Academic literature on the topic 'Habermas, Jürgen – Criticism and interpretation'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Habermas, Jürgen – Criticism and interpretation.'
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.
Journal articles on the topic "Habermas, Jürgen – Criticism and interpretation"
1
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.
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
Viktorahadi, Bhanu. "Peluru-peluru Kritik Jürgen Habermas terhadap Peran dan Fungsi Agama dalam Masyarakat Modern." Jurnal THEOLOGIA 28, no. 2 (February 20, 2018): 273. http://dx.doi.org/10.21580/teo.2017.28.2.1879.
Full textAbstract:
<p><em>The wrong understanding about role and function of religion will make religion just function as instruments of legitimating those who use it irresponsibly. Therefore, it is important to take a certain paradigm to see and analyze the role and function of religion. That paradigm in its turn will restore religion in its essential role and function as a system of orientation and interpretation of the meaning of human life, as well as its relationship with God and others. The Theory of Religious Criticism and Communicative Practical Theory of Jürgen Habermas offers evaluative, reflective, and corrective critics of the role and function of religion. The fired criticism will, in turn, help religion restore its role and function as a bridge communicative and relational between human and God and the others. At the same time, religion is expected to return to its role and function in contributing to the realization of a receptive society in rational discursive rooms which in turn will enable the process of human emancipation. The further process of human emancipation is the formation of an increasingly strong personal and social identity, rooted in values </em><em></em><em>or virtues derived from religion itself as the bridge that leads people to the real truth.</em></p>
4
Finlayson, James Gordon. "Happy Birthday Jürgen Habermas." Studies in Social and Political Thought 29 (September 2, 2019): 32–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.20919/sspt.29.2019.115.
Full textAbstract:
[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.
5
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.
6
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.
7
Espíndola, Juan. "A Criticism of Edmund Burke’s Conception of Patriotism." Tópicos, Revista de Filosofía, no. 46 (June 27, 2014): 121. http://dx.doi.org/10.21555/top.v0i46.649.
Full textAbstract:
Este artículo se apoya en la literatura sobre el papel de las emociones en la filosofía de Edmund Burke para caracterizar su concepción del patriotismo, y para entender cómo se relaciona con otras dimensiones de su pensamiento político y estético. Más importante aún, el artículo rechaza la idea de que el patriotismo Burkeano (y su anclaje en una teoría particular de las emociones) sirva como base para articular una visión cosmopolita de la política. El trabajo hace una crítica de la concepción Burkeana del patriotismo a partir de una comparación de éste con algunas concepciones más recientes sobre el fenómeno. Primero, el artículo pone de relieve la afinidad del patriotismo Burkeano con la versión moralmente inaceptable de Alasdair MacIntyre. Después muestra su incompatibilidad con versiones menos objetables como la de Jürgen Habermas.
8
Καλτσάς, Σπύρος. "Δημόσια σφαίρα και θρησκευτικό επιχείρημα στο πλαίσιο της μετακοσμικής κοινωνίας." Ελληνική Επιθεώρηση Πολιτικής Επιστήμης 46 (June 24, 2020): 18. http://dx.doi.org/10.12681/hpsa.19427.
Full textAbstract:
Το κείμενο επιδιώκει την ανακατασκευή της προβληματικής της θέσης του θρησκευτικού επιχειρήματος στη δημόσια σφαίρα στο πλαίσιο της μετακοσμικής κοινωνίας. Ανατρέχοντας στη σκέψη των John Rawls, Charles Taylor, Jürgen Habermas και William Connolly, θα επιδιώξω την ανασυγκρότηση των πολλαπλών και πολυσύνθετων διαστάσεων της θέσης του θρησκευτικού επιχειρήματος στη μετακοσμική δημόσια σφαίρα με άξονα τη συνθήκη του πλουραλισμού από την οποία χαρακτηρίζονται οι νεωτερικές κοσμικές κοινωνίες. Το κείμενο κλείνει με την κριτική ανασύνθεση της προβληματικής στη σκέψη των Taylor και Connolly αναδεικνύοντας παράλληλα τη σημασία που έχει η διάσταση της διυποκειμενικής εγκυρότητας των διαβουλεύσεων στη δημόσια σφαίρα μέσα από μια κριτική προσέγγιση της θεώρησης του Habermas. Λέξεις κλειδιά: Δημόσια σφαίρα, θρησκευτικό επιχείρημα, μετακοσμική κοινωνία, πλουραλισμός. Abstract This paper addresses the question of the role of religious argument in the post-secular public sphere in the thought of John Rawls, Charles Taylor, Jürgen Habermas and William Connolly. In order to highlight the complex and multiple dimensions of this subject, I will focus on the importance of pluralism as the mediating concept between religious argumentation and the public sphere. In the concluding section of the paper I will provide a constructive criticism of Taylor’s and Connolly’s arguments and I will defend Habermas’s reconstruction of the intersubjective validity of deliberations in the post-secular public sphere through a critical account of his thought. Keywords: Public sphere, religious argument, post-secular society, pluralism.
