哈贝马斯与霍耐特团结观之辨析

哈贝马斯认为,团结指的是主体之间在交往共同体中互相尊重,彼此负责并包容他者的关系,它以正义为基础并以普遍语用学和主体间性为前提;霍耐特认为,团结是个体对共同体做出的贡献和成就得到认可和重视,而对共同体产生的休戚与共的忠诚感,它是主体间性基础上的承认的第三种模式.通过对二者团结观的比较分析,笔者认为与哈贝马斯语言理论相比,霍耐特承认理论更具现实性和可行性,实现了社会批判理论的范式转换.     

Natural Realism or Transactionalism: On the Relationships between Putnam and Two Pragmatists,James and Dewey

The relationships between Hilary Putnam and the pragmatists (especially William James and John Dewey) are obvious but subtle.To shed some light on this issue,the author will explore a key issue that not only stands as Putnam's main inheritance from the pragmatists,but that also illuminates the relationships between them more clearly than any other issues.This key issue is the understanding of perception and the philosophical position that arises from this understanding.The author argues that in adopting Dewey's transactionalism (or interactionalism),Putnam advances from James' insight to Dewey's,a shift that is particularly manifest in Putnam's attempt to add another layer of meaning to what he refers to as the second na(i)veté that he detects and appreciates in James' natural realism.     

Habermas and Dummett: Beyond Dogmatism and Scepticism

In this article I suggest a way of overcoming the traditional dichotomy between analytic and continental philosophy by pointing at some similarities between apparently disparate philosophical approaches, viz. those of Michael Dummett and Jürgen Habermas. The comparison revolves around the so-called 'paradox of analysis', which poses a dilemma concerning philosophical propositions: these are allegedly shown to be either trivial or unsecured. Both Dummett and Habermas offer ways out of the dilemma, through recognition of the intersection of analysis with life. A transcendentally characterized conception of language is conceived by both as the only way to overcome the haunting objective m subjective distinction. Thus they offer fresh insights into the nature of meaning and truth, and the place these occupy within philosophical systems. Both philosophers take the notions of justification and procedural rationality to be primary in the order of philosophical explanation. Meaning is not conceived in terms of representation and truth conditions, but in terms of validity claims. Truth is not viewed as independent and static, but as historically conditioned and constantly unfolding. As a result, even the statements of logic, and certainly those of philosophy, find a place between the alleged emptiness of analyticity and the robust empirical character of science. This common ground represents, I believe, one of the new faces of post-analytic m and hence also post-continental m philosophy. Parts of it are shared by other contemporary philosophers, such as Derrida and Brandom. What marks this new Weltanschauung is the way it surpasses the current eliminativist trends in philosophy.     

民主的危机与合法性的重建--哈贝马斯对民主的思考

引言随着冷战时代的终结,自由主义在全球范围内获得了压倒性胜利,但国际间的冲突和西方国家内部存在的种种危机并未因此得以消弭,反而更加引人注目了。几乎在福山抛出颇为乐观的“历史终结论”的同时,亨廷顿的“文明冲突论”即尾随而至,给后冷战时代的国际关系蒙上了一层阴影。就西方自由主义国家的民主实践而言,盛行于上个世纪60年代风起云涌的激进民主浪潮挑战了自由主义对民主的规范理解,也显示了西方国家政治系统的危机,这刺激了西方思想家对民主问题的深层思考。在《公民与国家之间的距离》一文中,查尔斯·泰勒忧虑当代西方民主国家的…     

Habermas and validity claims

At the heart of Jürgen Habermas’s explication of communicative rationality is the contention that all speech acts oriented to understanding raise three different kinds of validity claims simultaneously: claims to truth, truthfulness, and normative rightness. This paper argues that Habermas presents exactly three distinct, logically independent arguments for his simultaneity thesis: an argument from structure; an argument from criticizability/rejectability; and an argument from understanding/reaching understanding. It is further maintained that the simultaneity thesis receives cogent support only from the Argument from understanding/reaching understanding, and only if the notion of ‘understanding’ is expanded to that of ‘agreement’.     

Habermas on reason and revolution

Identifying self-empowerment as the normative core of the liberal democratic project, Habermas proceeds to dilute the revolutionary character of that project. After describing Habermas' views about legitimation problems in the West, the author examines critically Habermas' claim that democratic practices of self-empowerment must be self-limiting, arguing that under some circumstances (which cannot be specified in advance), more radical forms of self-empowerment may be justified. The author also argues that Habermas' own acknowledgement of the revolutionary character of liberal democracy, along with his criticisms of the manifestly unconstitutional circulation of power which characterizes existing liberal democratic states, may themselves provide the basis for a more radical conception of self-empowerment than Habermas will currently allow.     

哈贝马斯和利奥塔论后现代性

在<知识与人类旨趣>(Knowledge and Human Interests)中,哈贝马斯试图把马克思和弗洛伊德已经完成了的理论普遍化--通过把他们的"揭露"(unmasking)方案置于一种更为全面的理论中.近些年来,哈贝马斯经常批评的一种当代法国思想,却是从怀疑马克思和弗洛伊德、怀疑怀疑者、怀疑"揭露"开始的.     

拯救1968的哈贝马斯批判观

哈贝马斯在《追补的革命》一文中混淆了关于1989年东欧共产主义倒台的规范性和描述性的断言。哈贝马斯将这个事件称作“追补的革命”是简单地把它作为现代性的扩张来把握。在比较哈贝马斯论公共领域和后期著作论技术亚系统的社会控制问题之后,我指出哈贝马斯已经忘记了他在1968年所学到的重要教训：政治控制和技术-经济控制的两个孪生极端产生了同样的问题——公共领域缺乏民主潜能。这些革命（1989）表明,东欧国家的革命正在克服像1968年的学生及其革命曾克服的同样问题。     

Communicative Reason and Religion: The Case of Habermas

Although Jürgen Habermas has a strong argument to link reason and philosophy, he also thinks that religion has a legitimate place in the (rational) public sphere. The question, though, is: what does this legitimate place entail? Is the power of religious language due to the fact that modern culture is not sufficiently secularized, that is, not yet sufficiently philosophic? Or is the power of religious language due to the fact that it successfully articulates certain widely shared moral (and substantive) intuitions? In addressing these questions, this contribution has four parts. In the first section the issue of Critical Theory and religion will be briefly examined. The point here is that where religion (like aesthetics) plays a more central role amongst the thinkers of the first movement of Critical Theory (theorists such as Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, and Benjamin), this is not the case with Habermas (the leading exponent of the second movement). In the second section, this aspect is further explored by reconstructing Habermas’s intellectual project (with its religious implications) in six steps. Finally (in the third and fourth sections) some critical remarks (inter-paradigmatic and extra-paradigmatic) will be made on Habermas’s view of religion.     

Unconscious reasons: Habermas,Foucault, and psychoanalysis

Continental Philosophy Review - The Habermas–Foucault debate, despite the excellent commentary it has generated, has the standing of an ‘unfinished project’ precisely because it...     

Choosing Between Capitalisms: Habermas, Ethics and Politics

In Between Facts and Norms Habermas both accepts the place of distinctively ethical considerations about ‘the good’ in political deliberation, and advances a particular view of the nature and justification of ethical judgments. Whilst welcoming the former, this paper criticises the latter, with its focus on issues of identity and self-understanding, and suggests instead a broadly Aristotelian alternative. The argument proceeds, first, through a detailed engagement with Habermas’s theoretical claims about ethical reasoning in politics, in which it is argued that he fails to show how different ethical possibilities can be critically evaluated, and second, through the analysis of a practical example, that of a political choice being made between different kinds of capitalism. Here the paper draws on recent work in comparative political economy on the institutional differences between varieties of capitalism, and uses this to contrast the implications of Habermas’s conception of ethics, according to which what would matter is the congruence between economic institutions and a political community’s historically shaped identity, with those of its preferred alternative, which requires a comparison between the different conceptions of the good that each kind of capitalism institutionally favours, and collective judgments about their respective contributions to human well-being.     

The Post-National Constellation: Habermas and ``the Second Modernity'

For some years now, Jürgen Habermas, possibly the most influential European philosopher of today, has been producing a growing number of publications on world politics. In the historical context of the collapse of bipolarity and the advent of the triad, along with the punitive wars in the Gulf and Yugoslavia, he is very far from being alone: Jacques Derrida and Noberto Bobbio,Michael Walzer and John Rawls, to name only the most forceful, have also been thinking out loud about the new political configurations beyond the nation-state. The characteristic feature of Habermas’s thought is to perceive a radically new historical configuration, which he calls a‘post-national constellation’ and which would justify the development of a new political project, as a transition to a new cosmopolitan law. In what follows, I examine the precise modalities that are supposed to transform his philosophical design into political and legal arrangements, attempting to dissect the Habermasian vision of a post-Cold War politics better adapted to the challenges of the new century, and to throw light on the ideology behind it, as a prolegomenon to the larger project Habermas invites us to undertake. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.