TWENTIETH CENTURY
PHILOSOPHY:
Intellectual Heroes and Key Themes
LECTURES
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
The limits of language.
Death and authenticity.
The great community.
Making differences.
Social hope.
Communicative rationality.
VI. COMMUNICATIVE
RATIONALITY
1.THE RENEWAL OF CRITICAL THEORY
What is the project of enlightenment?
2.THE COLONISATION OF THE LIFEWORLD
Which concepts can serve as intellectual
tools to analyse the world society?
3. TOWARDS A NEW WORLD ORDER
How should the postnational constellation
look like?
1. THE RENEWAL OF CRITICAL
THEORY
FRANKFURTER SCHULE
 ‘Institut für Sozialforschung’ >
founded in 1924 by Felix Weil.
 Interdisciplinary research
program.
 Initially: the investigation of the
history of the labour movement.
 Later on: the investigation of
the socio-economic,
psychological and cultural
factors to explain why people
submit themselves to
authoritarian regimes.
MAX HORKHEIMER (1895-1973)
Major works:
 Autorität und Familie
(1936).
 Traditionelle und
kritische Theorie
(1937).
 Dialektik der
Aufklärung [ with
Adorno] (1947)
ERICH FROMM (1900-1980)
Major works:
 Escape from Freedom
(1945).
 The Art of Loving
(1956).
 The Anatomy of Human
Destructiveness (1973)
HERBERT MARCUSE (1898-1979)
Major works:
 Eros and Civilisation
(1955).
 The One Dimensional
Man (1964).
 Repressive Tolerance
(1965).
THEODOR W. ADORNO (1903-1969)
Major works:
 Dialektik der Aufklärung
[with Horkheimer] (1947).
 Philosophie der neuen Musik
(1948).
 Minima Moralia (1951).
 Negative Dialektik (1966).
 Ästhetische Theorie (1969).
WALTER BENJAMIN (1892-1940)
Major works:
 Ursprung des deutschen
Trauerspiels (1928).
 Das Kunstwerk im Zeitalter
der technischen.
 Reproduzierbarkeit (1936).
 Das Passagenwerk
(posthumous).
ANGELUS NOVUS
“A Klee painting named Angelus Novus shows an
angel looking as though he is about to move away
from something he is fixedly contemplating. His
eyes are staring, his mouth hangs open, his wings
are spread. This is how the angel of history must
look. His face is turned toward the past. Where we
perceive a chain of events, he sees one catastrophe,
which keeps piling wreckage upon wreckage
hurling it before his feet. The angel would like to
stay, awaken the dead, and make whole what has
been smashed. But a storm is blowing from
Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with such
violence the angel can no longer close them. This
storm irresistibly propels him into the future to
which his back is turned, while the pile of debris
before him grows skyward. This storm is what we
call progress.”
Walter Benjamin
A REALISTIC UTOPIA
 Traditional theory > is affirmative concerning the status
quo.
 Critical theory > articulates the discomfort about the status
quo.
 The aim of a critical theory of the world society: to
develop a theory of justice that does justice to 1) moral
intuitions and 2) reality.
 A realistic utopia > an ideal world order that is reachable
from the present.
 A normative theory presents intellectual tools to criticize
the status quo.
 Empirical research is necessary to figure out what is going
on in the world society.
 Critical theory > the combination of empirical research
and normative reflections.
CLAIMS OF CRITICAL THEORIES
1. Cognitive claim: to present an adequate analysis of
the world society.
2. Normative claim: to deliver a fair judgment on the
society.
3. Emancipatory claim: an adequate analysis and a
fair judgment should help to overcome situations
of oppression and marginalization.
4. Selfreflexive claim: to be self-critical.
TRADITIONAL
THEORY
CRITICAL THEORY
1. Empirical research to test
hypotheses.
1. Empirical research to test
hypotheses and to change
situations in which people
are repressed.
2. Dichotomy between
science and society.
2. Science is always a part of
the society.
3. Value-free science.
3. No dichotomy between
facts and values.
JÜRGEN HABERMAS
Biographical data:
 1929: Born June 18, in Düsseldorf.
 1949-1954: Studies philosophy, psychology,
economics and literature in Göttingen, Zürich
and Bonn.
 1955-1959: Assistant of Theodor W. Adorno in
Frankfurt.
 1959-1961: Researcher and ‘Habilitant’.
 1961-1964: Professor in philosophy in
Heidelberg.
 1964-1971: Professor philosophy and sociology
in Frankfurt.
 1971-1981: Director of the Max Planck Instituut
in Starnberg.
 1981-1994: Professor in philosophy in Frankfurt.
 1994: Professor emeritus.
IMPORTANT PUBLICATIONS
















Student und Politik (1962).
Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit (1962).
Technik und Wissenschaft als ‘Ideology’ (1968).
Erkenntnis und Interesse (1968).
Legitimationsprobleme im Spätkapitalismus (1973).
Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981).
Moralbewußtsein und kommunikatives Handeln (1984).
Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne (1985).
Nachmetaphysisches Denken(1988).
Faktizität und Geltung (1992).
Die Einbeziehung des Anderen (1996).
Die postnationale Konstellation (1998).
Wahrheit und Rechtfertigung (1999).
Der gespaltene Westen (2004).
Ach, Europa (2008).
Zur Verfassung Europas: Ein Essay (2011).
THE PROJECT OF ENLIGHTENMENT
Habermas wants to continue the project of
enlightenment > emancipation via the public use of
reason.
Immanuel Kant > ‘What is enlightenment?’ (1784).
“Enlightenment is man's emergence from his selfincurred immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to
use one's own understanding without the guidance
of another. This immaturity is self-incurred if its
cause is not lack of understanding, but lack of
resolution and courage to use it without the guidance
of another. The motto of enlightenment is therefore:
Sapere aude! Have courage to use your own
understanding!”
DIALECTIC OF ENLIGHTENMENT
Central question: “why mankind, instead of entering
into a truly human condition, is sinking into a new
kind of barbarism”.
Main object of criticism: instrumental reason.
Three forms of domination:
1. The domination of one’s self.
2. The domination of other individuals.
3. The domination of outward nature.
Central thesis: enlightenment turns against itself.
Mythology and enlightenment have the same roots:
survival, self-preservation and fear.
MASS DECEPTION
> Features of the culture
industry:
1. Standardization.
2. Pseudoindividualization.
3. Profit-oriented.
 The production of goods that
are consumable.
 Culture as a mean to defend
the status quo.
A NEW PERSPECTIVE
Habermas aim > to renew critical theory.
Deficits of the old critical theory:
1. One-sided pessimistic view of modern
societies.
2. The subject-object model of classical
metaphysics.
3. An underdeveloped normative theory.
Claim: a theory of communicative action can
generate a new perspective on modern societies.
2. THE COLONISATION OF THE
LIFEWORLD
PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIOLOGY
Habermas’ theory of communicative action
integrates the knowledge of two disciplines:
philosophy and sociology.
Central topic of philosophy > reason (Vernunft).
Central topic of sociology > the issue of social
order: how to coordinate the actions of the
members of a society in order to get a reasonable
form of social cohesion?
On the cross-road of both disciplines: what
frustrates a reasonable (i.e. rational) coordination
of actions?
A THEORY OF COMMUNICATIVE
ACTION
Elements of Habermas’ theory of communicative
action:
1. A theory of rationality.
2. A theory of communicative action that can be
used for a theory of the modern society.
3. A critical sketch of the process of
rationalization.
4. A concept of society that integrates system
theory and action theory.
A THEORY OF RATIONALITY
 Three types of relations:
1. The relation to the objective world of things:
subject <> object.
2. The relation to the social world based upon norms:
subject <> other subjects.
3. The relation to the subjective world of thought, feelings
and images: subject <> to itself.
 Philosophy delivers a theory of rationality that illuminates
these relations.
 Intellectual strategy: the reconstruction of the tacit
knowledge actors need in order to coordinate their actions
with others.
TYPES OF RATIONALITY
In general: rationality is the disposition of an
individual that can communicate and act.
Instrumental rationality > something is mainly
seen as a mean to attain a goal in an efficient and
effective way.
Strategic rationality > someone is mainly seen as a
mean to attain a goal in an efficient and effective
way.
Communicative rationality > two or more subjects
want to attain mutual understanding.
A THEORY OF COMMUNICATIVE
ACTION
Communicative action > the interaction of at least
two persons who are in search of mutual
understanding about a specific situation in order
to make plans and coordinate their actions.
Three worlds: the objective world, the social
world and the subjective world.
The three worlds correspond to three validity
claims which are inherent to communicative
actions.
VALIDITY CLAIMS
 When ego says something to alter he or she implicitly or
explicitly makes three claims:
1. Propositional truth > ego claims that what he or she
says about a state of affairs is the truth.
2. Normative rightness > ego claims that the norms he
or she thins are underlying his or her relation with
alter are right.
3. Subjective truthfulness > ego claims that he or she
seriously means what is said (sincerity).
 The three validity claims are inherent to communicative
action.
 Alter can challenge ego on these claims > possibility of
criticism.
THE COORDINATION OF ACTIONS
Language > a medium for coordinating actions
(but not the only medium).
The coordination of actions can be based upon:
1. Communicative action > the coordination of
actions is inherently consensual and actors
mobilise the potentials for rationality.
2. Strategic actions > to achieve individual
goals in an efficient and effective way.
CONSENSUS AND DISSENSUS
What does it mean when Habermas claims that
the coordination of actions is inherently
consensual?
Not that a consensus is the goal!
Habermas distinguishes ‘Verständigung’
(mutual understanding) and ‘Einverständnis’
(subjects agree that X is p, or that Y should be
the case).
Two subjects can agree that they disagree
(consenus-in-the-dissensus).
RATIONALISATION
Rationalisation refers to
- the differentiation of several spheres (science
and technology, law and morality, and art).
- disenchantment of the world > secularization.
- the rise of instrumental and strategic rationality.
- the emergence of a bureaucratic state.
- the rise of communicative rationality.
Paradigm shift is necessary from teleological action
to communicative action.
From the subject-object model to the model of
intersubjectivity.
LEARNING PROCESSES
The reconstruction of the development of
individuals and societies.
The development of individuals and societies
can be seen as learning processes.
Individual level > the development of
competences.
Societal level > the transformation of different
types of societies.
THE INTEGRATION OF TWO
PARADIGMS
 Two perspectives:
1. The perspective of the actor.
2. The perspective of the observer.
 Lifeworld: the unquestioned background resources that
enable actors to interpret the surrounding world and to
coordinate their actions.
 Reproduction of the lifeworld > communicative actions.
 System: the coordination of actions is based upon
nonlinguistic media: money (market) and power (state).
 Reproduction of the system > strategic actions.
COLONISATION
A critical view based on the integration of
normative and empirical inquiry.
The problem of modern societies > the
colonisation of the lifeworld by the imperatives of
different systems (the state or the market).
The colonisation of the lifeworld > money and
power displace the communicative coordination of
actions where that should not be the case
(example: universities governed by market
strategies).
3. TOWARDS A NEW WORLD ORDER
FROM ORDINARY SPEECH TO
DISCOURSES
The validity claims that are inherent to
communicative action can be the focus of
discourses.
Rationality > presumption that good reasons can be
given to justify validity claims in the face of
criticism.
Discourse > an inclusive critical discussion that is
free from pressures and in which actors treat each
other as equals in order to reach mutual
understanding on matters of common concern.
Theoretical discourse > the truth of propositions.
Practical discourse > the rightness of norms.
IMPROVING DEMOCRATIC
PRACTICES
Democracy > citizens author laws to which they
are subject.
