युर्गन हाबरमास
तर्क उस ढंग में बसता है जिससे लोग खुले तर्क-वितर्क द्वारा आपसी समझ तक पहुँचते हैं, और लोकतंत्र तब काम करता है जब निर्णय ऐसी मुक्त चर्चा से निकलते हैं।
पृष्ठभूमि
संवादात्मक कर्म का सिद्धांत: तर्क पारस्परिक समझ में निवास करता है; संवाद-नीति और विमर्शात्मक लोकतंत्र।
मुख्य विचार
- संवादात्मक कर्म
- प्रभुत्व-मुक्त संवाद
- सार्वजनिक क्षेत्र
गुरु: थियोडोर डब्ल्यू. एडोर्नो
शिष्य: एक्सेल होनेथ, राइनर फ़ोर्स्ट
प्रभाव
जिनसे प्रभावित 18
इमानुएल कांट
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas recast Kant’s categorical imperative as a principle of universalisation that norms must pass in real discourse among all those affected (Moralbewußtsein und kommunikatives Handeln, 1983). J. Habermas, “Diskursethik – Notizen zu einem Begründungsprogramm”, in Moralbewußtsein und kommunikatives Handeln (1983); SEP “Jürgen Habermas”
इमानुएल कांट › 1724–1804
गेऑर्ग विल्हेल्म फ़्रीडरिश हेगल
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
In ‘Labour and Interaction’ (1967) Habermas drew from Hegel’s Jena philosophy of spirit the distinction between labour and interaction that underlies his theory of communicative action. J. Habermas, “Arbeit und Interaktion. Bemerkungen zu Hegels Jenenser Philosophie des Geistes” (1967), in Technik und Wissenschaft als „Ideologie“ (1968)
गेऑर्ग विल्हेल्म फ़्रीडरिश हेगल › 1770–1831
कार्ल मार्क्स
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas set out to reconstruct historical materialism, separating the development of productive forces from that of normative structures (Zur Rekonstruktion des Historischen Materialismus, 1976). J. Habermas, Zur Rekonstruktion des Historischen Materialismus (1976); Erkenntnis und Interesse (1968)
कार्ल मार्क्स › 1818–1883
ज़ीगमुंड फ़्रॉइड
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
In Knowledge and Human Interests (1968) Habermas took psychoanalysis as the model of a self-reflective science guided by an emancipatory interest, criticising Freud’s own scientistic self-misunderstanding. J. Habermas, Erkenntnis und Interesse (1968); SEP “Jürgen Habermas”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
ज़ीगमुंड फ़्रॉइड › 1856–1939
एमिल दुरकेम
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas developed from Durkheim’s sociology of religion the thesis of a ‘linguistification of the sacred’, in which ritual authority passes into communicative agreement (Theory of Communicative Action, 1981). J. Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981), vol. II; É. Durkheim, Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse (1912); SEP “Jürgen Habermas”
एमिल दुरकेम › 1858–1917
मैक्स वेबर
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas built his theory of modernity on Weber’s account of rationalisation, but argued that Weber had narrowed reason to its purposive, instrumental form (Theory of Communicative Action, 1981). J. Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981), vol. I; SEP “Jürgen Habermas”
मैक्स वेबर › 1864–1920
सभी दिखाएँ (18)कम दिखाएँ
फ्रेडरिख शेलिंग
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas wrote his dissertation on Schelling (Das Absolute und die Geschichte, 1954) and later drew materialist conclusions from his idea of God’s contraction (1963). J. Habermas, Das Absolute und die Geschichte. Von der Zwiespältigkeit in Schellings Denken (diss. 1954); “Dialektischer Idealismus im Übergang zum Materialismus”, in Theorie und Praxis (1963)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
फ्रेडरिख शेलिंग › 1775–1854
चार्ल्स सैंडर्स पियर्स
जिनसे प्रभावित
In Knowledge and Human Interests (1968) Habermas read Peirce’s logic of inquiry as uncovering the technical interest that guides the empirical sciences. J. Habermas, Erkenntnis und Interesse (1968); SEP “Jürgen Habermas”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
चार्ल्स सैंडर्स पियर्स › 1839–1914
जॉर्ज हर्बर्ट मीड
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas saw in Mead’s theory of symbolically mediated interaction the paradigm shift from purposive to communicative action (Theory of Communicative Action, 1981). J. Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981), vol. II, “Der Paradigmenwechsel bei Mead und Durkheim”; G. H. Mead, Mind, Self, and Society (1934)
जॉर्ज हर्बर्ट मीड › 1863–1931
जॉर्ज लुकाच
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas reconstructed Lukács’ theory of reification as a reading of Weber’s rationalisation and recast it as the colonisation of the lifeworld (Theory of Communicative Action, 1981). J. Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981), vol. I, “Von Lukács zu Adorno: Rationalisierung als Verdinglichung”; vol. II
