Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I NEW PARADIGMS AND SOCIAL THEORY PERSPECTIVES
- Chapter One Habermas's New Paradigm of Critical Theory
- Chapter Two Giddens's Theory of Structuration – an Ontology of the Social
- Part II INSTITUTIONALIZING MODERNITY: DEVELOPMENT AND DISCONTINUITY
- Part III THE POLITICAL AND SOCIAL CONSTELLATION OF CONTEMPORARY MODERNITY
- Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
Chapter One - Habermas's New Paradigm of Critical Theory
from Part I - NEW PARADIGMS AND SOCIAL THEORY PERSPECTIVES
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 January 2018
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I NEW PARADIGMS AND SOCIAL THEORY PERSPECTIVES
- Chapter One Habermas's New Paradigm of Critical Theory
- Chapter Two Giddens's Theory of Structuration – an Ontology of the Social
- Part II INSTITUTIONALIZING MODERNITY: DEVELOPMENT AND DISCONTINUITY
- Part III THE POLITICAL AND SOCIAL CONSTELLATION OF CONTEMPORARY MODERNITY
- Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
In the structures of diffracted intersubjectivity […] singularization is just as impossible without the inexorable compulsion to universalization as is socialization without concomitant individuation. (Habermas 1991, 218)
Critical Theory and Social Identity: On Habermas's Conceptual Foundations
As I have discussed, the Marxian perspective of the philosophy of praxis derives its conception of the social from an interpretation of the intersection between the subject and history. A distinctive feature of this perspective is its synthetic orientation, generating a concern with the problem of mediation. Starting from Marx's critique of Hegel and Feuerbach, critical theory has sought to transform philosophical concepts through grounding them in social processes. In particular, this Marxian perspective considers that practice constitutes the linkage between the subject and history. This mediation is meant to be a process of transcending many traditional philosophical and political antinomies, like those of the divisions between essence and appearance, subject and object, freedom and necessity. Habermas diverges from several of the praxis perspective's synthetic aspirations, but I argue that he retains a founding interest in the problem of the mediation of the universal and the particular. The intersubjective approach that he develops to this problem of mediation is central to his defence of the continuing relevance of the ‘project of modernity’ and his claim that ‘the rationality structures that became accessible in the modern age have not yet been exhausted and that they allow for a comprehensive institutional embodiment in the form of extensive processes of democratization’ (Habermas 1979a, 129).
Habermas's specification of this mediation of the universal and the particular is based on his demonstrating the rationality intrinsic to communicative action oriented towards mutual understanding. He develops this basic consideration into a theory that is internally organized around the formation of social identity and its moral– practical translations. In Habermas's theory, identity is constitutive of the social, as the intersubjectivity of communication mediates processes of socialization and individuation. The principle of Habermas's discourse ethics exemplifies the normative implications of this mediation of the universal and the particular:
(D) Only those norms can claim to be valid that meet (or could meet) with the approval of all affected in their capacity as participants in practical discourse. (Habermas 1990a, 66)
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Habermas and Giddens on Praxis and ModernityA Constructive Comparison, pp. 23 - 62Publisher: Anthem PressPrint publication year: 2017