5
Notes on The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, Habermas Introduction by Thomas McCarthy -The young Hegelians, in accepting Hegelianism but distancing themselves from Hegel’s ideal of the absolute, were the first group to mark the downfall of reason -the “overwhelming impurity” of reason -reason is unavoidably tangled with history and tradition, society and power, practice and interest, body and desire -this downfall inspired a few crucial thinkers at the turn of the century: Nietzsche’s heroic proclamation of the end of philosophy, Wittgenstein’s therapeutic farewell, Heidegger’s dramatic overcoming -this turn in thought leads to French poststructuralism, Habermas’ main target in these lectures -Heidegger and Nietzsche set the agenda for these French thinkers -we must look at the whole sweep, starting from Hegel, to understand where their radical critique of reason went wrong -the French poststructuralists offer a pure negation of reason, but we need a “determinate negation” -not just an opposition toward traditional reason, but a way of opposing a specific alternative to traditional reason -for Habermas, we should identify traditional reason as subject-centered reason, and communicative reason should be the specific alternative -the “discourse of modernity” is subject-centered reason, and the French thinkers are still under its influence and thus can’t escape the enlightenment (?) -the conception of “man” and reason that begins with the enlightenment is the core of western humanism, and its flaws and influence account for western humanism’s long “complicity with terror”

Notes on the Philosophical Discourse of Modernity

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

notes on Habermas' The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity.

Citation preview

Page 1: Notes on the Philosophical Discourse of Modernity

Notes on The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, Habermas

Introduction by Thomas McCarthy-The young Hegelians, in accepting Hegelianism but distancing themselves from Hegel’s ideal of the absolute, were the first group to mark the downfall of reason-the “overwhelming impurity” of reason-reason is unavoidably tangled with history and tradition, society and power, practice and interest, body and desire-this downfall inspired a few crucial thinkers at the turn of the century: Nietzsche’s heroic proclamation of the end of philosophy, Wittgenstein’s therapeutic farewell, Heidegger’s dramatic overcoming

-this turn in thought leads to French poststructuralism, Habermas’ main target in these lectures-Heidegger and Nietzsche set the agenda for these French thinkers-we must look at the whole sweep, starting from Hegel, to understand where their radical critique of reason went wrong-the French poststructuralists offer a pure negation of reason, but we need a “determinate negation”-not just an opposition toward traditional reason, but a way of opposing a specific alternative to traditional reason-for Habermas, we should identify traditional reason as subject-centered reason, and communicative reason should be the specific alternative-the “discourse of modernity” is subject-centered reason, and the French thinkers are still under its influence and thus can’t escape the enlightenment (?)

-the conception of “man” and reason that begins with the enlightenment is the core of western humanism, and its flaws and influence account for western humanism’s long “complicity with terror”-critics or rationality see their project as a prelude to the criticism of the bankrupt western culture that is based on it

-the raise a set of oppositions against the tenets of the enlightenment-necessity <– contingency-universality <– irreducible plurality of incommensurable lifeworlds and forms of life, the local character of truth-a priori <– empirical-certainty <– fallibility-unity <– heterogeneity-homogeneity <– fragmentart-slef-evident givenness (“presence”) <- universal mediation by a differential system of signs (Saussure)-the unconditioned <– a universal rejection of ultimate foundations in any form

Page 2: Notes on the Philosophical Discourse of Modernity

-Interwoven with this is a critique of the traditional subject: atomistic, autonomous, disengaged, disembodied, potentially and ideally transparent

two lines of influence run out from Nietzsche: one goes the Heidegger to Derrida, the other from Bataille to Foucault

-Heidegger’s strand-reality is mediated by pre-given understanding based on our lifeworld-language represents worldview (not a “truthful” mapping of world), using language is a world-making exercise-argument, and philosophical argument in particular, sees itself as logical, but it is irrecoverably aesthetic, rhetorical, and metaphorical-philosophy is a form of literature-truth isn’t a viable ideal here, since language isn’t a mirror of the world but a world-making device-Habermas’ main problem with these thinkers is that they ignore the fact that the way we model the world runs into actual practical issues-we can’t just make our worldview in whatever way we want, because practice puts constraints on us and shapes our worldview-truth and reason CAN be talked about in discourse, there is something going on in language more than just play-“social practice submits the background of the lifeworld to an ‘ongoing test’ across the entire spectrum of validity claims”-in derrida and his followers, especially, language’s capacity to solve problems disappears into its world-creating capacity-this is what is at stake in Derrida trying to argue that philosophy is not distinguishable from literature-Habermas argues instead that there is a continuum from philosophy ot literature, both sides having clear functions

-Bataille to Foucalt’s strand-the guiding strand is Nietzsche’s theory of power-modern reason is nothing more than a perverted and disguised will to power-for Foucault, knowledge and truth have normalizing and disciplinary effects-Foucault is interested in how we constitute ourselves as subjects and objects of knowledge, mainly through the human sciences-essentially functionalist account of truth-Habermas’ fight with this strand is the perforative self-contradiction inherent in criticizing reason wit hreason-accuses Foucalt of “cryptonormativity” – he argues against truth and reason, but his motivation for uncovering these falsities is ostensibly to substitute these manipulative discourses for more truthful ones

-ultimately habermas accepts these critiques of the enlightenment-he agrees that the subject-centered account of rationality is exhausted

Page 3: Notes on the Philosophical Discourse of Modernity

-but rather than abandoning reason and enlightenment, he believes that the only cure is more enlightenment

Preface

I Modernity’s consciousness of Time and its need for self-reassurance

II Hegel’s concept of modernity

Excursus on Schiller’s “Letters on the Aesthetic Education of Man”

III Three perspecties: Left Hegelians, Right Hegelians, and Nietzsche

Excursus on the obsolescence of the production paradigm

IV The entry into postmodernity: Nietzsche as turning point

V The entwinement of myth and enlightenment: Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno

VI The undermining of western rationalism through the critique of metaphysics: Martin Heidegger

VII Beyond a temporalized philosophy of origins: Jacques Derrida’s critique of Phonocentrism

Excursus on leveling the genre distinction between philosophy and literature

VIII Between eroticism and general economics: Georges Bataille

IX The critique of reason as an unmasking of the human sciences

X Some questions concerning the theory of power: Foucault again

XI An alternative way out of the philosophy of the subject: Communicative versus subject-centered reason

Excursus on Cornelius Castoriadus: the imaginary institution

XII The normative content of modernity

Page 4: Notes on the Philosophical Discourse of Modernity

Excursus on Luhmann’s appropriation of the philosophy o fthe subject though systems theory