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जॉर्ज लुकाच › 1885–1971
मैक्स होर्कहाइमर
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas continued Horkheimer’s programme of an interdisciplinary critical theory but replaced his critique of instrumental reason with a theory of communicative rationality (Theory of Communicative Action, 1981). J. Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981); M. Horkheimer, “Traditionelle und kritische Theorie” (1937); Eclipse of Reason (1947)
मैक्स होर्कहाइमर › 1895–1973
ज़ाँ प्याज़े
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas modelled the development of moral consciousness, and in part social evolution, on Piaget’s developmental logic and Kohlberg’s stages (Moralbewußtsein und kommunikatives Handeln, 1983). J. Habermas, Moralbewußtsein und kommunikatives Handeln (1983); Zur Rekonstruktion des Historischen Materialismus (1976); J. Piaget, Le jugement moral chez l’enfant (1932)
ज़ाँ प्याज़े › 1896–1980
आल्फ्रेड शुट्ज़
जिनसे प्रभावित
Habermas developed his concept of the lifeworld, the shared background of communication, in critical dialogue with Husserl, Schutz and Luckmann (Theory of Communicative Action, 1981). J. Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981), vol. II; A. Schutz and T. Luckmann, The Structures of the Life-World (1973)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
आल्फ्रेड शुट्ज़ › 1899–1959
ई. ई. इवांस-प्रिचर्ड
जिनसे प्रभावित
Habermas took up the rationality debate that Winch opened over Evans-Pritchard’s Zande study (1937) to contrast mythical and modern worldviews (Theory of Communicative Action, 1981). J. Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981), vol. I; E. E. Evans-Pritchard, Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande (1937); P. Winch, “Understanding a Primitive Society” (1964)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ई. ई. इवांस-प्रिचर्ड › 1902–1973
टैल्कॉट पार्सन्स
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas took over Parsons’s account of money and power as steering media to conceive economy and state as systems, distinct from the lifeworld (Theory of Communicative Action, 1981). J. Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981), vol. II, “Talcott Parsons: Konstruktionsprobleme der Gesellschaftstheorie”; T. Parsons, “On the Concept of Political Power” (1963)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
टैल्कॉट पार्सन्स › 1902–1979
हाना आरंट
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Habermas took up Arendt’s communicative concept of power as the ability to act in concert but faulted its neglect of strategic action (‘Hannah Arendts Begriff der Macht’, 1976). J. Habermas, “Hannah Arendts Begriff der Macht” (1976), in Philosophisch-politische Profile (1981); Faktizität und Geltung (1992); SEP “Hannah Arendt”
हाना आरंट › 1906–1975
नोरबेर्तो बोब्बियो
जिनसे प्रभावित
In Between Facts and Norms (1992) Habermas started from Bobbio’s procedural minimal definition of democracy (The Future of Democracy, 1984) and extended it into a deliberative model. J. Habermas, Faktizität und Geltung (1992); N. Bobbio, Il futuro della democrazia (1984)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
नोरबेर्तो बोब्बियो › 1909–2004
जे. एल. ऑस्टिन
जिनसे प्रभावित
Habermas built his universal pragmatics on Austin’s speech-act theory, aligning communicative action with illocutionary and strategic action with perlocutionary effects (‘Was heißt Universalpragmatik?’, 1976). J. Habermas, “Was heißt Universalpragmatik?” (1976); Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981); J. L. Austin, How to Do Things with Words (1962); SEP “Jürgen Habermas”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
जे. एल. ऑस्टिन › 1911–1960
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया 4
एक्सेल होनेथ जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया ✓
After a doctorate at the Free University of Berlin (1983), Honneth was Habermas’s assistant at the Department of Philosophy in Frankfurt from 1983 to 1989 and took his Habilitation there in 1990 with Kampf um Anerkennung (expanded edition 1992). Columbia University, Department of Philosophy, profile of A. Honneth; A. Honneth, Kampf um Anerkennung (1992)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एक्सेल होनेथ › जन्म 1949
आइरिस मैरियन यंग
