Jurgen Habermas

Die Systemtheorie und die Kritische Theorie sind Schulen, die Theoretikerinnen seit langem ein Zuhause bieten. In der Zeit ihres Bestehens kam es immer wieder zu Treffpunkten und Theoriekollisionen dieser beiden Traditionen des Denkens der Gesellschaft. Durch die hier entwickelte Metareflexion wird es möglich, zu analysieren, wie diese
Theorietraditionen verbunden werden. Da sich die aktuelle Diskussion auf die Perspektive der Systemtheorie beschränkt, ist es notwendig, die Verbindung auch aus der Perspektive Kritischer Theorie zu debattieren. Denn erst die Unterscheidung der heute immer mehr ins Gespräch kommenden Kritischen Systemtheorie von der kaum diskutierten Kritischen Theorie sozialer Systeme macht es möglich, die volle Produktivität der Theoriekollisionen zu erkennen. Wir konzipieren unsere Metareflexion damit als eine Intervention im Sinne einer soziologischen Selbstkritik. Sie richtet sich gegen die Gefahr des theoretischen Dogmatismus und plädiert für die Öffnung der Kontingenz des eigenen Denkens der Gesellschaft.

Systems theory and critical theory are schools of thought that for a long time have been familiar for theorists. During the period of their emergence, there were several theoretical collisions between these two traditions of thinking of society. The meta-reflection that is developed here makes it possible to analyze how these theoretical traditions are connected. As the current discussion is limited to the perspective of systems theory, it is necessary to amplify the debate and to ask for a connection from the perspective of critical theory. Only through the distinction between critical systems theory, which is increasingly discussed today, and a critical theory of social systems, which is barely discussed, we may be able to recognize the full productivity of these theoretical collisions. Therefore, we understand our metareflection as an intervention that takes the form of sociological self-criticism, which is directed against the risk of theoretical dogmatism and advocates for opening up the contingency of sociology’s own thinking about society.

One of the most persistent and poignant human experiences is the sensation of longing—a restlessness perhaps best described as the unspoken conviction that something is missing from our lives. In this study, Drew M. Dalton attempts to illuminate this experience by examining the philosophical thought of Emmanuel Levinas on longing, or what Levinas terms “metaphysical desire.”

Metaphysical desire, according to Levinas, does not stem from any determinate lack within us, nor does it aim at a particular object beyond us, much less promise any eventual satisfaction. Rather, it functions in the realm of the infinite where such distinctions as inside and outside or one and the other are indistinguishable, perhaps even eliminated. As Levinas conceives such longing, it becomes a mediator in our relation to the other—both the human other and the divine Other.

Dalton follows the meandering trail of Levinas’s thought along a series of dialogues with some of the philosophers within the history of the Western tradition who have most influenced his corpus. By tracing the genealogy of Levinas’s notion of metaphysical desire—namely in the works of Plato, Heidegger, Fichte, Schelling, and Otto—the nature of this Levinasian theme is elucidated to reveal that it is not simply an idealism, a “hagiography of desire” detached from actual experience and resulting in a disconnect between his phenomenological account and our own lives. Rather, Levinas’s account of metaphysical desire points to a phenomenology of human longing that is both an ethical and religious phenomenon. In the end, human longing is revealed to be one of the most profound ways in which a subject becomes a subject, arising to its “true self,” and hearing the call to responsibility placed upon it by the Other.

Throughout, Dalton explicates the nuance of a number of key Levinasian terms, many of which have been taken from the Western philosophical tradition and reinscribed with a new meaning. Eros, the “Good beyond being,” shame, responsibility, creation, the trace, the il y a, and the holy are discovered to be deeply tied to Levinas’s account of metaphysical desire, resulting in a conclusion regarding longing’s role in the relationship between the finite and the Infinite.

