A Critical Reading Of Habermas’ Defense Of Modernity
AbstractJürgen Habermas has engaged in a critical defense of reason and Enlightenment against the rising postmodernism in the 1980s. Reading the modern philosophy as a discourse constituted by the attempts to transcend the subjective character of Enlightenment thought, Habermas claimed that the attempts by Nietzsche and his followers ended up with the denial of reason and thus strengthened reactionary movements, yet remained within the boundaries of subjective philosophy. According to him, the way to avoid the tyranny caused by subjective philosophy is not to deny reason but to reconstruct it on the basis of intersubjective communication. In this article, those resources and assumptions of Habermas which have several in common with that of anti-modernist thinkers he discussed with are dwelt on, and some criticisms brought to his attempt through the theory of communicative action to explain and resolve the problems of modernity are examined.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Anadolu University in its journal Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences.
Volume (Year): 11 (2011)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Yunus Emre Kampusu 26470, Eskişehir
Phone: (90) (222) 335-0580 x 2743
Fax: (90) (222) 320-1304
Web page: http://www.anadolu.edu.tr/akademik/birim/genelBilgi/205/3429/1
More information through EDIRC
Jürgen Habermas; Modernity; Postmodernism; Theory of Communicative Action;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- Z00 - Other Special Topics - - General - - - General
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Social Sciences Institute).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.