Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:22:13 -0600
From: noelle-AT-ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Noelle McAfee)
Subject: Re: Habermas and Emotions


Stephen Chilton wrote:

>while [Habermas] may derive moral authority
>from the level of general agreement, it is at least agreement of concrete
>others mutually recognizing each others in their situatedness. 

In my reading of Habermas, so long as agreement occurs among particular
others it is only conventional agreement not moral agreement, which
requires agreement from an unlimited communication community.  This is a
universal community, not a particular community of concrete others.  I
think that's Benhabib's point.

So the initial question that someone (who was it?) raised is still a good one:

> 1. How is Habermas any different from Rawls in positing the general other
> rather than the concrete other?



__________________________________
Noelle McAfee
Dept. of Philosophy
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712
voice: 512/450-0705
fax: 512/450-0545
noelle-AT-ccwf.cc.utexas.edu