Concept Of Communicative Rationality Research Articles

Explanatory Value of Reason in Public Space: Use and Misuse in Political Speech

In this article, the concept of communicative rationality and its practical application in public debates will be explored. Focusing on the importance of the communicative treatment of reason, validity, and its practical implications, the article critically examines Jürgen Habermas's theory of communicative action and its ethical elements. The potential difficulties of bridging the gap between theory and practice are highlighted by discussing the distinction between theoretical discourse and discursive practice. Through an analysis of Habermas' approach, the paper aims to improve public discourse quality and understand how communicative reason works in practical terms. It considers the pragmatic context of communicative action, the importance of claiming validity, and the process of validating. It discusses the concept of communicative reason in the context of concrete instances of communication, such as public discussion. It emphasizes the importance of communicative reason and the pursuit of the common good in promoting productive discussion and compromise.

The Crisis of Democracy and the Problem of Democratic Peace

The author analyzes three waves of the crisis of democracy during the 20th and early 21st centuries. The first crisis of democracy in the early 20th century is caused by the emergence and development of public politics, which challenged the possibility to govern the masses having conflict potential, it balanced the power of the people and universal suffrage with the control of the media in order to maintain the stability of political system. The second wave of the crisis of democracy (the last third of the 20th century) is associated with the destruction of the conventional world and the weakening of the nation-state; and its markers were: the imbalance between the branches of government, the domination of economics over politics, the predominance of equality over freedom, the problematic implementation of human rights, and, as a consequence, the inability to put into practice the national form of democracy. The third wave of crisis (early the 21st century) is accompanied by the transformation of democracy into post-democracy, in which the power of the people is replaced by the power of global capital, and the illusion of consent is reinforced by the prohibition of alternative points of view and the narrowing of the space of issues allowed for discussion in the name of public security. The crisis of the policy to achieve peace through the transformation of the balance of powers into a balance of interests called into question the principles of democracy. On the contrary, post-democracies justify the use of force to spread democracy around the world, and they take an active part in contemporary military conflicts, which can rightly be defined as hybrid proxy wars. Drawing on J. Habermas’s concept of communicative rationality, the author concludes that to overcome the crisis of democracy it is necessary to accept the very possibility of an alternative to this form of government and allow to discuss these previously marginalized issues as well as to maintain the return of the majority to genuine communication and politics, contribute to its enlightenment.

Non-systemic Consolidation — Main Forms, Factors, and Approaches

Man is a being. But what lies behind this description is presented differently in different theoretical traditions. So, within structural-functionalist approaches, sociality was understood as a problem of a order, was often considered in isolation from the person himself and received the appropriate connotations (solidarity, integration, communication, etc.). At the same time, “understanding sociology” focusing on generalized meanings of actions or attitudes of individuals, in turn, problematized the conditions for the possibility of consensus and order, starting from the situation of the individual himself. Understanding approaches, according to the authors, make possible a broader view of the problem of order, which in this sense is not reduced exclusively to systemic (material, economic, administrative) factors, motivations or guidelines, but suggest other grounds for rational, consensus behavior. The purpose of the article is to operationalize the nature of a person through the broader concept of consolidation and deconsolidation (connecting the systemic macro-level and the individual micro-level of analysis), as well as the reconstruction of the sum of consolidation-significant factors. Thus, the authors turn to the theory of rational choice by J. Coleman and H. Esser and the corresponding understanding of human rationality, aimed at maximizing, among other things, “intangible profit”. At the same time, the authors associate the sources and conditions of intangible consolidation with the accumulation of various forms of “social capital” that ensures people's trust in its holders. The concept of communicative rationality by J. Habermas gives the authors reason to consider the “public sphere” as an intangible condition of consolidation as a of structural cohesion of “vital-world” expectations of actors and the political system, which often ignores “under-reflective topics” and “under-represented communities” in its agenda. Focusing on the theory of A. Giddens, the authors consider the concept of “double hermeneutics” as a methodological tool for the analysis of non-material consolidation. The latter ensures the exchange of moral and normative interpretations of political events and decisions between intellectuals, scientists, politicians and ordinary citizens, who, in turn, are capable of reflexive monitoring of the actions and decisions of higher authorities. As another condition for consolidation, the so-called “expert knowledge systems” that provide consensus and standardize communication are considered. P. Bourdieu's ideas about social space give reason to consider the factor of (de-) consolidation of society the mismatch between contradictory typical habits (lifestyles, types of consumption, expectations) in a heterogeneous space. As a result, a complex and synthetic concept of consolidation crystallizes, concretizing the abstract concept of human nature.