Hegel's approach to sociopolitical normativity can be understood as a response to problems that are also faced by contemporary constructivists and realists. From Hegel's perspective, realists may be able to account for the nonrelative status of norms' content. But they undermine the notion of individual freedom. Meanwhile, constructivists' ability to defend individual freedom comes at the cost of rendering normative content contingent. To avoid these problems, both Aristotle and Kant devise hybrid accounts. However, Aristotle's fundamental commitment to objectivist substance-metaphysics undermines individual choice. Meanwhile, Kant's prioritization of unconditioned individual subjectivity over normative content renders norms subjective. In order to retain both choice-guaranteeing subjectivity and content-defining objectivity, Hegel bases his argument on the metaphysics of "the concept of the will." Within its

Jürgen Habermas und Talal Asad zählen zu den bedeutendsten Protagonisten des Diskurses um die postsäkulare Gesellschaft. In der vorliegenden Arbeit unternehme ich eine vergleichende Lektüre zentraler Schriften beider Autoren. Dabei versuche ich, möglichst präzise zu beschreiben, wie Habermas und Asad einen neuen Blickwinkel auf die Verhältnisbestimmung von Religion und Gesellschaft in der Gegenwart freigeben und plausibilisieren.
Einen zentralen Stellenwert schreibe ich der Tatsache zu, dass hierfür von beiden der Begriff der ‚Übersetzung‘ herangezogen wird. Ziel der Untersuchung ist es folglich, erste systematisierende Vorstöße bezüglich des Begriffspaars ‚Religion übersetzen‘ zu leisten. Dabei gilt es ein Bündel an Forschungsfragen zu beantworten: Wie wird der Begriff der Übersetzung verstanden? In welcher Art und Weise kommt Religion im Werk der Autoren zur Sprache? Auf welche Aspekte der Religion soll sich die Übersetzungsleistung beziehen? Wer sind die Subjekte dieser Übersetzung? Und schließlich, welche Chancen und Probleme bringen die beiden Ansätze für eine politiktheoretische Perspektive auf religiös-gesellschaftliche Fragestellungen mit sich?

A fil rouge goes through Habermas's decade long research. It is the idea that Reason and rationality permeate human societies and may lead human action towards emancipation, if aptly elaborated through the filter of theoretical reflection. Theory must pick up on this rational core and turn the intrinsic rational potential inherent to modern societies into a self-consciously pursued 'project of enlightenment'. This introduction to the special issue 'Habermas, Democracy, and the Public Sphere: Theory and Practice' shows how Habermas's work in different scientific domains contributes to the construction of the 'project of modernity' from the many angles that such a complex project requires. The public sphere is, in Habermas's theory, the societal domain in which communicative interactions have a chance to make Reason come to bear on human societies and lead them on the path to social and political emancipation. The contributions to this special issue focus therefore on the public sphere and illustrate the evolution of the concept in Habermas's work and its relation to democracy at national and supranational level.

“Power is war, the continuation of war by other means”: Foucault’s reversal of Clausewitz’s formula has become a staple of critical theory — but it remains highly problematic on a conceptual level. Elaborated during Foucault’s 1976 lectures (“Society Must Be Defended”), this work-hypothesis theorises “basic warfare” [la guerre fondamentale] as the teleological horizon of socio-political relations. Following Boulainvilliers, Foucault champions this polemological approach, conceived as a purely descriptive discourse on “real” politics and war, against the philosophico-juridical conceptuality attached to liberal society (Hobbes’s Leviathan being here the prime example).
However, in doing so, Foucault did not interrogate the conceptual validity of notions such as power and war, therefore interlinking them without questioning their ontological status. This problematic conflation was partly rectified in 1982, as Foucault proposed a more dynamic definition of power relations: “actions over potential actions”.
I argue, somewhat polemically, that Foucault’s hermeneutics of power still involves a teleological violence, dependent on a polemological representation of human relations as essentially instrumental: this resembles what Derrida names, in “Heidegger’s Ear”, an “anthropolemology”. However, I show that all conceptualisation of power implies its self-deconstruction. This self-deconstructive (or autoimmune) structure supposes an archi-originary unpower prior to power: power presupposes an excess within power, an excessive force, another violence making it both possible and impossible. There is something within power located “beyond the power principle” (Derrida). This (self-)excess signifies a limitless resistantiality co-extensive with power-relationality. It also allows the reversal of pólemos into its opposite, as unpower opens politics and warfare to the messianic call of a pre-political, pre-ontological disruption: the archi-originary force of différance. This force, unconditional, challenges Foucault’s conceptualisations of power, suggesting an originary performativity located before or beyond hermeneutics of power-knowledge, disrupting theoreticity as well as empiricity by pointing to their ontological complicity.
The bulk of this essay is dedicated to sketching the theoretical implications of this deconstructive reading of Foucault with respect to the methodology and conceptuality of political science and social theory.

