[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 339 KB, 1200x1800, ugly fuk.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18706799 No.18706799 [Reply] [Original]

Rawls? Nah, fuck that weak shit. Habermas's where it's at.
Why is his theory of communicative action so good?

>> No.18706813

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eb1R3mjyZqc

>> No.18706820

>>18706799
Is his stuff 'readable' to your regular layperson who made his way through a college intro to philosophy course?

>> No.18706829

>>18706799
Aristotle solved politics two thousand years ago

>> No.18706831

>>18706829
So we are fucked?

>> No.18706847

>>18706820
Maybe, if you pay a lot of attention

>> No.18706853

>>18706829
>Aristotle solved politics two thousand years ago
Said the nigger that never understood Aristotle.

>> No.18706859
File: 7 KB, 229x220, 1595865549880.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18706859

>>18706813
>Habermas
>Marxist

>> No.18706872

>>18706859
he'll fight for any title with good price money, do you even follow boxing?

>> No.18707072

>>18706799
Hoppe did it better

>> No.18707159

>>18706799
>thinking an academic is going to be honest about how society works
oh no no

>> No.18707749

>>18706820

No. Although his prose is "sensible" in the sense that he's making concrete points in an organized way and isn't writing obscurantist nonsense in the tradition of French poststructuralism, Judith Butler, contemporary feminists etc, It's still dense academic jargon. It is helpful to have some familiarity with the sociologists whose criticism form the body of the work, and any familiarity with philosophy is helpful, but you need a specific, targeted knowledge base: german philosophers on the one hand, a few sociologists on the other.

This is not to say that it's impossible to make out what he's saying without having read everybody, (again, his sectioning and actual arguments are straightforward, though cloaked in dense academic prose) but if you only have a freshman-tier exposure to philosophy, to say nothing of sociology, you're going to have a hard time and not get much out of it.

I would strongly recommend reading Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere first. It's a self-contained history of the 18th century and surrounding periods, and how these gave rise to the modern notion of public sphere, publicity, etc, and how these were subverted by capitalism. It's also a way to familiarize yourself with his style, itself an acquired taste.

t. 3/4s of the way through TCA

>> No.18707818

>>18706799
>capitalism bad
>xenophilia good
>nationalism bad
>European Union (TM) good

>> No.18707923

>>18707818
>capitalism bad
Habermas isn't against capitalism.
>xenophilia good
Habermas is against political disidence, thus, if a culture is against the politics of deliberative democracy he'd be against that culture (no matter if you're white, chink or nigger)
>nationalism bad
He's all for it if it doesen't go against deliberative democracy, as he has stated in 'controversial' writings
>European Union (TM) good
He criticises the existing one a lot

>> No.18707960

>>18706799
this nigga has only 1 worth reading book, and its not about politics
>they philosophical discourse of modernity

>> No.18707962

>>18706799
Are they just gonna get away with this shit? >>18707944

>> No.18707970

>>18707960
>they philosophical discourse of modernity
>they philosophical discourse of
>they philosophical discourse
>they philosophical
>they

>> No.18707984

>>18707970
ok
>the philosophical discourse of modernity

>> No.18708009
File: 32 KB, 356x519, here.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18708009

All this political guys you are talking about are irrelevant, since Aristotle did it better 2000 years ago. This thread is cringe.

>> No.18708016

>>18708009
refer to >>18706853

>> No.18708024

>>18708016
stop coping dude

>> No.18708036

>>18708024
You're the one that keeps making the same post

>> No.18708042

His ideas seem like puffed up truisms.
Read his stuff on "communicative rationality" and all I could think of was that under all the fancy multisyllabic continental philosophy jargon there was nothing but bland and vapid ideas. Like yeah dude when people talk that happens.

>> No.18708044

>>18708036
get a life dude, have sex

>> No.18708065

>>18708042
Shit half-read take

>> No.18708095

>>18708065
Thanks you've convinced me Habermas is actually great. That's communicative rationality at work!

>> No.18708105

>>18708095
>That's communicative rationality at work!
That's how one knows you haven't read shit from Habermas!

>> No.18708134

>>18708105
Just replying to a dumb comment with another dumb comment. If you want to discuss anything in particular I'm here. Hot take is required to get a discussion started. don't get precious about it.

>> No.18708623

>>18706820
>>18706820
It's like reading a manual for intercourse

>> No.18708633

>>18708623
So it teaches me how to not catch whatever disease most people seem to have? That seems interesting, going to put it on my kindle.

>> No.18708646
File: 328 KB, 1200x1200, aristotle.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18708646

Why is this thread still up? I already told you incels that Aristotle already solved politics thousands of years ago. All the authors after him are losers.

>> No.18709333

I fucking hate Rawls. I fucking love Habermas.

>> No.18709783

>write the only worthwhile post in the thread
>no (You)s

Many such cases! Also the tripcode idiot doesn't understand that communicative action is a sociological concept, not an explicitly political one, even in the classical sense that he's leaning on the one work for (there is a substantive distinction here), which makes his objection silly. Rather Habermas tries to explain "how do it be that human organisms get around to using authentic reason-based communication at all, and why that's an important paradigm" as opposed to manipulation, religion, or sociological theories which emphasize human actions (action theory) or the various human institutions (system theory).

>> No.18709860
File: 37 KB, 252x258, 1594369865787.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18709860

Why are people so embarrassingly cliquey about political, economic, and social philosophy on this board? Stop treating thinkers like football teams.

>> No.18710169

>>18709860
No, fuck you. Habermas!

>> No.18710173

>>18709860
No, fuck you. Rawls!

>> No.18710196

>>18706799
>Why is his theory of communicative action so good?
Because you've never organised a strike for your own wages.