[ 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: 1.90 MB, 2939x1959, JuergenHabermas.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6848433 No.6848433 [Reply] [Original]

What /lit/ think about this man?

>> No.6848440

>>6848433
remarkable hairstyle

>> No.6848451

>>6848433
Bump. Been reading a lot of Adorno and enjoying him so may move onto Habermas as I study Frankfurt

>> No.6848658

He gave a lecture at my uni last year, the guy was incomprehensible

>> No.6848703

I suggest you read this quote from Slavoj

>However, the ultimate argument against "big" political interventions which aim at a global transformation is, of course, the terrifying experience of the catastrophes of the XXth century, catastrophes which unleashed unheard-of modes of violence. There are three main versions of theorizing these catastrophes: (1) the one epitomized by the name of Habermas: Enlightenment is in itself a positive emancipatory process with no inherent "totalitarian" potentials, these catastrophies are merely an indicator that it remained an unfinished project, so our task should be to bring this project to completion; (2) the one associated with Adorno's and Horkheimer's "dialectic of Enlightenment," as well as, today, with Agamben: the "totalitarian" potentials of the Enlightenment are inherent and crucial, the "administered world" is the truth of Enlightenment, the XXth century concentration camps and genocides are a kind of negative-teleological endpoint of the entire history of the West; (3) the third one, developed, among others, in the works of Etienne Balibar: modernity opens up a field of new freedoms, but at the same time of new dangers, and there is no ultimate teleological guarantee of the outcome, the battle is open, undecided.

I really don't know anything about Habermas but you should check out Cosmopolitan Politics and Habermas Standford article.

>> No.6848716

>>6848433

he is a proponent of multiculturalism, mass immigration, and usual leftist shilling, so I don't like him.

He also wheezes out of his nose when he talks and sounds like an abomination

>> No.6848754

I think he bought the linguistic turn on the basis of Strauss' misunderstanding of totemism, and that his project is ultimately faulty, but holds some fruitfull ideas.

>> No.6848779

>>6848703
That quote doesn't really say much about Habermas, it's mostly just Slavoj making the same boring points about post-enlightenment industrial society.
>muh industrial slaughter
>muh assumptions
>muh trivial parts of the history of ideas define society
I want the Slavojspam to end. He's a meme. His thought isn't interesting. His writing is disorganized. His sources are worse than him. His lectures never stay on and rarely come anywhere near the topic they're supposedly about.

>> No.6848872

I always thought his voice was like that because he was old, but apparently it's due having been born with a cleft palate or sth like that