9
Scheuerman, William E. "Constituent power and civil disobedience: Beyond the nation-state?" Journal of International Political Theory 15, no. 1 (October 22, 2018): 49–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1755088218806642.
Full textAbstract:
Radical democratic political theorists have used the concept of constituent power to sketch ambitious models of radical democracy, while many legal scholars deploy it to make sense of the political and legal dynamics of constitutional politics. Its growing popularity notwithstanding, I argue that the concept tends to impede a proper interpretation of civil disobedience, conceived as nonviolent, politically motivated lawbreaking evincing basic respect for law. Contemporary theorists who employ it cannot distinguish between civil disobedience and other related, yet ultimately different, modes of political illegality (e.g. conscientious objection, resistance, revolution). The essay also examines Jürgen Habermas’ recent contributions to a theory of mixed or dualistic (postnational) constituent power, conceding that Habermas avoids many theoretical and political ills plaguing competing radical democratic theoretical retrievals. Nonetheless, Habermas’ attempt to salvage the idea of constituent power as part of his reformist agenda for the European Union not only breaks with his earlier understandable skepticism about the idea but also risks trimming the admirably ambitious sails of his radical democratic interpretation of civil disobedience.
10
Klare, Karl E. "Social Construction and System in Legal Theory: A Response to Professor Preuss." German Law Journal 12, no. 1 (January 1, 2011): 516–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200016977.
Full textAbstract:
Preuss' paper significantly advances the critical theory of law. As a side benefit, he provides English-speakers with an excellent introduction to the work of two leading West German participants in the debate, Jürgen Habermas and Gunther Teubner. Preuss' paper reveals considerable common ground between critical legal theorists in Germany and the United States, but also important differences of perspective and concern. I suspect that many American legal critics will think that Preuss' criticisms of Habermas and Teubner do not go far enough, that his criticisms raise a fundamental challenge to the current emphasis on structure and system in the German debate. In any event, Preuss' paper suggests the usefulness of a greater German “reception” of the American emphasis on agency and social construction. No doubt American legal criticism would likewise be enriched by entering into a more sustained dialogue with structuralist and systems theory.
Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Habermas, Jürgen – Criticism and interpretation"
1
Sibanda, Fortune. "Blogging, journalism and the public sphere: assessing the value of the 'blogosphere' as a new form of the public sphere : a case study of the Mail & Guardian Online's Blogmark." Thesis, Rhodes University, 2006. http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1002938.
Full textAbstract:
The study seeks to investigate whether weblogs can act as virtual public spheres, where people can meet to discuss issues of interest to them. It uses the Mail & Guardian Online’s Blogmark as a case study. Weblogs – highly interactive online journals comprised of links and postings in reverse chronological order – are fast becoming an avenue of choice for many internet users wanting to share opinions and news with others online. Because of their unique read-and-write characteristics, some have equated them to the 18th century coffeehouses, around which the early forms of citizen involvement in public affairs began in early capitalist Europe. Despite their growing popularity, however, not much scholarly work has been dedicated to the practice of blogging in Africa, and particularly in South Africa. The study’s theoretical framework is drawn from Jürgen Habermas’s concept of the public sphere. While noting some of the criticisms of the Habermasian model, it is argued that the concept is instrumental in our understanding of the relationship between the media and democracy. The study, however, adopted a re-worked model of the concept of the public sphere. This model argues for the need to have a multiplicity of public sphericules (instead of one single public sphere as advocated by Habermas), around which individuals can congregate to discuss issues of common concern to them. Using a combination of qualitative content analysis, self-completion questionnaires and a semi-structured interview, the study found Blogmark to be an example of how emerging internet genres such as weblogs can be vehicles of citizen involvement in public life. A range of issues were discussed in the blog, from politics, race and ii i gender issues, to personal anecdotes, relationships, and sex. However, while some posts exhibited high levels of interactivity, with many bloggers joining in to offer their opinions, some read like online monologues. The study argues that although blogging is a practice that is still limited to a few privileged individuals, with the everrising size of the ‘blogosphere’, weblogs such as Blogmark are making a small but not insignificant contribution to the number of voices that can be heard in the public realm.