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Young took up Habermas’s discourse model of deliberative democracy but widened it to include greeting, rhetoric and narrative as forms of political communication (Inclusion and Democracy, 2000). I. M. Young, Inclusion and Democracy (2000); “Communication and the Other”, in S. Benhabib (ed.), Democracy and Difference (1996)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
आइरिस मैरियन यंग › 1949–2006
सेला बेनहबीब
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In ‘The Generalized and the Concrete Other’ (1987) Benhabib argued that Habermas’s discourse ethics, which she defended, must also take in the concrete other. S. Benhabib, “The Generalized and the Concrete Other”, Praxis International 5 (1986), and in S. Benhabib and D. Cornell (eds.), Feminism as Critique (1987); Situating the Self (1992)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
सेला बेनहबीब › जन्म 1950
राइनर फ़ोर्स्ट जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया
Forst took his doctorate under Habermas in Frankfurt in 1993, after working in Habermas’s Leibniz research group on legal theory; the thesis appeared as Kontexte der Gerechtigkeit (1994). Normative Orders (Goethe University Frankfurt), notice on the Festschrift for R. Forst, 15 Aug. 2024; R. Forst, Kontexte der Gerechtigkeit (1994)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
राइनर फ़ोर्स्ट › जन्म 1964
आलोचना
परस्पर आलोचना 2
जॉन राल्स ⇄ परस्पर
जिनकी आलोचना की
Habermas questioned whether Rawls’s original position and overlapping consensus can secure the validity, not merely acceptance, of principles of justice (‘Reconciliation through the Public Use of Reason’, 1995). J. Habermas, “Reconciliation through the Public Use of Reason: Remarks on John Rawls’s Political Liberalism”, Journal of Philosophy 92 (1995); J. Rawls, “Reply to Habermas”, ibid.
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Replying to Habermas, Rawls argued that his own liberalism is freestanding and political, whereas Habermas’s discourse theory is a comprehensive doctrine (‘Political Liberalism: Reply to Habermas’, 1995). J. Rawls, “Political Liberalism: Reply to Habermas”, Journal of Philosophy 92 (1995), 132–180; J. Habermas, “Reconciliation through the Public Use of Reason”, ibid., 109–131
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जॉन राल्स › 1921–2002
निकलास लूमन ⇄ परस्पर
जिनकी आलोचना की
Habermas objected that Luhmann’s systems theory is a sophisticated form of technocratic thinking that redefines practical questions as technical ones (Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie?, 1971). J. Habermas & N. Luhmann, Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie – Was leistet die Systemforschung? (1971), Habermas’s contribution
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Luhmann rejected Habermas’s anchoring of social theory in consensus reached through discourse, analysing society as differentiated systems that reduce complexity (Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie?, 1971). J. Habermas & N. Luhmann, Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie – Was leistet die Systemforschung? (1971)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
निकलास लूमन › 1927–1998
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित 6
ज़ाँ-फ़्रांस्वा ल्योतार
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Lyotard objected that Habermas’s aim of universal consensus through discourse rests on an outdated narrative of emancipation and does violence to heterogeneous language games (The Postmodern Condition, 1979). J.-F. Lyotard, La condition postmoderne (1979), §14; “Réponse à la question: qu’est-ce que le postmoderne?” (1982)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ज़ाँ-फ़्रांस्वा ल्योतार › 1924–1998
एनरिके दुसेल
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Dussel objected that Habermas’s discourse ethics presupposes a community of equal participants and forgets those excluded from it – the victims (Ética de la liberación, 1998). E. Dussel, Ética de la liberación en la edad de la globalización y de la exclusión (1998); The Underside of Modernity (1996)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एनरिके दुसेल › 1934–2023
