Does Philosophy Require De-Transcendentalization? Habermas, Apel, and the Role of Transcendentals in Philosophical Discourse and Social-Scientific Explanation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6107.34.02Słowa kluczowe:
citizen participation, urban governance, public space, urban design, public art, urban regeneration, bottom-up processesAbstrakt
The heritage of transcendental philosophy, and more specifically its viability when it comes to the problematic of the philosophy of social sciences, has been a key point of dissensus between Jürgen Habermas and Karl-Otto Apel. Whereas Apel has explicitly aimed at a transcendental-pragmatic transformation of philosophy, Habermas has consequently insisted that his formal pragmatics, and the theory of communicative action which is erected upon it, radically de-transcendentalizes the subject. In a word, the disagreement concerns whether transcendental entities have any substantial role to play in philosophical discourse and social-scientific explanations. My aim is to reconstruct how Apel establishes a connection between transcendentals, qua the ideal communicative community and the possibility of non-objectifying self-reflection. As I shall demonstrate, the principles that transcendental pragmatics sees as underlying social actions are not to be understood in a strictly judicial way, as “supernorms.” Rather, they should be conceptualized and used as a means for action regulation and mutual action coordination. Against this backdrop, I show that the concept of the ideal community provides the necessary underpinnings for Habermas’ schema of validity claims and the project of reconstructive sciences.
Bibliografia
Apel, Karl-Otto. “Normatively Grounding ‘Critical Theory’ Through Recourse to the Lifeworld? A Transcendental-Pragmatic Attempt to Think with Habermas Against Habermas.” In Philosophical Interventions in the Unfinished Project of Enlightenment, edited by Axel Honneth, Thomas McCarthy, Claus Offe, Albrecht Wellmer, translated by William Rehg, 125–170. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1992.
Google Scholar
Apel, Karl-Otto. The Response of Discourse Ethics to the Moral Challenge of the Human Situation as Such and Especially Today. Mercier Lectures, March 1999. Leuven: Peeters, 2001.
Google Scholar
Apel, Karl-Otto. Towards a Transformation of Philosophy, edited by Glyn Adey and David Fisby. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 1998.
Google Scholar
Apel, Karl-Otto. Understanding and Explanation. Translated by Georgia Warnke. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1984.
Google Scholar
Apel, Karl-Otto. “Wittgenstein and the Problem of Hermeneutic Understanding.” In Towards a Transformation of Philosophy, edited by Glyn Adey and David Fisby, 1–45. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 1998.
Google Scholar
Crame, Phoebe. Protecting the Self: Defense Mechanisms in Action. New York: The Guilford Press, 2006.
Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, Bent. “Habermas and Foucault: Thinkers for Civil Society?” British Journal of Sociology 49, no. 2 (June 1998): 210–233.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/591310
Gall, John. Systemantics: How Systems Work and Especially How They Fail. New York: Quandangle/The New York Times Books Co., 1975.
Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. “A Reply.” In Communicative Action: Essays on Jürgen Habermas’s “The Theory of Communicative Action”, edited by Axel Honneth and Hans Joas, translated by Jeremy Gaines and D. L. Jones, 214–264. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1991.
Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. “Actions, Speech Acts, Lingistically Mediated Interactions, and Lifeworld.” In On the Pragmatics of Communication, edited by Maeve Cooke, 215–256. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1998.
Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. Erkenntnis und Interesse. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1968; (Knowledge and Human Interests. Translated by Jeremy J. Shapiro. Boston: Beacon Press, 1971.)
Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. “From Kant to Hegel: On Robert Brandom’s Pragmatic Philosophy of Language.” In Truth and Justification, edited and with translations by Barbara Fultner, 131–173. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2003.
Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume 1. Translated by Thomas McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press, 1984.
Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. Truth and Justification, edited and with translations by Barbara Fultner. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2003.
Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. “What is Universal Pragmatics?” In On the Pragmatics of Communication, edited by Maeve Cooke, 21–104. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1998.
Google Scholar
Hansen, Ejvind. “The Foucault-Habermas Debate: The Reflexive and Receptive Aspects of Critique.” Telos 130 (Spring 2005): 63–83.
Google Scholar
Kelly, Michael, ed. Power: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debate. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1994.
Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226217239.001.0001
Landesman, Charles. “The New Dualism in the Philosophy of Mind.” Review of Metaphysics 19, no. 2 (December 1965): 329–345.
Google Scholar
Owen, David. “Foucault, Habermas, and the Claims of Reason.” History of the Human Science 9, no. 2 (1997): 119–138.
Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. “The Law of Mind.” The Monist 2 (1892): 533–559.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/monist18922434
Rouse, Joseph. Engaging Science: How to Understand Its Practices Philosophically. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501718625
Schnädelbach, Herbert. “The Transformation of Critical Theory.” In Philosophical Interventions in the Unfinished Project of Enlightenment, edited by Axel Honneth, Thomas McCarthy, Claus Offe, and Albrecht Wellmer, translated by William Rehg, 7–22. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1992.
Google Scholar
Seel, Martin. “The Two Meanings of ‘Communicative’ Rationality: Remarks on Habermas’s Critique of a Plural Concept of Reason.” In Communicative Action: Essays on Jürgen Habermas’s “The Theory of Communicative Action”, edited by Axel Honneth and Hans Joas, translated by Jeremy Gaines and D. L. Jones, 36–48. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1991.
Google Scholar
Turner, Stephen P. Explaining the Normative. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2010.
Google Scholar
Turner, Stephen P. The Social Theory of Practices: Traditions, Tacit knowledge, Presuppositions. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994.
Google Scholar
Von Wright, Georg H. Explanation and Understanding. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1971.
Google Scholar
Wellmer, Albrecht. “The Debate about Truth: Pragmatism without Regulative Ideas.” In Pragmatic Turn in Philosophy: Contemporary Engagements between Analytic and Continental Thought, edited by William Egginton and Michael Sandbothe, 93–114. Albany: SUNY Press, 2004.
Google Scholar
Winch, Peter. The Idea of a Social Science and Its Relation to Philosophy. Second Edition. London: Routledge, 2003.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203014493
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1958.
Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Translated by C. K. Ogden. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd.; New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company, Inc., 1922.
Google Scholar
Pobrania
Opublikowane
Jak cytować
Numer
Dział
Licencja
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Użycie niekomercyjne – Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