2
Cloete, Michael. "Postmetaphysical versus postmodern thinking : a critical appraisal of Habermas's debate with postmodernism." Thesis, Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2002. http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/53008.
Full textAbstract:
Thesis (PhD) -- University of Stellenbosch, 2002.ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Philosophy has traditionally been concerned with the question of reason and rationality, as its central focus. From the perspective of the modern metaphysical tradition, this focus has developed around the theme of subjectivity in general, and the assumption of an ahistorical transcendental subject in particular. The idea of reason was thus foundational for the articulation and validation of the notions of truth and freedom. From the perspective of modernity, reason has thus been the condition of the possibility of enlightenment, freedom and moral progress. The debate between Habermas and the representatives of postmodern thinking represents the latest chapter regarding the question of reason, its limits, and its possibilities. What makes this debate particularly challenging is that Habermas, while he defends the idea of reason against its critique by the postmodernists, is actually in agreement with them in their dismissal of the tradition of metaphysical thinking. In view of his defense of the idea of reason, however, Habermas has invariably been accused of defending an outmoded and discredited form of philosophical thinking, while his opponents have generally been hailed as progressive thinkers who have succeeded in effecting a radical break with the conceptual legacy of the metaphysical tradition. In my dissertation I argue that the exact opposite position is the case, namely, that it is Habermas, and not his postmodern opponents, who has effected a radical break with metaphysical thinking. It is his ability to transform the idea of reason, from a transcendental into a postmetaphysical concept, in terms of which the question of reason and rationality, and the related ideas of truth and knowledge, are recast in fallibilistic terms, that, in my view, represents the overcoming of metaphysics. The postmodern turn, on the other hand, in view of its reluctance to consider the question of reason from an alternative model of rationality, finds itself still trapped within a form of transcendental thinking in which it seeks to enquire into the (im)possibility of reason, in the absence of a transcendental subject. In the final analysis, I argue that it is postmetaphysical rather than postmodern thinking, that offers us a practical alternative to the problematic conception of reason, bequeathed by the tradition of metaphysical thinking.
AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die fenomeen van die rede en die betekenis van rasionaliteit vorm tradisioneel 'n sentrale fokus van die filosofie. Vanuit die perspektief van die moderne metafisiese tradisie het hierdie fokus ontwikkel rondom die tema van subjektiwiteit in die algemeen, en die aanname van 'n a-historiese transendentele subjek in die besonder. Die rede was dus fundamenteel vir die artikulasie en legitimering van die konsepte van waarheid en vryheid. Vanuit die perspektief van moderniteit was die rede dus die voorwaarde vir die moontlikheid van verligting, vryheid, en morele vooruitgang. Die debat tussen Habermas en die verteenwoordigers van postmoderne denke verteenwoordig die mees onlangse hoofstuk van die verhaal van die vraag na rede en rasionaliteit - die beperkings daarvan, asook die moontlikhede daarvan. Hierdie debat bied besondere uitdagings omdat Habermas, terwyl hy die idee van rede verdedig teen die kritiek van die postmoderniste, eintlik met hulle saamstem vir sover hulle die tradisie van metafisiese denke verwerp. In die lig van sy verdediging van die idee van rede, is Habermas egter voortdurend daarvan beskuldig dat hy 'n uitgediende en gediskrediteerde vorm van filosofiese denke bly voorstaan, terwyl sy opponente in die algemeen voorgehou is as progressiewe denkers wat suksesvol 'n radikale breuk gemaak het met die konseptuele erfenis van die metafisiese tradisie. In my dissertasie beweer ek dat die teenoorgestelde inderwaarheid die geval is, naamlik dat dit Habermas, en nie sy postmoderne opponente nie, is wat hierdie radikale breuk met metafisiese denke suksesvol uitgevoer het. Dit is sy verrnoe om die idee van die rede te transformeer vanaf 'n transendentale na 'n post- metafisiese konsep, in terme waarvan die vraag na rede en rasionaliteit, en die verwante idees van waarheid en kennis, omskep is in fallibilistiese beg rippe, wat, soos ek aantoon, 'n (die!) suksesvolle transendering van die metafisika bewerkstellig. Die postmoderne wending, aan die ander kant, in die lig van die traagheid daarvan om 'n alternatiewe en verruimde konsepsie van rasionaliteit te ontwikkel, bly vasgevang in 'n vorm van transendentele denke waarin dit probeer om ondersoek in te stel na die (on)moontlikheid van die rede ten aansien van die afwesigheid van 'n transendentele subjek. Uiteindelik beweer ek dat dit die post-metafisiese eerder as die postmoderne denke is wat aan ons 'n praktiese alternatief bied vir die problematiese konsep van die rede, soos ons dit qeerf het by die tradisie van metafisiese denke.
