Postmetaphysical Thinking (Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought) [ Jürgen Habermas, William Mark Hohengarten] on *FREE*. It is hard to think of a contemporary philosopher whose achievement rivals that of Jürgen Habermas, in terms of range, comprehensiveness and. Postmetaphysical thinking reflects an acceptance of principled critiques of earlier, more metaphysi- cal approaches to philosophical questions. For Habermas.
|Published (Last):||12 November 2008|
|PDF File Size:||15.72 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.81 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Habermas is all too aware that he may simply be inviting metaphysics in through the back door. As an inheritor of the Hegelian-Marxist tradition of the Frankfurt School, Habermas began with the assumption that humankind can be understood as a kind of macro-subject of its own history — albeit, so far, in an unconscious, self-estranged guise.
Pstmetaphysical the same time, according to Habermas, elected legislators, judges, and other public officials, are under an obligation to frame their decisions in a neutral, secular language, postmetqphysical order that their reasons be accessible to all citizens.
After more than sixty years of intellectual endeavour, Habermas has accumulated an oeuvre which not only stands in the tradition of the great systematic social thinkers of postmetapgysical nineteenth and early twentieth century — Hegel, Marx, Durkheim, Weber — but can claim posmetaphysical dignified place beside them.
Religion and Postmetaphysical Thinking: From Worldviews to the Lifeworld 2. In short, it would fail adequately to respect the distinction between fides quae creditur and fides qua creditur — between articles of belief and a lived faith.
Postmetaphysical Thinking II | Social Philosophy | General Philosophy | Subjects | Wiley
In developing communication theory, Habermas is, in our terms, developing a theory of society that is not reducible to a simple totality but has social complexity as its ground i. This possibility is not available when epistemic issues are mixed up with normative and evaluative ones, as was standardly the case in the pre-modern world.
What postmetapyysical sheet can we draw up of his tackling of these issues, on the evidence of the current volume? Ciaran Cronin, Cambridge Many soft naturalists are happy to leave it at that, indifferent to the objection that perspectives that expect to be taken seriously imply ontological commitments. In the domain of moral philosophy, hqbermas enormous task he set himself was nonchalantly expressed on the back cover of the English translation of his Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action From this postmmetaphysical, his thinking can be broadly divided into three stages: His principal efforts were directed to proving the meaningfulness of seeking ultimate agreement regarding cognitive postmetapyysical and practical morality, by showing that simply to engage with one another in discussion commits us to the ideal of a universally valid consensus in normative and theoretical matters.
Such a demand, as put forward by Rawls, postmtaphysical place an unreasonable strain on individuals who are not in a position to separate their religious perspective on practical matters from their whole way of being in the world. In the final part he addresses the thorny and acutely topical question of the political relations between the secular and religious citizens of contemporary states, taking as his most important interlocutor John Rawls.
In developing Mead’s idea of the social ego Habermas puts forward that consciousness is not a originary act of the ego, but an external force that encroaches inwardly and forms the ego within a set of responses to stimuli from the other, wherein the I through being refered to by another can gain knowledge of himself in seeing how a second actor organises his interlocutionary demands. It renounces as outdated any philosophical vision of the world imbued with substantive values.
Hence both Kierkegaard and Marx are seen as paths away from this type of thought and stepping thinikng on the way to functional sociologies and psychologies that set in motion the procedures of communication theory.
Table of contents Reviews Linguistification of the Sacred.
Request an Evaluation Copy for this title. But this problem connects with another major issue. The type of self-reflection achieved, for example, by the patient in psychoanalysis thinling who begins to penetrate and comprehend the opacities of her individual life history — is a process quite distinct from the kind of transcendental reflection inaugurated by Kant, which seeks to delineate the universal structures underpinning cognition and other human competencies.
In addition to these multiple strands of activity, over the years Habermas has also published twelve volumes of Kleine Politische Schriftenhis interventions — sometimes more academic, sometimes more journalistic and even polemical — on topical social and political issues.
In the final part, Habermas explores the implications for democratic politics of this acknowledgement of the enduring roots of religion in the basic dynamics of human sociality. For him, metaphysics is the enterprise of framing a comprehensive view of the world, and the place of human beings within it, in which cognitive, normative and evaluative perspectives are fused.
Postmetaphysical Thinking II
Thomas McCarthy, Cambridge In Postmetaphysical Thinking Habermas begins to portray religion as a reservoir of such insights, with which philosophy must learn to co-exist, and from which it can indeed learn. But then it finds itself intimately linked to extra-philosophical thinoing of meaning — pre-eminently religion — that are characterized by a fusion of validity spheres. The age of the philosopher as prophet or visionary, as represented in twentieth-century Ppostmetaphysical by the fateful example of Heidegger, is over — notwithstanding the occasional theatrics of thinkers domiciled in Paris.
Habermas likes to portray such a situation haebrmas giving the dialectic of enlightenment one more twist. However, the distinctively human need to use language to secure social collaboration puts stresses and strains on the individual, who is thrown back on her own initiative in new ways. But is this a distinction without a difference?
Since the nature and status of metaphysics is itself a matter of endless dispute, it may be as well to formulate at the outset the core of what Habermas means by the term.
postmetaohysical The theory of communicative reason does not offer us the image of a possible future condition of free and egalitarian intersubjective relations. It covers a rich variety of topics, honing in particularly on the meaning of religion in public life. His writings have dealt with the philosophy of language and communication, the basis of moral consciousness, the philosophy of history and the evolution of social life since the dawn of human time, sociological theory on the grand scale, political philosophy and legal theory, and — increasingly — the habermae of religion.
How to orient oneself in this vast body of work? According to him, this enterprise is no tinking plausible, because philosophy must also bow to the separation of validity spheres, and conceive of itself either as collaborative Wissenschaftseeking universal structures underpinning human capabilities, or merely as the reflexive illumination of a particular socio-cultural world. Indeed, this is the guiding theme of an earlier collection of essays — Between Naturalism and Religion.
Part II is concerned with the venerable question of the relation between faith and knowledge; with his habitual intellectual generosity, Habermas offers extensive, thoughtful and learned responses to the papers which were presented by theologians and philosophers of religion at two conferences devoted to his work, in New York and Vienna.