Selective Solidarity and Discursive Modulation in the Brazilian Public Sphere

Abstract In this article the author argues that solidarity can be used as an analytical concept in order to understand the dynamics of discourses in the public spheres of contemporary democracies. He begins by discussing conceptions of solidarity in political theory, followed by descriptions of its manifestations in recent public debates in different countries. After that, he relates solidarity to Habermas’s formal-pragmatic concept of communicative rationality, which enables him to sketch out notions such as discursive and selective solidarity, as well as discursive modulations of solidarity, which are formulated through analogies of discourse theory and musical theory. In the last part of the article, the author applies these notions to three specific examples of public debates in the Brazilian public sphere.

Noonomics. Experience of Creative Continuation of S.D. Bodrunov’s Ideas

The article presents the main provisions of S.D. Bodrunov’s theory of noonomics and synthesizes them with the leading theories of the leaders of the Frankfurt school: Jürgen Habermas and Axel Honneth. Noonomics refers to a new stage in the development of society as a whole, in which people will be forced out of material production, which will allow everyone to freely develop their creative powers. However, on the way to noonomics, humanity must avoid falling into a state of “digital concentration camp,” which is possible only by transforming human nature itself, moving “from zoo- to noo-state.” This implies a synthesis of science and culture and the highest value of moral self-improvement for each person. Therefore, it is the development of the human mind that will allow the transition to noonomics. It is the study of the content and possibilities of the mind that will allow us to creatively develop the theory of noonomics by using J. Habermas’s concept of communicative rationality and A. Honneth’s new theory of socialism. Communicative rationality is a special capability which makes possible to achieve mutual understanding between representatives of con-flicting social classes and develop universal norms of activity that allow for the sustainable development of society as a whole. This capability can be developed within a special institutional environment based on solidarity activities. Thus, each person will consider the successful implementation of the plans of others as a condition for the possibility of implementing their plans. This network of social institutions based on solidarity activity will be the realization of freedom in its social form. Within the framework of solidarity activities, new universal meanings of social development arise, which the communicative community will be able to formulate. Further, these meanings will replace the existing ones, which are focused on profit and unlimited economic growth, and thus transform the existing institutional system.

A Space for Sound

The focus of this article is Western theatre voice practice and discourse. With the voice conceived as the trace of language, the main intention is to reveal interstices for creative vocal or sonorous play by unsettling the relationship between voice and language.The project references the shift to the ‘natural voice’ in Western theatre voice practice and how, in spite of this shift to sound that is strongly located in the person of the performer, voice does not exploit the riches of either its originating practice in orality or its own essential nature as sonorous vocality. This article proposes that Western theatre voice’s strong link to a devocalizedlogosas argued by Cavarero, andlogosas text informed by Habermas’s concept ofcommunicative rationality, do not allow the voice to transcend a single representation rooted in language.

Collaborative rationality as a strategy for working with wicked problems

In this essay we argue that while classical modern planning cannot solve wicked problems, collaborative rationality can successfully move beyond them and develop useful and innovative strategies. We then outline the characteristics of a collaboratively rational planning process, which we have developed on the basis of decades of research and practice and Habermas' concept of communicative rationality. We show how it offers a model for the second generation systems-approach which Rittel and Webber called for. We talk about the practicalities of getting such processes organized and close with commentary of what planner's roles are in them.

Rhythm, rhyme and reason: hip hop expressivity as political discourse

AbstractUsing Norwegian hip hop as an example, this article argues that public sphere theory offers a fruitful theoretical framework in which to understand the political significance of music. Based on a musical and lyrical analysis of Lars Vaular's ‘Kem Skjøt Siv Jensen’ (Who Shot Siv Jensen) – a song that recently became the subject of extensive public political discourse in Norway – this article first highlights how the aesthetic language specific to hip hop music constitutes a form of political discourse that may be particularly effective in addressing and engaging publics. Further, the analysis brings attention to how hip hop music is characterised by phatic, rhetoric, affective and dramatic modes of communication that may be of value to democratic public discourse. Lastly, this article examines the expressive output of ‘Kem Skjøt Siv Jensen’ in light of Habermas' concept of communicative rationality. In conclusion, the article contends that the dichotomy between (‘rational’) verbal argument and (‘irrational’) musical expressivity constructed within public sphere theory is contrived and, moreover, that hip hop expressivity under certain conditions does conform to the standards of communicative rationality.

The interactive researcher as a virtual participant: A Habermasian interpretation

This article explores the role of the interactive researcher by drawing on Jürgen Habermas’s theory of communicative action to develop the concept of virtual participant. An ideal interactive research project is used to explore the issues faced by interactive researchers in three phases – initial, implementation and conclusion. In each phase, an interactive research project is used to demonstrate the issues that are discussed. First, this article argues that the concept of communicative rationality can be helpful in understanding how mutually trusting relationships between practitioners and researchers can be established at the beginning of a project. Second, it argues that the idea of taking a virtual stand on validity claims can be used during a project to engage a performative attitude and achieve mutual understanding with actors in the practice system. Third, this article argues that the concept of the virtual participant can explain how the interactive researcher can engage in performative action without becoming captive to the practice system. The concept of the virtual participant helps to enhance understanding of the complexity of the role of the interactive researcher.

Communicative Rationality, Strategy, and Intersubjectivity: Results From a Quasi-Experimental Investigation

This article presents some results from an investigation of the concept of strategy through the lens of the Habermasian concept of communicative rationality. It draws upon the theory of communicative action to posit “intersubjectivity” (the degree to which interlocutors assess themselves as engaged in ideal-type communication) as the means through which communicative and strategic orientations are reconciled in interaction. The research involved a quasi-experimental study in which two sets of teams playing a negotiation-intensive board game differed in terms of the orienting information they received. Players oriented toward the strategic aspect of the game initially reported lower intersubjectivity with nonteammates than did players oriented toward the communicative features of the game. By the end of the game, this difference was no longer observed. These results are consistent with the fundamental Habermasian precept of the primacy of communication over strategy, so that a communicative orientation persists even in the face of a clearly strategic context of interaction.

A communicative planning approach to combat graduate unemployment in Saudi Arabia

This paper introduces and critically reviews the Saudi education and unemployment situation. It sets out the specialized nature of issues regarding education and unemployment which are seldom found in other countries. The governmental efforts and subsequent results in the employment sectors are investigated to illustrate the reasons behind prevailing and expected future graduate unemployment. In addition, this paper proposes the application of a combination of a rational planning model and the concept of communicative rationality in solving the problem of graduate unemployment in Saudi Arabia. It asserts the need for comprehensive data on the nature and magnitude of unemployment, and adequate consultation with all the stakeholders including the private sector. A brief survey conducted among the graduates of King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM) reveals that, while they are competent and easily absorbed into the market, the scenario is not the same for other educational institutions. Similar studies for other educational institutions will facilitate an understanding of the extent of coordination with the job market. A study is being conducted to enhance the creation of a link between the market demand for educational programs and programs offered by educational institutes.

Jane Austen and the Public Sphere

Without renouncing his speculations on the historical emergence of the idea of the public sphere, Habermas’s later writings explore the potential of language itself, when oriented towards reaching understanding, to sustain public sphere values. Stressing transformation rather than structure, he sees such intersubjective understandings as the means by which social norms are maintained and critiqued. The works of Austen and her family show a similar eighteenth-century faith that society can be reformed by social means. Austen’s novels criticise restricted views of who constitutes society, use a common language, go beyond politeness in robust argumentation, and mediate between private and public in ways that answer to Habermas’s ideas. While the values of the public sphere are used to satirically critique society’s values and practices, Austen resists polarised antagonisms and Romantic pessimism, granting authority neither to unexamined traditions, professionalised ‘reason’ nor one class. Conversation is allowed to frame problems and, in the ‘utopian’ conclusions granted to principal characters, suggest solutions. Habermas might not deal adequately with non-verbal communication, but his concept of communicative rationality can be usefully applied to major aspects of Austen’s work.

Consensus Building: Clarifications for the Critics

Many critiques of consensus building have been uninformed about the nature of this practice or the theory on which it was built, though there is extensive literature on both. It is grounded in the theory and practice of interest-based negotiation and mediation. It is not grounded in Habermas’ concept of communicative rationality, though theorists have found useful illumination in his ideas. Claims are often made about pathologies of consensus building based on cases where the conditions for authentic dialogue recognized by both practitioners and theoreticians were not met. Documentation of cases shows that when these conditions are met, many desirable outcomes occur. The article examines the various critiques, including the claims that external power differentials are deterministic, that lowest common denominator solutions are the outcomes, that valuable tensions are lost in the process, and that agreements are fleeting at best. It shows how and why each of these is not borne out by experience. Consensus building is time consuming and requires skill and training. It is only appropriate in situations of uncertainty and controversy where all stakeholders have incentives to come to the table and mutual reciprocity in their interests.

The Rationality of Narrative Inquiry in Research and Professional Development

SUMMARY As researchers follow the hermeneutic turn to narrative, are they also obliged to join what Richard Bernstein calls the 'rage against reason'? Taking criteria from Habermas's Theory of Communicative Action and his concept of communicative rationality, I propose that narrative inquiry can indeed be a rational enterprise. Habermas recreates a standpoint from which critiques are possible, for he detects and analyses the implicit rationality built into everyday communicative practices in which conversation partners orient themselves toward understanding rather than the success of their own points of view. In these practices, as in narrative inquiry, participants claim that each could challenge the other's implicit claims to truth, sincerity and social appropriateness. I give examples to illustrate how such challenges can be met in one specific line of narrative research .