3
Hauswedell, Tessa C. "The formation of a European identity through a transnational public sphere? : the case of three Western European cultural journals, 1989-2006." Thesis, University of St Andrews, 2009. http://hdl.handle.net/10023/789.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis analyses processes of discursive European identity formation in three cultural journals: Esprit, from France, the British New Left Review and the German Merkur during the time periods 1989-92, and, a decade later, during 2003-06. The theoretical framework which the thesis brings to bear on this analysis is that of the European Public Sphere. This model builds on Jürgen Habermas’s original model of a “public sphere”, and alleges that a sphere of common debate about issues of European concern can lead to a more defined and integrated sense of a European identity which is widely perceived as vague and inchoate. The relevancy of the public sphere model and its connection to the larger debate about European identity, especially since 1989, are discussed in the first part of the thesis. The second part provides a comparative analysis of the main European debates in the journals during the respective time periods. It outlines the mechanisms by which identity is expressed and assesses when, and to what extent, shared notions of European identity emerge. The analysis finds that identity formation does not occur through a developmental, gradual convergence of views as the European public sphere model envisages. Rather, it is brought about in much more haphazard back-and-forth movements. Moreover, shared notions of European identity between all the journals only arise in moments of perceived crises. Such crises are identified as the most salient factor which galvanizes expressions of a common, shared sense of European identity across national boundaries and ideological cleavages. The thesis concludes that the model of the EPS is too dependent on a partial view of how identity formation occurs and should thus adopt a more nuanced understanding about the complex factors that are at play in these processes. For the principled attempt to circumscribe identity formation as the outcome of communicative processes alone is likely to be thwarted by external events.
4
Martinez, David. "Habermas's project of social criticism : between normativity, institutions and practices." Thesis, University of Sussex, 2017. http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/68219/.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis maintains that Jürgen Habermas‘s moral and political theories rely on a modified version of Kant‘s notion of normativity. Taking this as a starting point, it examines this component in light of criticisms inspired by Hegel‘s critique of Kant. The thesis shows that Habermas can answer most of the criticisms that could arise from Hegel‘s critique. That said, Hegel‘s criticism of the will as a tester of maxims does apply to Habermas. This criticism states that Kant cannot connect the universal will of morality and the particular will of the empirical subject because he rules out particular contents as susceptible of being universalized. And it can apply to Habermas because he set strict limits to what can count as a content which may bleed into the justification of moral norms and, following Kenneth Baynes – in his interpretation of Habermas‘s theory –, of legal and political norms. To be justifiable, – according to Habermas – these norms need to embody generalizable interests and they cannot be based on particular interests. However, Habermas infers from this that norms can only be justified with impartial, that is agent-neutral reasons, and cannot be justified with agent-relative reasons. From this, emerges the question whether and to what extent a theory of this sort can successfully include particular contents (for example a particular agents‘ real interests, inclinations and needs). The strict version of the generalizability of norms seems to occlude this possibility. Nonetheless, it is possible to rebut this criticism by slackening the strong version of normative justification that Habermas has built into the theory. By means of an analysis of two elements that he incorporates into his reconstruction of the normative point of view, namely, the concept of ideal role taking and the notion of mutual recognition, it is possible to argue that the loosening of the strict notion of generalizability is a modification that does not contradict and actually coheres with Habermas‘s Kantian concept of moral reason, and this operation fortifies the theory in the face of the Hegelian criticism of the will as a tester of maxims. To develop these issues, this work is divided in two parts with two chapters each part. Part I is an analysis of Habermas‘s notion of moral reason and autonomy and it reconstructs its normative Kantianism. After that, it discusses Hegelian criticisms of Habermas‘s moral theory. Part II focuses on Habermas‘s political Kantianism in Between Facts and Norms and in the debate with Rawls and it examines Hegelian criticisms of that Kantianism.
5
Sá, Waltenberg Lima de. "Fundamentos filosóficos para uma crítica e legítima aplicação do direito: o operar do círculo hermenêutico na compreensão jurídica." Pós-Graduação em Direito, 2014. https://ri.ufs.br/handle/riufs/4399.
Full textAbstract:
This work presents a new paradigm for legal hermeneutics, divorced from positivism and hence the legal doctrine. To do so, outlines the doctrinal framework that preceded the construction of the theoretical framework used here , the philosophical hermeneutics of Gadamer, whose keynote is in opposition to the method as the only means to get to the truth. When entering your analysis itself, seeks to work with the most important concepts, such as tradition, authority, pre-understanding and the fusion of horizons, in order to pave the way to understand what he describes as a circle hermeneutic, a key concept for the demarcation of the proposal developed here. On this, also seeks to make an evolutionary analysis of the proposals of the thinkers that preceded the gadameriano concept. Outlined the substance of
philosophical hermeneutics, we proceed to the analysis of its operation in legal interpretation, printing a critical reflection on the understanding in the application of law and, as a corollary, contributing to overcome the positivist paradigm and its aporias and as for the discussion about the legitimacy of judicial decisions. Thus seeks to clarify the contribution of Gadamer to legal thought, from his philosophical
hermeneutics to explain, justify and legitimize the path taken by the judge pronouncing judgments.A presente dissertação apresenta um novo paradigma para a hermenêutica jurídica, divorciado do positivismo e, consequentemente, da dogmática jurídica. Para tanto, delineia o arcabouço doutrinário que antecedeu a construção do marco teórico aqui utilizado, a hermenêutica filosófica de Gadamer, cuja tônica consiste na oposição ao método como único meio para se chegar à verdade. Ao ingressar em sua análise propriamente dita, busca trabalhar com os conceitos mais importantes, a exemplo da tradição, da autoridade, da pré-compreensão e da fusão de horizontes, com a finalidade de sedimentar o caminho para a entender aquilo que ele descreve como círculo hermenêutico, conceito-chave para o deslinde da proposta aqui desenvolvida. Quanto a este, também procura fazer uma análise evolutiva das propostas dos pensadores que precederam ao conceito gadameriano. Delineada a substância da hermenêutica filosófica, parte-se para a análise de seu operar na hermenêutica jurídica, imprimindo uma reflexão crítica sobre a compreensão no âmbito da aplicação do direito e, como corolário, contribuindo para a superação do paradigma positivista e suas aporias, bem como para a discussão acerca da legitimidade das decisões judiciais. Assim, busca explicitar a contribuição de Gadamer para o pensamento jurídico, partindo de sua hermenêutica filosófica para explicar, fundamentar e legitimar o caminho trilhado pelo julgador ao prolatar as decisões judiciais.
6
"Towards a sociology of ethics and morality: a comparison between Jürgen Habermas and Niklas Luhmann." 2007. http://library.cuhk.edu.hk/record=b5896760.
Full textAbstract:
Lo, Kai Ching.Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2007.
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 214-221).
Abstracts in English and Chinese.
