Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 21:36:54 -0600 (CST)
From: "Vic Peterson" <vpetersn-AT-merle.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject: RE: HAB: Habermas and social action


Hi, I'm not sure I see the shift to which you're referring--i.e., since the
early 70's consensus in discourse and, more broadly, mutual understanding in
communicative action have been and still are (even in TCA) the normative
core of his theory of social integration.  In TCA and elsewhere, he
distinguishes communicative from strategic action; only the former is
oriented toward mutual understanding (and hence implicity to consensus), but
the latter is parasitic on the former, through which alone can lifeworld
meanings be regenerated.  So, while consensus is for Habermas not the goal
of all types of action (e.g., strategic action) and never has been, still
communicative action (which does remain internally linked to consensus) is
the action type central to his normative social theory.

For recent stuff, you might want to look at _Between Facts and Norms_,
Ch. 1.2 and also check the index under "consensus, social integration/action
coordination."  Even more recently, see "Actions, speech acts,
linguistically mediated interactions and the lifeworld," in G. Floistad,
ed., _Philosophical problems today_, Vol. 1 (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1994), pp.
45-74.  --Vic

In message Wed, 19 Mar 1997 04:02:31 -0500 (EST), EDavisMail-AT-aol.com  writes:

> Hello, people in dialogue about Habermas.
>
> I am currently a Masters Candidate in Economics, with an emphasis on the
> Austrian School, at California State University, Hayward Campus.
>
> I hope that maybe one of you can help me.  I'm a little confused about
> Habermas's approach to social action, which I understand has evolved over
> time.  My confusion centers particularly around his treatment of social
> action in relation to communicatively achieved consensus.  In his earlier
> work, he appears to tie consensus closely to a goal shared by the
> participants in dialogue.  In his later work--and for me this goes no
> later than The Theory of Communicative Action, because I have not yet
> read anything more recent--consensus and shared purpose, in the sense of
> social action, do not appear to be as closely tied.  Does Habermas's
> notion of a "general interest" imply a single, shared goal?  How is this
> linked to consesus?  Does Habermas's expansion of the public sphere
> entail a shared goal among the participants in this sphere insofar as
> they achieve consensus?
> I would greatly appreciate any assistance.
>
> Erik Davis
> CSU, Hayward
>
>
> --- from list habermas-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>


     --- from list habermas-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---