Jürgen Habermas
Rozum żyje w sposobie, w jaki ludzie dochodzą do porozumienia przez otwartą argumentację, a demokracja działa, gdy decyzje wyłaniają się z takiej swobodnej dyskusji.
Umiejscowienie
Teoria działania komunikacyjnego: rozum mieszka w porozumieniu; etyka dyskursu i demokracja deliberatywna.
Kluczowe idee
- Działanie komunikacyjne
- Dyskurs wolny od panowania
- Sfera publiczna
Nauczyciele: Theodor Adorno
Uczniowie: Axel Honneth, Rainer Forst
Wpływ
Pod wpływem 18
Immanuel Kant
pod wpływem ✓
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”
Immanuel Kant › 1724–1804
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
pod wpływem ✓
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)
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel › 1770–1831
Karol Marks
pod wpływem ✓
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)
Karol Marks › 1818–1883
Sigmund Freud
pod wpływem ✓
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”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Sigmund Freud › 1856–1939
Émile Durkheim
pod wpływem ✓
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”
Émile Durkheim › 1858–1917
Max Weber
pod wpływem ✓
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”
Max Weber › 1864–1920
Pokaż wszystko (18)Pokaż mniej
Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling
pod wpływem ✓
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)
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling › 1775–1854
Charles Sanders Peirce
pod wpływem
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”
Źródło: szkic AI
Charles Sanders Peirce › 1839–1914
George Herbert Mead
pod wpływem ✓
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)
George Herbert Mead › 1863–1931
György Lukács
pod wpływem ✓
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
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
György Lukács › 1885–1971
Max Horkheimer
pod wpływem ✓
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)
Max Horkheimer › 1895–1973
Jean Piaget
pod wpływem ✓
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)
Jean Piaget › 1896–1980
Alfred Schütz
pod wpływem
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Alfred Schütz › 1899–1959
E. E. Evans-Pritchard
pod wpływem
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
E. E. Evans-Pritchard › 1902–1973
Talcott Parsons
pod wpływem ✓
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)
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Talcott Parsons › 1902–1979
Hannah Arendt
pod wpływem ✓
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”
Hannah Arendt › 1906–1975
Norberto Bobbio
pod wpływem
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Norberto Bobbio › 1909–2004
John Langshaw Austin
pod wpływem
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”
Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO
John Langshaw Austin › 1911–1960
Wpływ na 4
Axel Honneth uczeń/uczennica
uczeń/uczennica ✓
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Axel Honneth › ur. 1949
Iris Marion Young
wpływ na
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Iris Marion Young › 1949–2006
Seyla Benhabib
wpływ na ✓
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)
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Seyla Benhabib › ur. 1950
Rainer Forst uczeń/uczennica
uczeń/uczennica
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Rainer Forst › ur. 1964
Krytyka
Wzajemna krytyka 2
John Rawls ⇄ wzajemnie
krytykuje
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.
Źródło: szkic AI
krytyka ze strony
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
Źródło: szkic AI
John Rawls › 1921–2002
Niklas Luhmann ⇄ wzajemnie
krytykuje
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
Źródło: szkic AI
krytyka ze strony
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Niklas Luhmann › 1927–1998
Krytyka ze strony 6
Jean-François Lyotard
krytyka ze strony
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Jean-François Lyotard › 1924–1998
Enrique Dussel
krytyka ze strony
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Enrique Dussel › 1934–2023
Nancy Fraser wpływ na
wpływ na
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
krytyka ze strony
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Nancy Fraser › ur. 1947
Peter Sloterdijk
krytyka ze strony
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Peter Sloterdijk › ur. 1947
Slavoj Žižek
krytyka ze strony
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
Źródło: szkic AI
Slavoj Žižek › ur. 1949
Paul Gilroy
krytyka ze strony
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Paul Gilroy › ur. 1956
Krytykuje 9
Martin Heidegger
krytykuje
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
Źródło: szkic AI
Martin Heidegger › 1889–1976
Hans-Georg Gadamer
krytykuje
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Hans-Georg Gadamer › 1900–2002
Karl Popper
krytykuje
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Karl Popper › 1902–1994
Theodor Adorno nauczyciel(ka)
nauczyciel(ka) ✓
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)
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
krytykuje
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
Źródło: szkic AI
Theodor Adorno › 1903–1969
Michel Foucault
krytykuje
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
Źródło: szkic AI
Michel Foucault › 1926–1984
Jacques Derrida
krytykuje
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
Źródło: szkic AI
Jacques Derrida › 1930–2004
Pokaż wszystko (9)Pokaż mniej
Carl Schmitt
krytykuje
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Carl Schmitt › 1888–1985
Cornelius Castoriadis
krytykuje
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Cornelius Castoriadis › 1922–1997
Reinhart Koselleck
krytykuje
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)
Źródło: szkic AI
Reinhart Koselleck › 1923–2006
Dzieła
Powstanie i upadek burżuazyjnej sfery publicznej.
Poznanie kieruje się interesami technicznymi, praktycznymi i emancypacyjnymi.
Świat życia i system; racjonalność porozumienia.
Wykłady przeciw krytyce rozumu od Nietzschego po Foucaulta i Derridę.
Stanowisko
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.
Życie i kontekst
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.
Dalsze główne dzieła
- 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)
Pojawia się w
- Podróż „Spadkobiercy Hegla” · Przystanek 8 z 10
- Debata „Czy jesteśmy wolni? Wolna wola w epoce neurobiologii”
- Debata „Demokracja, prawda i polaryzacja”
- Debata „Media społecznościowe i sfera publiczna”
- Debata „Wojna i pokój: kiedy użycie siły zbrojnej jest uzasadnione?”
- Debata „Spór o pozytywizm w socjologii niemieckiej”
- Debata „Spór historyków (Historikerstreit)”
Stan na listopad 2026 · Źródła · Ulepsz tę stronę · Jak powstaje Agora