds.), The Communicative Ethics Controversy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    _____. 1996. “'Discourse Ethics' before the Challenge of 'Liberation Philosophy,'” Philosophy & Social Criticism 22, 2: 1-25.

    Benhabib, Seyla. 1990a. “Afterword: Communicative Ethics and Contemporary Controversies in Practical Philosophy.” Pp. 330-369 in Seyla Benhabib and Fred R. Dallmayr (eds.), The Communicative Ethics Controversy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    _____. 1990b. “In the Shadow of Aristotle and Hegel: Communicative Ethics and Current Controversies in Practical Philosophy.” Pp. 1-31 in Michael Kelly (ed.), Hermeneutics and Critical Theory in Ethics and Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    _____., and Fred R. Dallmayr (eds.). 1990. The Communicative Ethics Controversy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Bernstein, Richard J. M. 1995. Recovering Ethical Life: Jürgen Habermas and the Future of Critical Theory. London: Routledge.

    Blanke, Thomas. 1991. “Versprachlichung: Aspekte zum zeitdiagnostischen Gehalt von Jürgen Habermas' Diskurs der Moderne.“ Pp. 175-195 in Stefan Müller-Doohm (ed.), Jenseits der Utopie, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Böhler, Dietrich. 1990 [1982]. “Transcendental Pragmatics and Critical Morality: On the Possibility and Moral Significance of a Self-Enlightenment of Reason.” Pp. 111-150 in Seyla Benhabib and Fred R. Dallmayr (eds.), The Communicative Ethics Controversy, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Similar Research Results (2)
  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark