Habermas and Occidental Rationalism: The Politics of Identity, Social Learning, and the Cultural Limits of Moral Universalism

Abstract

While Habermas's theory of communicative action is deeply critical of all kinds of ethnocentrism, proposing a discursive concept of universal morality which transcends culture, a residual Eurocentrism still pervades it. Habermas's theory rests on a notion of modernity which is tied to Occidental rationalism, and when viewed in the global context or in the context of deeply divided societies it is problematic. The theory fails to grasp that universal morality can be articulated in more than one cultural form and in more than one logic of development. However, his theory can be defended against its Eurocentric bias if it shifts its emphasis from a de-contexualized and transcendental critique of communication rooted in Occidental rationalism to a cosmopolitan model of contemporary cultural transformation. Crucial to that task is a weaker notion of rationality which recognizes that the problem of universality is also a cognitive cultural problem and not just a normative one. Bringing culture and identity to the foreground will involve making room for a level of discourse focused less on consensual agreement than on cultural understanding.

Stakeholder Management on Construction Projects: A Key Indicator for Project Success

“…Central to the course of participation is the issue of mediation, which involves a discursive and impulsive connection between the law and democracy [15]. According to [16], the concept of discursive democracy within which stakeholder involvement resides, is becoming the normal practice in the management of projects. The conjecture of discursive democracy transcends forthcoming action as it encapsulates a theory of law and democratic institutionalization.…”

“…The theory considers 'democracy as not being ingrained in civic society or popular autonomy, but in the structures of communication, for which Habermas takes for granted the prospect of consensus and argumentative discourse' [15]. In discursive democracy, equal access to the discursive platform is a fundamental notion [16]. However, [17] argues that this assumption in reality may not always be the case.…”

The paradox of observing, autopoiesis, and the future of social sciences

“…For example, Niklas Luhmann has challenged Habermas's rationalist approach to communication (Knodt, 1995). Others have charged that his theory lacks a critical dimension and represents just another foundational metanarrative which is logo-and Eurocentric, despite the importance he attributes to peripheral groups, such as women and minorities, in constituting more equal and autonomous relations (Delanty, 1997).…”

The Authority of the Holy Revisited: Habermas, Religion, and Emancipatory Possibilities

“…Moreover as Patricia Hill Collins (1990:212) observes, "new knowledge claims are rarely worked out in isolation from other individuals and are developed through dialogue with other members of a community." Yet the implications of individuals' participation in specific social and cultural contexts are ignored by Habermas (see Delanty 1997). Given Habermas's embrace of what Iris Young (1990:125) calls "the disembodied coldness of modern reason," it is not a surprise that Habermas dismisses validity claims that are tainted by their association with what he sees as nonrational domains of life.…”

“…Moreover as Patricia Hill Collins (1990:212) observes, "new knowledge claims are rarely worked out in isolation from other individuals and are developed through dialogue with other members of a community." Yet the implications of individuals' participation in specific social and cultural contexts are ignored by Habermas (see Delanty 1997).…”