The law should be the subject to the deliberation of
citizens.
Public sphere > important for the public opinionformation about (new) laws and issues that are in
the common interest of citizens.
A discourse theory of deliberative democracy.
Aim: to show how the model of ideal discourses
can be linked to real institutional contexts.
LAW BETWEEN FACTS AND VALUES
Contra positivism (only interested in facts).
Contra moralism (only interested in values).
Focus on deliberation > to come to a decision on
the basis of a debate of all the interested parties
instead of a decision on the basis of a command.
Discourse principle > a rule of action or decision
is justified only if all those affected by the rule or
decision could accept it in a discourse.
LAW AND POLITICS
Central question: how to get a normative account of
legitimate law?
The answer is based upon a link between the
discourse theory and the character of modern legal
systems.
One cannot have a stable society if citizens don’t
perceive the law as legitimate.
The legitimation of law > citizens understand
themselves as the authors of the laws they have to
obey.
A system of rights guarantees a minimum set of
normative conditions for a legitimate political order.
CONDITIONS REQUIRED FOR
DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY
 Habermas pleas for a deliberative democracy.
 Conditions for a deliberative democracy:
1. The absence of exclusion or power distortion.
2. Egalitarian reciprocity > minorities must not, in virtue
of their membership status, be entitled to lesser
degrees of civil, political, social and cultural rights
than the majority.
3. Voluntary self-ascription > an individual’s group
membership must permit the most extensive forms of
self-ascription and self-identification possible.
4. Freedom of exit and association.
COSMOPOLITANISM
A just cosmopolitan political order should be
based on international public law.
The emergence of international public law and a
transnational civil society (NGOs).
The creation of opportunities for political
participation at a transnational level.
Postnational democracy > self-determination
through legislation is also an important criterion
of democracy at the transnational level.
At a transnational level governance can only be
indirectly democratic.
WORLD DOMESTIC POLICY
 The focus of Habermas > a world domestic policy without world
government (‘eine Weltinnenpolitik ohne Weltregierung’).
 World government > the danger of despotism.
 A world domestic policy based upon a multi-level governance
approach:
1. Supranational level > the reformation of the United Nations in the
direction of an agent that should have the power to control the
fulfilment of democratically legitimized decisions concerning
peace, security and human rights.
2. Transnational level > multinational companies, nongovernmental organisations and international organisations and
regional regimes (for instance the EU) that are responsible for the
implementation of a powerful economic and environmental
policy.
3. National level > citizens give expression to their political
autonomy by critique towards those who represent them.
THE CONSTITUTIONALIZATION
OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
International law should regulate the relations
between actors who operate on the three levels.
The constitutionalization of international law is a
necessary condition for a democratically
legitimized world domestic policy.
The current international law is still state-centric,
and should be transformed in a cosmopolitan law
(Kant > Weltbürgerrecht) that guarantees the
fulfilment of human rights.
EUROPEAN IDENTITY
 Habermas raises two important questions:
1. Do we need a European identity?
2. Is the construction of a European identity possible?
 Two answer this question it is important to make a
difference between different forms of integration:
1. Cultural integration.
2. Social integration.
3. Political integration.
 Not a cultural, but a social and political integration are
important for the construction of a European identity?
 Discussions about the European identity should be linked
to the debate about a new world order.
MORE THAN A EUROPEAN DREAM
 Habermas delivers arguments to get beyond the realexisting euro centrism.
 Jeremy Rifkin distinguishes the American Dream from
the European Dream.
 American Dream > individual freedom, hard work,
personal success, and financial independence.
 European Dream > quality of life, community, peaceful
coexistence, and the enjoyment of leisure.
 To what extent is Rifkin’s (West?) European Dream the
dream of all human beings?
 A cosmopolitan Europe > a Europe that sees itself as the
mean to establish democracy and human rights
worldwide.
RECOMMENDED
1. Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of
Communicative Action.
2. Jürgen Habermas, The Divided West.
3. Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its
History, Theory and Political Significance.