Discourse Ethics and Moral Rationalism

Dialogue ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 373-386
Author(s):  
Brian K. Powell

ABSTRACT: In this paper, I raise the following question: can the ethical thought of Jurgen Habermas and Karl-Otto Apel provide us with a way of showing that morality is a rational requirement? The answer I give is that (unfortunately) it cannot. I argue for this claim by showing that a decisive objection to Alan Gewirth’s line of thought in Reason and Morality also applies to discourse ethical arguments that try to show an inescapable commitment to a moral principle.

Dialogue ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-110
Author(s):  
JUVÉNAL NDAYAMBAJE

In his moral theory, named ‘discourse ethics,’ Jürgen Habermas holds that a norm is morally valid only when it is universalizable. He establishes the principle of universalization (U) as the procedural principle for testing the moral validity of norms in moral discourse. He argues that this principle can be derived from the pragmatic presuppositions of argumentation in general. By explicating the fiduciary status of pragmatic presuppositions of argumentation, and by distinguishing perspectival from comprehensive universalization, I argue that Habermas fails to justify his moral principle.


2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 193
Author(s):  
Gusti A. B. Menoh

Abstrak: Tulisan ini bertujuan mempresentasikan etika diskursus Jürgen Habermas dan kemudian menarik kemungkinan relevansinya bagi dialog interreligius. Berbeda dengan global ethics Hans Küng yang menjadikan “problem of the good” sebagai pokok pembicaraan, etika diskursus hanya membicarakan bagi kehidupan bersama dalam masyarakat majemuk. Karena itu, etika diskursus tidak ber-tendensi mengejar substansi nilai-nilai etis dari berbagai pandangan dunia (world-view) dalam kelompok-kelompok kultural maupun religius yang berbeda-beda itu. Sebaliknya, etika diskurus hanya menawarkan sebuah prosedur untuk memecahkan masalah hidup bersama secara adil di tengah kemajemukan pandangan nilai dan keyakinan yang tak terbantahkan. Etika ini tidak bertujuan melenyapkan perbedaan-perbedaan identitas para warga dengan segala kekayaan kultural dan religiusnya, melainkan berupaya menjamin kelangsungan hidup bersama secara bermartabat tanpa kehilangan identitas individual. Tulisan ini dibagi dalam dua bagian. Pertama, penulis akan mendeskripsikan hakikat etika diskursus. Kedua, penulis akan menarik kemungkinan aplikasi etika diskursus bagi dialog interreligius. Tulisan ini akan diakhiri dengan penutup singkat. Kata-kata Kunci: Lebenswelt (dunia-kehidupan), tindakan komunikatif, etika diskursus, dialog interreligius, teologi agama-agama. Abstract: This paper aims to present the Discourse Ethics of Jürgen Habermas and find its relevance for interreligious dialogue. In contrast to the global ethics of Hans Küng that concerns the “problem of the good,” discourse ethics deals only with “the problem of justice” within a pluralistic society. Therefore, discourse ethics does not attempt to find the commonality of the ethical different values of the various group either culturally or religiously. Rather, discourse ethics offers a procedure for solving inter-religion and inter-cultural problems within a community or society fairly and reasonably. In other words, discourse ethics does not aim to eliminate the distinctive attributes of every citizen within their own cultural and religious belief, but rather ensures that each person or each group live together with dignity without losing their identity. This paper is divided into two parts. First, the author will describe what discourse ethics is. Second, the authors will discuss the possible application of discourse ethics for interreligious dialogue. This paper will end with a short conclusion. Keywords: Lebenswelt (world-lives), communicative action, discourse ethics, interreligious dialogue, theology of religions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document