1923 yılında bir grup aydın tarafından Marksizmi yeniden düşünmek amacıyla kurulan Frankfurt Okulu, sanattan sosyolojiye, eğitimden psikolojiye dek pek çok alanıda yeni fikirlerin ortaya konmasında etkili olmuştur. Bu alanların yanı sıra, Okul’a bağlı birçok aydın edebiyat alanında da çalışmalar yapmış, yaptıkları çalışmalar edebiyat kuramlarının modern dünyayla olan ilişkisini yeniden düşünmek açısından faydalı olmuştur. Makalenin temel fikri Frankfurt Okulu’nun modern edebi kuramların seyrini belirlediğidir. Bu çalışmada önce Frankfurt Okulu tanıtılacak, sonrasında ise bu ekole bağlı olarak edebiyata dair fikir üreten düşünürler ve onların fikirlerinden bahsedilecektir.

Um tratado prático-teorético é fundamentalmente um tratado de filosofia social e de metafísica, na medida em que trata da filosofia prática em sua relação específica, por um lado, com uma teoria do conhecimento e da linguagem, e por outro lado, com a própria questão da teoria do social, enquanto teorização do ser social (ontologia social e epistemologia social), da intersubjetividade (teoria moral, filosofia política, antropologia e psicologia filosóficas) e dos domínios regionais de objetos de investigação (sobretudo as ciências empíricas, incluindo, além da antropologia cultural e da psicologia social, a própria lingüística e abordagens neurocientíficas da linguagem e de fenômenos mentais), em sua diferença programática entre um uso teórico e um uso prático da razão em suas tentativas de fundamentar ou justificar a crença de que as coisas são o que são, em contraposição a por que devem ser assim e não de outro modo.

GODOY, M. G.. Justiça e Democracia: o Liberalismo Igualitário de John Rawls, o Procedimentalismo de Jürgen Habermas e a Proposta de Carlos Santiago Nino. In: Clèmerson Merlin Clève. (Org.). Constituição, Democracia e Justiça: aportes para um constitucionalismo igualitário. 1ed.Belo Horizonte: Fórum, 2011, v. , p. 369-397.

El propósito de estas páginas consiste en repensar la dignidad de la persona humana a la luz, primero, de la antropología que subyace en la Instrucción 'Dignitas Personae', desde la aportación, después, de algunos de los intentos más notables de la llamada razón secular. Terminaré, por último, haciendo unas breves consideraciones de conjunto en torno a la crisis que actualmente experimentan tanto el concepto como la dignidad misma de la persona.
Los desarrollos de la técnica genética nos han trasladado a un ámbito nuevo de interrogantes y cuestiones. Resulta que tras la proclamada muerte de Dios, se nos viene anunciando, bajo la inspiración última quizá de los adversarios de la llamada “metafísica de la subjetividad” , la propia muerte del hombre o el surgimiento, cuanto menos, de un nuevo tipo de humanidad. Y las preguntas que debemos contestar en estos momentos vuelven a ser, curiosamente, las mismas que antes dábamos por más obvias: ¿Qué o quién es el hombre? Mejor aún: ¿Quiénes somos? ¿Qué significa ser persona? ¿Es lo mismo una persona que un ser humano? ¿Existe alguna diferencia entre algo y alguien? ¿Somos meros fragmentos y productos de la naturaleza o poseemos cierta singularidad en el cosmos? ¿El embrión humano o el enfermo de Alzheimer deber ser reconocidos, respetados y tratados como personas?
Todas estas cuestiones, es verdad, no se van a resolver nunca a base de negar las posiciones tradicionales tachándolas como rancias antiguallas. Pero tampoco se logrará una respuesta adecuada a estos desafíos, pienso yo, anclándonos sin más en nuestros principios, blindando nuestro discurso ante las objeciones planteadas. La antropología filosófica y teológica del siglo XXI, deben repensar sus afirmaciones a la luz de nuestro presente con capacidad analítica, reflexiva y crítica. Creo que los desafíos planteados por la bioética están suponiendo para ambas disciplinas una auténtica provocación en el sentido literal que encierra el término alemán Herausforderung, esto es, una especie de acicate o de reto que oportunamente interpela desde fuera a unos discursos juzgados por muchos sectores de la posmodernidad como agotados o en completa bancarrota.

The Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities under International Humanitarian Law issued by the ICRC in 2008 recommended two interpretive standards on the use of force against individuals in armed conflicts. While one standard defines ‘direct participation in hostilities’ by reference to ‘functional membership’ such that anyone with a continuous combat functions in an organised armed group will lose her/his civilian immunity and be subject to attack on a continuous basis, the other standard requires that the kind and degree of force used in the attack be graduated according to military necessity. This paper surveys the court decisions, military manuals and legal or policy documents in different domestic jurisdictions since the publication of the Interpretive Guidance to illustrate the different levels of the adoption of these standards in domestic legal orders. The paper then borrows Franck’s theory of legitimacy to identify the possible legitimating factors that gave these standards the capacity to induce their adoption by domestic actors. Lastly, the paper employs Habermas’ theory of deliberative democracy in order to examine whether and how the governance by these transnational standards of the people subjected to them may be justified by their democratic legitimacy.

[EN] This paper briefly introduces the concepts of the public space by H. Arendt and J. Habermas, compares them and presents an analysis of the problems concerning the transformation of the public space. In this work, I try to demonstrate that a confrontation between the civic body and the state that appears in the context of the transformation of the public space is not completely grounded. The public sphere, which connects these two areas, is not autonomous. For the main points, I choose the theories of the two authors – Hannah Arendt and Jurgen Habermas. In the work, I discuss the similarities and differences of these theories as well as their conceptual interactions.

[LT] Straipsnyje aptariama viešoji erdvė ir jos sampratos bei transformacijos problemos. Pagrindiniais atramos taškais pasirinktos dviejų autorių – Hannah’os Arendt ir Jürgeno Habermaso – teorijos. Darbe aptariami šių teorijų panašumai ir skirtumai, jų konceptualios sąveikos. Straipsnyje mėginama įrodyti, kad viešosios erdvės transformacijos kontekste atsirandantis valstybės priešpriešinimas pilietinei bendruomenei nėra visiškai pagrįstas, o šias dvi sritis jungianti viešoji sfera nėra autonomiška.

[DE] Die Rezeptionsgeschichte des Werks von Carl Schmitt lässt sich grob in zwei Etappen gliedern. Während zunächst seine Kritik an der liberalen Demokratie im Zentrum des Interesses stand, verlagerte sich der Fokus nach dem Ende des Kalten Krieges auf seine Philosophie der internationalen Beziehungen. In diesem Artikel wird gezeigt, dass auch Jürgen Habermas’ aufmerksame Lektüre von Schmitts Texten diesen Schritten weitgehend folgt. Statt einer naiven Verwendung und Übernahme Schmitt’scher Kategorien findet sich bei Habermas allerdings eine kritische Aneignung ihres explikativen Potenzials. Darüber hinaus zeigt er große Vorbehalte gegenüber zentralen Ideen des sogenannten »Kronjuristen des Dritten Reiches«. Dies betrifft insbesondere das in alternativen politischen Kreisen bis heute weit verbreitete Konzept des »Politischen«.
[EN] While initially criticism of liberal democracy was the aspect of Carl Schmitt’s work which received attention, since the end of the Cold War interest has shifted towards his philosophy of international relations. Throughout this article it is shown that to a large extent Jürgen Habermas’ attentive reading of certain Schmitt texts follows in these steps. Rather than naively using Schmitt’s categories, Habermas practices a critical appropriation of his explanatory potential. Nevertheless, he manifests enormous reservations regarding the elongated shadow cast by his ideas and, in particular, by his concept of the political which is so prevalent today in alternative political circles.

