{"title":"Strategic actions according to Jürgen Habermas – some critical remarks from the transcendental-pragmatic procedure viewpoint","authors":"M. Filipiak","doi":"10.1515/linpo-2017-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The purpose of this paper is to analyze the primacy of communicative rationality in relation to other forms of rationality and to determine the status of openly strategic actions in the concept of Jürgen Habermas. In the theory of communicative actions, Habermas focuses on actions secretively strategic, recognizing them as “parasitic” in relation to communicative actions and explains the prevalence of communicative actions on the grounds of the theory of speech acts, in particular the concept of illocutionary force, the category of “social binding force”, or practice in the lifeworld. By the same, Karl-Otto Apel challenges Habermas that he has skipped explicitly strategic class of actions, which entails the inadequacy of the justification for the status of communicative rationality. This raises a doubt – why should non-strategic actions take precedence over strategic ones? Karl-Otto Apel replies to this question with the help of transcendental-pragmatic procedure of an ultimate justification.","PeriodicalId":35103,"journal":{"name":"Lingua Posnaniensis","volume":"59 1","pages":"39 - 52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lingua Posnaniensis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/linpo-2017-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract The purpose of this paper is to analyze the primacy of communicative rationality in relation to other forms of rationality and to determine the status of openly strategic actions in the concept of Jürgen Habermas. In the theory of communicative actions, Habermas focuses on actions secretively strategic, recognizing them as “parasitic” in relation to communicative actions and explains the prevalence of communicative actions on the grounds of the theory of speech acts, in particular the concept of illocutionary force, the category of “social binding force”, or practice in the lifeworld. By the same, Karl-Otto Apel challenges Habermas that he has skipped explicitly strategic class of actions, which entails the inadequacy of the justification for the status of communicative rationality. This raises a doubt – why should non-strategic actions take precedence over strategic ones? Karl-Otto Apel replies to this question with the help of transcendental-pragmatic procedure of an ultimate justification.
摘要本文的目的是分析沟通理性相对于其他形式理性的首要地位,并确定公开战略行动在Jürgen Habermas概念中的地位。在交际行为理论中,哈贝马斯将注意力集中在隐秘的战略性行为上,将其视为与交际行为相关的“寄生”行为,并基于言语行为理论,特别是言外力的概念、“社会约束力”的范畴或生活世界中的实践,解释了交际行为的普遍性。同样,卡尔·奥托·阿佩尔(Karl Otto Apel)质疑哈贝马斯(Habermas),他明确跳过了战略行动类别,这导致了交际理性地位的正当性不足。这引发了一个疑问——为什么非战略行动要优先于战略行动?卡尔·奥托·阿佩尔借助一种终极正当性的先验语用程序回答了这个问题。