Comment on Richard Willson's paper: Assessing communicative rationality as a transportation planning paradigm

Willson addresses in his paper a wide range of planning issues: better communication, honesty, re-education of planners, public participation, planning process, and so on, and aims at creating a new paradigm for transport planning. The paper has much content to recommend it to planners, decisionmakers and the public. Dr. Willson deserves credit ‐ as does Transportation ‐ for bringing up these issues. Dr. Willson is also right in pointing out that technical expertise and methods that have been built over the past 30 years continue to be needed. Is Prof. Willson’s case for Communicative Rationality as the new paradigm for transport planning valid? I am not persuaded. I agree with many elements of his argument enumerated above, but not the paradigm. If it is not the right paradigm, what is? I argue below that analysis and emotional communication are. This is puzzling when talking is involved in both, and a prominent econometrist friend once complained to me that “these planners like to talk rather than analyze the problems.” Willson’s core inspiration is Habermas’ concept of communicative rationality. Habermas crafted communicative rationality as postmodernist method to counter the instrumental rationality of industrial revolution. Two constructs, lifeworld and system, are central to his argument. Lifeworld comprises the social life with symbolic meanings ‐ religion, self-concepts, social norms, stories, art ‐ and form the cultural basis for communication, social interaction, consensus and conflict resolution. System is the material knowledge in society, such as agriculture or engineering. Prior to the modern era system and lifeworld had an experiential relation. Symbolically, Habermas argued, in the good old days people related to each other in human ways ‐ Oktoberfest brought people together to celebrate the hard work of harvest. Industrial revolution uncoupled system and lifeworld, mechanized harvest and commercialized Oktoberfest. Other than issues of money, there is now little human satisfaction in either. For Willson communicative rationality is an expansion of knowledge

Habermas, critical theory and selves‐directed learning

Habermas’ concept of communicative rationality, in which reason is construed in terms of the noncoercive intersubjectivity of mutual understanding and reciprocal recognition, provides a valid foundation on which the theory and practice of selves‐directed learning can be developed. In an increasingly individualized world a focus on learning networks allows a perspective transformation from the purely individualistic instrumental rationality of self‐directed‐learning towards communicative interaction via learning encounters and the possibility of satisfying the emancipatory conditions of communicative rationality within communities of selves‐directed‐learners in life and work. The orientation of communicative action to criticizable validity claims which are open to empirical investigation is the central core that makes this learning process both theoretically and practically possible.

Information in Communicative Planning

What planners do most is talk and interact; it is through communicative practice that they influence public action. This paper contends that communicative planning requires a new concept of information and how it influences action—namely, a concept of communicative rationality, supplementing instrumental rationality. Drawing on the author's research on the role of information in policy processes, and on Habermas's views of communicative action and rationality, the paper makes three main points. First, information in communicative practice influences by becoming embedded in understandings, practices and institutions, rather than by being used as evidence. Second, the process by which the information is produced and agreed on is crucial and must include substantial debate among key players and a social process to develop shared meaning for the information. Third, many types of information count, other than “objective” information. A concluding note urges planning researchers and educators to put more emphasis on this broader concept of information in practice, and warns practitioners that being technically right is never enough to influence action.

Sweet reason: rhetoric and the discourses of modernity

This volume presents a rhetorical model for understanding the diverse discourses of modernity. Wells describes modernity as a system of texts which we are only now learning to read. In order to comprehend how these texts organize our world, she argues, we must grasp how reason and desire interact to create meaning. To this end, Wells offers a based on an understanding of meaning as created through the work of language. Wells elaborates this rhetoric of intersubjectivity by drawing on both Jurgen Habermas's concept of communicative rationality and on Jacques Lacan's theory of desire, affirming the significance of reason and desire for rhetorical studies. From scientific articles to classroom altercations, contemporary government hearings to Montaigne's Essays, Wells organizes several using as an art, and she shows how operates in practice.

La teoría crítica: de Frankfurt a Habermas. Una «traducción» de la teoría de la acción comunicativa a la sociología

Aquest article preten ser una primera introduccio per a no iniciats a la teoria sociologica de Jurgen Habermas. S’hi analitza la teoria de l’accio comunicativa d’Habermas des del «gir linguistic» fins a la teoria de la societat passant per la teoria de l’accio. S’argumenta que la teoria d’Habermas parteix d’un concepte de racionalitat instrumental-estrategica; que la seva teoria de l’accio comunicativa proveeix d’un model d’accio alternatiu el de les teories de l’eleccio racional; que la seva teoria de la societat articulada en dos nivells —sistema i mon de la vida— supera les antinomies tant del funcionalisme com de la fenomenologia i connecta amb la tradicio marxista; i, finalment, que tot aixo conserva una connexio entre teoria i practica tipica de qualsevol teoria critica de la societat.