O presente artigo busca apresentar os principais contornos do pensamento de Karl-Otto Apel, pensador preocupado com a filosofia da linguagem e a construção de uma ética do discurso. Como forma de explorar conceitos e categorias de Apel, além da transcrição de trechos derivados de consultas primárias de suas principais obras, parte-se da relação antecedente com Kant e de um contato posterior com Habermas, apresentando semelhanças e diferenças, para encerrar a abordagem da matriz apeliana, a partir da crítica pautada

Resumo Uma reflexão crítica sobre os caminhos e descaminhos das tecnologias contemporâneas se impõe com cada vez mais força na atualidade. Não se pode mais falar das dimensões "social" e "política" apenas se referindo à interação intersubjetiva; é preciso focar igualmente na interação humana com os aparatos técnicos. Tendo como pano de fundo a crescente digitalização da vida, acompanhada de processos de captação e armazenamento massivos de dados por parte de diferentes mecanismos e instâncias, gostaria de abordar, neste artigo, uma série de análises sobre os impactos do big data nos campos da economia, da política e da subjetividade a fim de colocar a seguinte questão: em que medida esse novo fenômeno não altera a configuração dos espaços de socialização e subjetivação, notadamente a esfera privada, de sorte a gerar um impacto na própria estruturação das democracias modernas? Tal questão se impõe na medida em que a antropologia política da modernidade é baseada, predominantemente, em uma noção substancial de sujeito autônomo, que possui na esfera privada um espaço fundamental de atividade e vivência cujo acesso lhe é privilegiado. Sendo assim, o objetivo do artigo é o de iniciar uma discussão sobre até que ponto as bases da antropologia política da modernidade não estariam sendo solapadas a partir de uma "mudança estrutural da esfera privada", uma vez que o acesso privilegiado do indivíduo a determinados dados privados poderia ser suplantado pelo

In 2009 Iran witnessed the Green Movement, a popular uprising that challenged the status quo of the socio-political structures of the Islamic Republic. This movement which pre-dates the Arab Spring uprisings in the region, drove large numbers of Iranian citizens to the streets, reminiscent of the 1979 revolution, protesting the presidential election results. This book investigates the impact of the political communications of the leaders of the uprising, namely Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Zahra Rahnavard and Hojatol Islam Mehdi Karoubi, on the movement. Although the Green Movement was ultimately unsuccessful, it produced valuable data for studying political uprisings and the role of social media in facilitating articulations of dissent, especially in the Middle East. This work is particularly significant since the cycle of protests surfaced again in 2017-2018 and Iran was yet again embroiled in violent dissent.

This book provides a historical link between the political discourse of Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the current regime, and that of the leaders of the Green Movement. Such historical approach facilitates an understanding of the impact and implication of speech on key Iranian uprisings since the revolution of 1979. In other words, this book asks was the discourse of the leaders of the Green Movement oriented towards building bridges or systematically distorted communication oriented to electoral success?

This work successfully tests the viability of a constellation of critical and cultural theories in the Iranian context. More specifically Jurgen Habermas’ Theory of Communicative Action, his conception of the Public Sphere as well as Anthony Giddens Theory of Structuration serve as the theoretical foundations of this inquiry. Furthermore, this book takes the unique approach of analysing YouTube videos of the protests, for the counter hegemonic role played by this social media platform as well its broadcast capabilities in authoritarian regimes where mass media are in the service of the ruling class. This study takes a Critical Discourse Analysis approach to analyse the collected data. The investigation uncovers evidence of systematic communication distortion in the public discourse of both Ayatollah Khomeini and the leaders of the Green Movement and discusses the impact of said distortions on the direction and shaping of the movement. This book also offers a brief analysis of the 2018 protests in comparison with Green Movement and explores ways to unify the nation and move forward.