नैन्सी फ़्रेज़र जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Fraser kept Habermas’s public sphere as an indispensable concept of critical theory and carried it beyond the frame of the nation-state (‘Transnationalizing the Public Sphere’, 2007). N. Fraser, “Rethinking the Public Sphere”, Social Text 25/26 (1990); “Transnationalizing the Public Sphere”, Theory, Culture & Society 24 (2007)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Fraser objected that Habermas’s system–lifeworld split hides the family’s gendered economy and that his account of the public sphere idealises a forum that excluded women (1985; 1990). N. Fraser, “What’s Critical about Critical Theory? The Case of Habermas and Gender”, New German Critique 35 (1985); “Rethinking the Public Sphere”, Social Text 25/26 (1990)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
नैन्सी फ़्रेज़र › जन्म 1947
पेटर स्लोटरदाइक
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In an open letter declaring ‘critical theory is dead’, Sloterdijk suspected Habermas behind the press criticism of Regeln für den Menschenpark (Die Zeit, 9 Sept. 1999). P. Sloterdijk, “Die Kritische Theorie ist tot”, Die Zeit, 9 Sept. 1999; Regeln für den Menschenpark (Elmau lecture, 1999); Habermas’s reply: letter in Die Zeit, 16 Sept. 1999 (reported in Radical Philosophy 99, 2000)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
पेटर स्लोटरदाइक › जन्म 1947
स्लावोय झ़िझ़ेक
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Žižek opened The Sublime Object of Ideology (1989) by reading Habermas’s neglect of Lacan as symptomatic, setting Lacan’s constitutive antagonism against Habermas’s ideal of transparent communication. S. Žižek, The Sublime Object of Ideology (1989), Introduction
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
स्लावोय झ़िझ़ेक › जन्म 1949
पॉल गिलरॉय
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In the same chapter of The Black Atlantic (1993) Gilroy objected that Habermas’s defence of modernity as an unfinished project of reason leaves out slavery and racial terror, which for the Black Atlantic belong to modernity’s core. P. Gilroy, The Black Atlantic (1993), ch. 2; J. Habermas, Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne (1985)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
पॉल गिलरॉय › जन्म 1956
जिनकी आलोचना की 9
मार्टिन हाइडेगर
जिनकी आलोचना की
In 1953 Habermas asked publicly why Heidegger had republished his 1935 phrase on the ‘inner truth and greatness’ of National Socialism without comment (FAZ, 25 July 1953). J. Habermas, “Mit Heidegger gegen Heidegger denken”, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 25 July 1953; Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne (1985), Lecture VI
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मार्टिन हाइडेगर › 1889–1976
हंस-गेऑर्ग गादामर
जिनकी आलोचना की
Habermas objected that Gadamer’s rehabilitation of tradition and prejudice overlooks language as a medium of domination, which calls for critique of ideology (Zur Logik der Sozialwissenschaften, 1967). J. Habermas, Zur Logik der Sozialwissenschaften (1967), on Gadamer’s Wahrheit und Methode; “Der Universalitätsanspruch der Hermeneutik” (1970), in Hermeneutik und Ideologiekritik (1971)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
हंस-गेऑर्ग गादामर › 1900–2002
कार्ल पॉपर
जिनकी आलोचना की
Habermas attacked Popper’s critical rationalism as a ‘positivistically halved rationalism’ that confines reason to method and leaves the choice of values to decision (1963–64, in Der Positivismusstreit, 1969). J. Habermas, “Analytische Wissenschaftstheorie und Dialektik” (1963); “Gegen einen positivistisch halbierten Rationalismus” (1964, reply to H. Albert); both in Der Positivismusstreit in der deutschen Soziologie (1969)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कार्ल पॉपर › 1902–1994
थियोडोर डब्ल्यू. एडोर्नो जिनसे पढ़ा
जिनसे पढ़ा ✓
After a doctorate in Bonn on Schelling (1954), Habermas came to Frankfurt in 1956 as Adorno’s assistant at the Institute for Social Research; in 1959 he left, pushed out by Horkheimer, and took his Habilitation with Wolfgang Abendroth in Marburg (1961). SEP “Jürgen Habermas”; S. Müller-Doohm, Jürgen Habermas. Eine Biographie (2014)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जिनकी आलोचना की
Habermas objected that Horkheimer and Adorno’s Dialectic of Enlightenment totalises the critique of reason and thereby undercuts its own standards (Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, 1985, Lecture V). J. Habermas, Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne (1985), Lecture V; Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981), vol. 1, ch. IV
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
