Date: 	Fri, 21 Mar 1997 12:42:04 -0500
From: Kenneth MacKendrick <kenneth.mackendrick-AT-utoronto.ca>
Subject: Re: HAB: Habermas and Social Action




> My first problem/question: 
> Does H's approach to social integration entail a shared PURPOSE beyond simply
> the achievement of shared PRINCIPLES?

Yes ( i think).  Insofar as a shared purpose is the notion of rationalization and the 
stablization of behavioural expectations (enlightenment through and through).

> My second, and for me most important, question/problem: 
> How, if at all, does H suggest that integration on a MACRO-social level can
> be achieved?  Must this be achieved though a shared PURPOSE (beyond merely
> achieving shared principles) or through simply shared PRINCIPLES?  

Through the law.  Law marks the go-between betwix the lifeworld and systems.  The 
legislature secures the norms (legitimacy and justification) through a model of 
deliberative democracy and public will-formation.  The judiciary applies the 
justified norms, much like the casuists of old.  The administration (the power 
brokers) make sure things get applied within society - whether through law 
enforcement, management etc.  Neither the judiciary or administration can 
contradict the justified norm.  By the way - all of this is a theoretical abstraction 
since in reality none of this has ever happened before.  The purpose of all of this is 
partially determined through the logic of communication - reason, consensus, etc.  
The purpose could be understood as the living of an ethical life.  An ethical life, for 
Habermas, coincides with principles that do not contradict the living of such a life 
nor limit it to a hollow shell (the distinction between public and private spheres) in 
such a way that the individual is not overburdended with moral struggles in a 
relentless manner (ie.  the stablization of behavioural expectations).
 ken




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