Acknowledgement --- p.vi
Abstract --- p.viii
INTRODUCTION --- p.1
Chapter I. --- The Problem: A Brief Introduction --- p.1
Chapter I.a. --- Research Problems --- p.1
Chapter I.b. --- The Subject Matters --- p.2
Chapter I.e. --- Conceptualization of the Subject Matters --- p.3
Chapter I.d. --- "The Orientation of the Research: Habermas, Luhmann, and Theory" --- p.6
Chapter I.e. --- Outline of the Research Result --- p.13
Chapter II. --- The Context --- p.17
Chapter II.a. --- Ethics and Morality in Modern Society --- p.17
Chapter II.b. --- Ethics and Morality in Sociology --- p.19
Chapter II.b.l. --- Durkheim and Weber: Conception of Ethics and Morality --- p.20
Chapter II.b.2. --- Successions and Revisions of Durkheim's and Weber's Perspectives --- p.25
Chapter II.b.3. --- Habermas's and Luhmann's Breakthrough --- p.29
Chapter III. --- The Framework --- p.31
Chapter III.a. --- The Use of Metatheory --- p.31
Chapter III.b. --- The Limitation of this thesis --- p.33
Chapter PART I. --- HABERMAS AND LUHMANN AS THE EXEMPLARS OF SOCIOLOGICAL INQUIRIES OF ETHICS AND MORALITY --- p.35
Chapter Chapter 1: --- Habermas's Discourse Ethics and The Theory of Communicative Action --- p.37
Chapter 1.1. --- Discourse Ethics --- p.38
Chapter 1.1.1. --- Discourse Ethics as the Sociology of Ethics and Morality --- p.40
Chapter 1.1.2. --- The Logic of Discourse Ethics --- p.46
Chapter 1.1.3. --- Morality and Ethical Life: From Philosophy and Politics to Sociology --- p.53
Chapter 1.2. --- The Theory of Communicative Action: The Sociological Foundation of Discourse Ethics --- p.61
Chapter 1.2.1. --- The Paradox of Rationalization and the Paradigmatic Change --- p.63
Chapter 1.2.2. --- Universal Pragmatics: The Foundation of Moral Order --- p.65
Chapter 1.2.3. --- Communicative Rationality and the Life world: The Redemption of Moral Order --- p.71
Chapter 1.2.4. --- Communicative Action and Strategic Action: The Possibility of Immorality --- p.75
Chapter 1.2.5. --- Ideal Speech Situation: The Unavoidable Cognitive and Normative Condition of Social Life --- p.78
Chapter 1.3. --- Concluding Remarks --- p.81
Chapter Chapter 2 --- : Luhmann's The Code of the Moral and Systems Theory --- p.84
Chapter 2.1. --- The Code of the Moral --- p.84
Chapter 2.1.1. --- The Code of the Moral as the Sociology of Ethics and Morality --- p.86
Chapter 2.1.2. --- Features of the Code of the Moral --- p.91
Chapter 2.2. --- Systems Theory: Approaching a Non-normative Social Order --- p.100
Chapter 2.2.1. --- Complexity and Binary Schematism: The Basic Settings of the World --- p.101
Chapter 2.2.2. --- The Theory of Observation and Self-Reference: The Epistemological and Ontological Foundation of Systems Theory --- p.107
Chapter 2.2.3. --- System/Environment Distinction and Autopoiesis: A New Conception of System --- p.117
Chapter 2.2.4. --- Communication and Action: An Amoral Interpretation --- p.122
Chapter 2.2.5. --- Double Contingency and Interpenetration: From Patterned Moral Order to Reflexive Amoral Order --- p.130
Chapter 2.3. --- Concluding Remarks --- p.139
Chapter PART II. --- FORMATION OF THE SOCIOLOGY OF ETHICS AND MORALITY: A METATHEORETICAL COMPARISON BETWEEN HABERMAS AND LUHMANN --- p.142
Chapter Chapter 3: --- A Comparison between Habermas and Luhmann --- p.144
Chapter 3.1. --- On Subject and the Individual --- p.144
Chapter 3.1.1. --- On Subject --- p.144
Chapter 3.1.2. --- On Human Individual --- p.146
Chapter 3.2. --- On Communication and Action --- p.151
Chapter 3.2.1. --- The Role of Language in Communication and Action --- p.154
Chapter 3.2.2. --- The Meaning of Understanding in Communication and Action --- p.156
Chapter 3.3. --- On Meaning and Value --- p.160
Chapter 3.3.1. --- On Meaning --- p.160
Chapter 3.3.2. --- On Value --- p.163
Chapter 3.4. --- On Ethics and Morality --- p.169
Chapter 3.4.1. --- Presuppositions --- p.170
Chapter 3.4.2. --- Methodologies --- p.174
Chapter 3.4.3. --- The Subject Matters and Their Level of Analysis --- p.179
Chapter 3.4.4. --- Concluding Remarks --- p.183
Chapter 3.5. --- On Humanism and Enlightenment --- p.184
Chapter 3.6. --- On Society --- p.189
Chapter 3.6.1. --- Identity and Difference --- p.189
Chapter 3.6.2. --- The Constitution of Social Order --- p.191
Chapter 3.6.3. --- Lifeworld and System --- p.192
Chapter 3.6.4. --- "Rationality, Morality, and Normality" --- p.193
Chapter 3.6.5. --- Descriptions of Modern Society --- p.196
Chapter 3.7. --- The Nature of Sociology --- p.200
Chapter 3.7.1. --- Methodology --- p.200
Chapter 3.7.2. --- Sociology and Society --- p.201
Chapter 3.8. --- Social Implications --- p.203
Chapter 3.9. --- Concluding Remarks: Metatheoretical Reflections on the Sociology of Ethics and Morality --- p.206
Concluding Reflections: Prospects for the Sociology of Ethics and Morality --- p.210
Bibliography --- p.214
7
Haller, Immanuel. "Verhältnis zwischen Geist, Kirche und Gesellschaft bei Jürgen Moltmann und in der pfingstlichen Theologie der Gegenwart." Diss., 2016. http://hdl.handle.net/10500/22679.