थियोडोर डब्ल्यू. एडोर्नो › 1903–1969
मिशेल फूको
जिनकी आलोचना की
Habermas charged Foucault’s genealogy of power with presentism, relativism and ‘cryptonormativism’, since it cannot account for the norms its own critique presupposes (Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, 1985, IX–X). J. Habermas, Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne (1985), Lectures IX–X
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मिशेल फूको › 1926–1984
जाक देरिदा
जिनकी आलोचना की
Habermas objected that Derrida levels the genre distinction between philosophy and literature, giving up the problem-solving power of argument for rhetoric (Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, 1985, excursus). J. Habermas, Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne (1985), Lecture VII and excursus on levelling the genre distinction between philosophy and literature
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जाक देरिदा › 1930–2004
सभी दिखाएँ (9)कम दिखाएँ
कार्ल श्मिट
जिनकी आलोचना की
Habermas objected that Schmitt’s decisionism dissolves the normative foundations of constitutional democracy (‘Die Schrecken der Autonomie. Carl Schmitt auf Englisch’, in Eine Art Schadensabwicklung, 1987). J. Habermas, “Die Schrecken der Autonomie. Carl Schmitt auf Englisch”, in Eine Art Schadensabwicklung (1987)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कार्ल श्मिट › 1888–1985
कोर्नेलियस कास्तोरियादिस
जिनकी आलोचना की
Habermas objected that Castoriadis’s creative social imaginary transfers the philosophy of the subject to society and cannot ground rational autonomy (Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, 1985). J. Habermas, Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne (1985), excursus on Castoriadis (after Lecture XI)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कोर्नेलियस कास्तोरियादिस › 1922–1997
राइनहार्ट कोसेलेक
जिनकी आलोचना की
Habermas read Koselleck’s Kritik und Krise (1959) as a neo-conservative critique of the Enlightenment and of the philosophy of history (‘Verrufener Fortschritt – verkanntes Jahrhundert’, Merkur, 1960). J. Habermas, “Verrufener Fortschritt – verkanntes Jahrhundert”, Merkur 14 (1960); N. Olsen, History in the Plural (2012)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
राइनहार्ट कोसेलेक › 1923–2006
कृतियाँ
बुर्जुआ सार्वजनिक क्षेत्र का उत्थान और पतन।
ज्ञान तकनीकी, व्यावहारिक और मुक्तिकारी हितों से निर्देशित होता है।
जीवन-जगत और प्रणाली; परस्पर समझ तक पहुँचने की तर्कसंगतता।
नीत्शे से फूको और देरिदा तक तर्क की आलोचना के विरुद्ध व्याख्यान।
मत
Habermas led Critical Theory out of the pessimism of Adorno and Horkheimer. Reason, he argued, is not only instrumental: in everyday speech we implicitly raise claims to truth, rightness and sincerity that can be tested in argument. This communicative rationality aims at understanding rather than success and contains a standard for criticising society. Modern society is split between the lifeworld, held together by communication, and systems such as markets and administration, steered by money and power; pathologies arise when systems “colonise” the lifeworld. In discourse ethics, valid norms are those all affected could agree to in free discussion. His work grounds a theory of deliberative democracy and a defence of modernity’s unfinished project.
जीवन और संदर्भ
Born in 1929 in Düsseldorf and raised in Gummersbach, Habermas studied in Göttingen, Zurich and Bonn and became Adorno’s assistant in Frankfurt. After a professorship in Heidelberg he took over Horkheimer’s chair, directed a Max Planck Institute in Starnberg and returned to Frankfurt. Over decades he intervened in German public debates, among them the historians’ dispute of 1986, as an advocate of constitutional democracy and European integration. He died in Starnberg on 14 March 2026.
अन्य प्रमुख कृतियाँ
- The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (1962)
- Knowledge and Human Interests (1968)
- The Theory of Communicative Action (1981)
- The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity (1985)
- Between Facts and Norms (1992)
इनमें आता है
- यात्रा ‘हेगल के उत्तराधिकारी’ · 10 में से पड़ाव 8
- बहस ‘क्या हम स्वतंत्र हैं? तंत्रिका-विज्ञान के युग में स्वतंत्र इच्छा’
- बहस ‘लोकतंत्र, सत्य और ध्रुवीकरण’
- बहस ‘सोशल मीडिया और सार्वजनिक क्षेत्र’
- बहस ‘युद्ध और शांति: सशस्त्र बल कब उचित है?’
- बहस ‘जर्मन समाजशास्त्र में प्रत्यक्षवाद-विवाद’
- बहस ‘इतिहासकारों का विवाद (हिस्टोरिकरश्ट्राइट)’
नवंबर 2026 तक · स्रोत · इस पृष्ठ को बेहतर बनाएँ · Agora कैसे बना है