走向后哈贝马斯话语伦理学:对他者的承认

Jeffrey W. Murray
{"title":"走向后哈贝马斯话语伦理学:对他者的承认","authors":"Jeffrey W. Murray","doi":"10.1080/15456870109367395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A significant attempt to recover ethics within the post‐Nietzschean and post‐Holocaust era has been Habermas's articulation of a “post‐conventional discourse ethics.” Habermas's work is of particular interest to the field of communication studies because it attempts to ground ethics in “the universal and necessary presuppositions of argumentation.” Yet there have been numerous challenges to Habermas ‘s discourse ethics, including the charge of ethnocentrism. This essay implements Levinas's philosophy of ethics in order to articulate three specific objections to Habermas's discourse ethics and to amend Habermas ‘s project of identifying the necessary preconditions of ethical communication. Specifically, Levinas's conception of ethical obligation as originating in the call of the Other identifies the acknowledgment of the Other as the one necessary precondition of discourse, and provides a phenomenological account of the nature of that precondition as ethical. Consequently, Levinas revitalizes the on‐going conversation concerning Habermas ‘s discourse ethics as a viable and practical solution to the postmodern crisis of ethics.","PeriodicalId":113832,"journal":{"name":"New Jersey Journal of Communication","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toward a post‐Habermasian discourse ethics: The acknowledgment of the other\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey W. Murray\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15456870109367395\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A significant attempt to recover ethics within the post‐Nietzschean and post‐Holocaust era has been Habermas's articulation of a “post‐conventional discourse ethics.” Habermas's work is of particular interest to the field of communication studies because it attempts to ground ethics in “the universal and necessary presuppositions of argumentation.” Yet there have been numerous challenges to Habermas ‘s discourse ethics, including the charge of ethnocentrism. This essay implements Levinas's philosophy of ethics in order to articulate three specific objections to Habermas's discourse ethics and to amend Habermas ‘s project of identifying the necessary preconditions of ethical communication. Specifically, Levinas's conception of ethical obligation as originating in the call of the Other identifies the acknowledgment of the Other as the one necessary precondition of discourse, and provides a phenomenological account of the nature of that precondition as ethical. Consequently, Levinas revitalizes the on‐going conversation concerning Habermas ‘s discourse ethics as a viable and practical solution to the postmodern crisis of ethics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":113832,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Jersey Journal of Communication\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Jersey Journal of Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870109367395\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Jersey Journal of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870109367395","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

哈贝马斯对“后传统话语伦理学”的阐述是在后尼采和后大屠杀时代恢复伦理学的一个重要尝试。哈贝马斯的著作对传播学研究领域特别有意义,因为它试图将伦理学建立在“论证的普遍和必要的前提”之上。然而,哈贝马斯的话语伦理学受到了许多挑战,包括对种族中心主义的指责。本文运用列维纳斯的伦理哲学,对哈贝马斯的话语伦理学提出三个具体的反对意见,并修正哈贝马斯确定伦理沟通必要前提的构想。具体来说,列维纳斯关于伦理义务的概念起源于他者的呼唤,他者的承认是话语的必要前提,并提供了一种现象学的描述,说明这种前提的本质是伦理的。因此,列维纳斯重振了正在进行的关于哈贝马斯话语伦理学的对话,将其作为一种可行的、实用的解决后现代伦理危机的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Toward a post‐Habermasian discourse ethics: The acknowledgment of the other
A significant attempt to recover ethics within the post‐Nietzschean and post‐Holocaust era has been Habermas's articulation of a “post‐conventional discourse ethics.” Habermas's work is of particular interest to the field of communication studies because it attempts to ground ethics in “the universal and necessary presuppositions of argumentation.” Yet there have been numerous challenges to Habermas ‘s discourse ethics, including the charge of ethnocentrism. This essay implements Levinas's philosophy of ethics in order to articulate three specific objections to Habermas's discourse ethics and to amend Habermas ‘s project of identifying the necessary preconditions of ethical communication. Specifically, Levinas's conception of ethical obligation as originating in the call of the Other identifies the acknowledgment of the Other as the one necessary precondition of discourse, and provides a phenomenological account of the nature of that precondition as ethical. Consequently, Levinas revitalizes the on‐going conversation concerning Habermas ‘s discourse ethics as a viable and practical solution to the postmodern crisis of ethics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信