Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 00:12:20 -0800
Subject: HAB: Disclosure, ethic of discussion, and other things


I enjoyed Antti's posting on disclosure so much, I can only say I
eagerly look forward to responding *appropriately*; I won't respond
impulsively. Yet, it will be a few days before I can make the time to
genuinely dwell with the relativity that Antti presents. I am very, very
interested in Heideggerian rhetoric confronting Habermasian contexts
(and would not defend Habermas' reading of Heidegger).

----------------------------------------

Thank you, Reginald Chevillon, for your very engaging points about the
practical reality of time in interactive deliberation. This obvious
difficulty in any effort to dwell fairly with an issue can be addressed
appropriately, but doing so would take more time than I can afford
tonight. (I hope you're not facing an examination tomorrow!). I want to
respond in some detail, recalling as well other postings of the past
several months that are available through the archive of postings at
Spoon's Web site (in particular, my interchange with Steve Chilton on
"the agreement problem," not to seem self-serving).

---------------------------------------

Rauno Huttunen's inquiry about comparative contexts in Habermas on the
ideal speaking situation deserves to be followed up in detail (Re:
Money, power..., Feb 26), so I reiterate his main point below (without
comment); have I missed that his concern was addressed?:

"I [suspect]," writes Rauno, "that Habermas had already abandon[ed] the
concept of ideal speech situation (ISS) in TCA (or put [it] aside). The
fact is that Habermas doesn't [employ] the concept of ISS any more.
Example in "Diskursethik- Notizen zu..." he speak[s] about
"Argumentationsvoraussetzungen" (presuppositons of argumenation; sorry,
I don't have english version in vorhanden). In page 98 in this article
(near footnote 69) Habermas writes that formerly he had described these
"presuppositons of argumenation" as attributes of ISS, but he doesn't
want to specify, revise or renew his former theory of ISS. Despite of
[the fact] that he feel[s] that [it] is right to reconstruct those
symmetrical presuppositions of argumentation [that] every competent
speaker [has] to fulfil if they want to participate to argumentation."

-----------------------------------------

I'm so enthused by the thoughtfulness of postings of the past couple of
weeks that I have a fantasy of responding to all of them at once--but I
want to avoid grand, self-serving presentation that is not basically
relative to Habermas' own formulations and dilemmas.

There is a wonderful context alive right now. May it bring Habermas'
voice into the interchange more and more.

Best regards to all,

Gary






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