Abstract: This article addresses shortcomings in the way that philosophers and cultural critics have considered propaganda by offering a new genealogical account. Looking at figures such as Marx, Adorno, Marcuse, Habermas, Bourdieu, and Stanley, this article finds that their consideration of propaganda has not necessarily been wrong but has missed some of the most significant and important functions of propaganda. This text draws on archival and published materials from propagandists, most notably Edward Bernays, to elaborate a new governmentality of propaganda and public relations. Through focusing on the concept of public opinion, I argue that propaganda is best thought of as an apparatus whose function it is to construct, modify, counter, and destroy relations of force within public opinion in order to produce the subjectivities and conduct that its disseminators and their clients desire.

What is the role of Jürgen Habermas’s critical theory amidst the prevalence of disinformation, polarization, and distrust in the media? In the book Habermas and the Media, Hartmut Wessler offers a “media lens” to make sense of Habermas’s work. He makes a case for the relevance of Habermas’s thought today, although his work needs to be updated to respond to developments in media studies and empirical political science. The book is an invaluable resource to any reader looking for an introduction on Habermas’s media theory. Its strongest point is its presentation of Habermas’s work in a clear and concise manner. It presents Habermas’s thinking chronologically, which is an effective way of walking readers through how Habermas’s ideas about the media evolved over 40 or so years. The discussion covered Habermas’s best-known books including The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (1989) and The Theory of Communicative Action (1984) as well as his little-known work such as The Inclusion of the Other (1998), the chapter “Further Reflections on the Public Sphere" in the book Habermas and the Public Sphere (1992) and the essays on Political Communication in Media Society published in Communication Theory (2006) and Europe: The Faltering Project (2009).

Tackling global injustice requires appropriate and effective institutions as well as cosmopolitan solidarity. This paper assumes that the ‘constitutionalized world society’ theorized by Habermas offers a viable proposal to make the protection and promotion of human rights more feasible. His account of solidarity, however, reveals a conundrum: If strong forms of solidarity grow out of shared political institutions and a related collective identity but it is precisely those institutions that we need to enhance at the global level, then how can we build sufficient solidarity to support this process? Habermas relies on a global consensus on human rights, but I argue that his version of cosmopolitan solidarity is too weak to motivate the measures needed to fully realize economic, social and cultural rights and the package of institutional reforms that he proposes. We thus need a narrative of the human condition that can lend additional support to the idea of human rights and cosmopolitan duties. I find the seeds of such a position, which I call cosmocommonism, in the work of Nancy. Having shown how this can motivate cosmopolitanism and support for human rights, I then consider in the conclusion its compatibility with the political institutions that Habermas proposes.

Resumo: Este texto é um ensaio sobre minha formação hermenêutica. Tem por objetivo sistematizar o aprendizado na interpretação de vários autores que estudei. O método é a análise crítica de suas ideias e o resultado é uma síntese do que aprendi e que gostaria de deixar compilado. Abstract: This text is an essay on my hermeneutics training. It aims to systematize learning the interpretation of several authors have studied. The method is the critical analysis of his ideas and the result is a summary of what I learned and would like to leave compiled. Resumen: Este texto es un ensayo sobre mi formación hermenéutica. Su objetivo es sistematizar el aprendizaje de la interpretación de varios autores han estudiado. El método es el análisis crítica de sus ideas y el resultado es un resumen de lo que he aprendido y quisiera dejar compilado.

For historical memory, here is an article by Christopher Hayes, in his Chicago days, covering the Brennan Lecture I organized when I was at Loyola University in Chicago.  On November 22, 2002, Habermas and Rorty held public dialogue on "Rationality and Universalism."

This article is based on Public Sphere ideology of JÜrgen Habermas reflecting communicative rationality that can make a selfhood in both individual and social level. In the Public Sphere, people can freely meet and share their attitude. The communication in this kind of space contributes the informal sphere that letting everyone be into inter-subjectivity and mutual understanding so that can last with the consensus eventually. Moreover, Production of Space ideology of Henri
Lefebvre considers the space relationship as dynamic as physical and imaginative space which mutual transfer as three cycling components as Representations of space, Representational space and Spatial practice. This eventually leads to reproduction concept of social relationship as new set of meaning. Both idea potential describe diversity of social phenomena focusing on contribution citizens’ role in driven society participation.