Full textAbstract:
Text in German with German and English summariesDie Pneumatologie ist ein aktuelles und insbesondere für die ökumenische Theologie entscheidendes Thema geworden. Die „Geistvergessenheit“ tritt immer mehr in den Hintergrund und schafft dadurch freien Raum für den noch nicht abgeschlossenen Prozess der „Wiederentdeckung des Heiligen Geistes“. Für eine missionale und gesellschaftsrelevante Theologie steht dabei immer wieder die Frage einer Verhältnisbestimmung zwischen Gott-Kirche-Gesellschaft im Fokus. Aus der Perspektive der Pneumatologie fehlen aber noch weitgehend Untersuchungen. Diese Arbeit will daher einen Beitrag leisten zur Diskussion, a) wie in der Theologie von Jürgen Moltmann – und im Vergleich dazu in der pfingstlichen Theologie der Gegenwart – Geist-Kirche-Gesellschaft aufeinander bezogen werden und zu welchem Ziel, und b) worin die Stärken und Schwächen des jeweiligen Ansatzes liegen und welche Konsequenzen daraus gezogen werden können. Durch den Vergleich der Modelle dieser zwei führenden Impulsgeber entsteht eine gute Grundlage für die Diskussion, wie das Verhältnis oder allenfalls die Wechselwirkung zwischen Geist, Kirche und Gesellschaft formuliert werden könnte.
Pneumatology became an ongoing and relevant topic, especially for the ecumenical theology. „The oblivion of the Spirit“ recedes to a large extend into the background and thus makes space for the process that has not yet been fully completed, that is to say, the „rediscovery of the Holy Spirit“. For a missional and socially relevant theology, the focus is again and again on the question of defining the relationship between God, Church and Society. From a pneumatological point of view the investigations are greatly lacking. Therefore, this paper intends to contribute to the discussion of a) how in Jürgen Moltmann’s theology – and in comparison to it in the current Pentecostal theology – Spirit, Church and Society relate to each other and to what purpose; and b) what are the strengths and weaknesses of each approach and which consequences can be drawn from them. By comparing the models of these two leading initiators, there occurs a solid basis for a discussion of how to define the relationship, or at best, the interplay between Spirit, Church and Society.
Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology
M. Th. (Systematic Theology)
Books on the topic "Habermas, Jürgen – Criticism and interpretation"
1
Abignente, Angelo. Legittimazione, discorso, diritto: Il proceduralismo di Jürgen Habermas. Napoli, Italy: Editoriale scientifica, 2003.
Find full text
2
System og livsverden: Jürgen Habermas' konstruktion af det moderne. Frederiksberg: ANIS Edition, 1993.
Find full text
3
Riis, Ricardt. Myte og rationalitet: En Grundtvig-inspireret bedømmelse af Jürgen Habermas. Horsens: Verbum, 1988.
Find full text
4
Bordum, Anders. Diskursetik og den positive selvreference: Jürgen Habermas' kommunikative etik. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur, 2001.
