Habermas

  • Habermas’ Communicative Action and its Platonic, Biblical and Metaphysical Consolidation. An Introduction to Democratical Political Philosophy

    Author: Wiera Paradowska
    Institution: University of Warsaw (Poland)
    Author: Ryszard Paradowski
    Institution: University of Warsaw (Poland)
    Year of publication: 2014
    Source: Show
    Pages: 389–404
    DOI Address: http://dx.doi.org/10.15804/ppsy2014023
    PDF: ppsy/43/ppsy2014023.pdf

    In this paper we would like to present a certain philosophical concept, which may be related to some contemporary philosophical controversies (and to political philosophy’ controversies included) concentrated around such problems as, the meaning of metaphysics and as the understanding of freedom. We are going also to say a word about the particularity of the philosophical understanding of reality, including the status of intention for agreement. The concept we present further for additional foundation of the Habermas’ idea of communicative action is a compound of metaphysics itself, and of our own concept of metaphysics, and of the two particular questions – interpretation of Plato’s philosophy as well as interpretation of the Biblical message about anthropogenesis.

  • What Kind of Politics Do We Need? Toward Freedom as Responsibility in Habermas’s and Rorty’s Visions of Democracy

    Author: Marcin Kilanowski
    Year of publication: 2017
    Source: Show
    Pages: 50-68
    DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/kie.2017.02.03
    PDF: kie/116/kie11603.pdf

    Isaiah Berlin said that it is part of the human condition to make choices between absolute values. Obviously, this choice cannot be easy. To be well informed, it has to be made in full awareness of the contingency of our criteria. This ability to make choices between absolute values in the light of contingencies is what distinguishes a civilized man from a barbarian, says Berlin, following Joseph Schumpeter. Similar ideas can be found in the philosophy of Richard Rorty, who believes that our liberal societies create more people who understand the contingencies of their vocabularies, but at the same time are still faithful to them. He calls this “freedom as acknowledgement of contingency.” This freedom is bound by the existence of a plurality of voices, which does not mean that it is bound by the existence of chaos. In such a spirit, Jürgen Habermas emphasizes the fact that in spite of the plurality of contingent views, we can find a unity of reason. In spite of plurality of views, we can still come to an agreement thanks to dialogue. The close analysis of Rorty’s and Habermas’s philosophy allows us to see that they share a common stance: thanks to disenchantment of the world, as Rorty says, or thanks to decentralization of the world, as Habermas says. Both are seeing such stance as a precondition to use our freedom in a way to be more tolerant, more open to dialogue and responsible for it. Further analysis allows us to see that there is a possibility to present a new understanding of the notion of freedom-freedom conceived as responsibility.

Wiadomość do:

 

 

© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart