File spoon-archives/habermas.archive/habermas_2001/habermas.0101, message 57


Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 18:02:42 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
Subject: Re: HAB: Help, please


Thad--Far from accepting Kohlberg's theory as an expert truth,
Habermas corrected Kohlberg's claim (made in "From Is to Ought")
of having overcome the naturalistic fallacy.  H argued that K's
claim could be formulated not as a matter of
empirically-discovered truth but rather as a matter of
reconstructive science (with a dialectical relationship between
theory and empirical results).  H's correction appears as
"Interpretive Social Science vs. Hermeneuticism", pp.251-269 of
Norma Haan, Robert N. Bellah, Paul Rabinow, and William M.
Sullivan, eds. Social Science as Moral Inquiry (NY:  Columbia
University Press, 1983).  Kohlberg acknowledged this correction
in Essays on Moral Development.  Vol. II:  The Psychology of
Moral Development (NY:  Harper & Row, 1984).  Habermas's entire
book, Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action (Cambridge,
MA:  MIT, 1983/trans. 1990) can be thought of as a systematic
presentation and application of this correction to the problem
of grounding ethics generally;  the first chapter ("Philosophy
As Stand-In and Interpreter") is most relevant, but it's hard to
understand when taken out of the context of the book as a whole.  
(Which is, in turn, pretty difficult itself -- but best of luck
grappling with it.)

Hope this helps.

Best,

Steve

On 14 Jan 2001 teeckard-AT-bulldog.unca.edu wrote:

> Hello All:
> 
> I am an undergraduate philosophy/mass communication major at the University
> of North Carolina at Asheville, and I am going to be writing my senior
> research thesis on Habermas' notions of paradigm and paradigm shift.
> Specifically, I will be questioning whether or not Habermas is a radical or
> a conservative. He criticizes the circularity and emptiness of positivism,
> yet he refers to (what I think are) the positivists' institutional
> standards
> when deciding who is communicatively competent and who is not (...i.e. his
> reference to Kohlberg, experts, etc.). Can anyone direct me to important
> passages where Habermas talks about the feasibility of a paradigm shift
> toward a critical method and rising above the current paradigm that
> distinguishes positivist methods and hermeneutics when studying human
> beings?
> 
> Thad
> 
> 
> 
>      --- from list habermas-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
> 

*************************************************************
| Stephen Chilton, Associate Professor, Dept of Pol Science 
|    Univ of Minnesota-Duluth / Duluth, MN 55812-2496 / USA 
|                                                           
| 218-726-8162/7534   FAX: 726-6386   Home: 724-6833 (home) 
| www.d.umn.edu/~schilton    EMAIL: schilton-AT-mail.d.umn.edu 
|
|  "A [person's] life can really be a succession of lives,
|   each revolving around some emotionally compelling situa-
|   tion or challenge, and each marked off by some intense
|   experience.
|        - Wallis Simpson, Duchess of Windsor
*************************************************************



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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005