Find full text
5
Düringer, Hermann. Universale Vernunft und partikularer Glaube: Eine theologische Auswertung des Werkes von Jürgen Habermas. Leuven: Peeters, 1999.
Find full text
6
Korf-Breitenstein, Sigrid. Menschliche Lebenswelt im technischen Fortschritt: Zur Analyse der technisierten Moderne bei Jürgen Habermas. Hamburg, Germany: Kovač, 1995.
Find full text
7
Hong, Ki-Su. Zur Dialektik von Tradition und Vernunft in Theorie und Praxis: Eine Studie zur Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns von Jürgen Habermas im Hinblick auf die philosophische Hermeneutik von Hans-Georg Gadamer und die Entwicklungspsychologie von Jean Piaget. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann, 1995.
Find full text
8
McCarthy, Thomas A. The critical theory of Jürgen Habermas. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1988.
Find full text
10
Critical hermeneutics: A study in the thought of Paul Ricoeur and Jürgen Habermas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Habermas, Jürgen – Criticism and interpretation"
1
Popp-Madsen, Benjamin Ask. "Institutionalising the Instituting Power? Castoriadis and the Councils." In Visions of Council Democracy, 73–98. Edinburgh University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474456319.003.0003.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter engages with the Greek French political thinker Cornelius Castoriadis and his interpretation of the workers’ councils’ movement. The chapter argues that Castoriadis developed two different theories of council democracy; an early theory developed while he was the figure head of the radical French group Socialisme ou Barberie, and a late theory developed in tandem with his overarching theory of autonomy, the imaginary, and the instituting power. While Castoriadis has often been criticised, for example by Jürgen Habermas, for not theorising the institutional preconditions for democratic autonomy and for deploying a groundless and normless account of political action as instituting ex nihilo, the chapter argues that Castoriadis’ late theory of council democracy provides a vantage point through which Castoriadis’ concepts of ‘instituting power’ and ‘autonomy’ can grounded in institutional structures, i.e., the council system.
2
Vatter, Miguel. "Jürgen Habermas and Public Reason." In Divine Democracy, 189–240. Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190942359.003.0006.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter explores Jürgen Habermas’s conception of a post-metaphysical idea of public reason as basis of democratic legitimacy in postsecular societies. It discusses Habermas’s interpretation of Kant’s and Hegel’s philosophies of religion in terms of their efforts to ‘translate’ theological substance into ethico-political form, thus giving a secular meaning to the idea of God’s Kingdom. The chapter shows the roots of Habermas’s adoption of ‘methodological atheism’ in the writings of Karl Jaspers and Ernst Bloch on the relation between philosophy and faith in revelation. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the similarities between Habermas’s and Jacques Derrida’s defences of an essential messianic component in contemporary democratic theory.
3
"7. Critical Theory, Public Sphere, and Culture: Jürgen Habermas and His Critics." In The Institution of Criticism, 242–80. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.7591/9781501705434-008.
Full text
4
Grimm, Dieter. "Europe." In Dieter Grimm, 155–60. Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198845270.003.0010.
Full textAbstract:
The chapter deals with the impact of European interpretation on the national constitution and the national constitutional courts. It reflects Dieter Grimm’s position on a European constitution, his controversy with Jürgen Habermas, his thesis of the “over-constitutionalization” of the EU as one of the most important, but at least noticed causes of the diminishing acceptance of the EU.
5
Immanen, Mikko. "Critical Theory as a Reply to Heidegger, Scheler, and the Frankfurt Heideggerians." In Toward a Concrete Philosophy, 238–70. Cornell University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.7591/cornell/9781501752377.003.0009.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter examines Martin Heidegger's role in Max Horkheimer's programmatic formulations of critical theory in the early 1930s as the director of the Institute for Social Research. It highlights Horkheimer's sublation of philosophy into multidisciplinary social criticism that opened a third post-metaphysical path along Heidegger's philosophical hermeneutics and analytical philosophy. It also refers to Jürgen Habermas, who judges Horkheimer's early critical theory as an original, anti-Heideggerian response to the end of metaphysics. The chapter investigates Horkheimer's critical theory as an alternative to the hegemonic teachings of Heidegger and Max Scheler as well as to the neo-metaphysical doctrines of the Frankfurt Heideggerians. It reviews Horkheimer's debates in the Frankfurt discussion with Kurt Riezler and Paul Tillich.