scholarly journals HABERMASIAN DISCOURSE THEORY OF MORALITY: A CRITIQUE

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 850-856
Author(s):  
Gobinda Bhattacharjee ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Dilemma ◽  
Democratic Theory ◽  
Communicative Action ◽  
Discourse Ethics ◽  
Discourse Theory ◽  
Moral Norms ◽  
Basic Characteristics ◽  
The Ideal

In this present work, I have made an attempt to discuss the concept of discourse ethics with its basic characteristics, and finally the main problems concerning Habermasian discourse theory of morality. Discourse ethics is an approach to ethics that is founded upon rules of dialogue, and which encourages participants to approach an ethical dilemma with both pure rational reason and experience firmly in hand. Habermasian discourse ethics is widely known as deliberative democratic theory often praised for its ideals. The concept of communicative action plays a central role in the development of Habermas discourse morality. It is a theory of morality, which claims that moral norms concerning justice can be tested rationally in an argumentative dialogue the ideal precondition is that dialogue should be free from domination. With its various characteristics, some main problems concerning Habermasian Discourse ethics is also discussed in this paper.

Philosophers-Citizens

In Our Name ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Beerbohm
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Democratic Theory ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Life Of The Mind ◽  
The Mind ◽  
The Ideal

This chapter challenges an account of citizenship that treats us as political philosophers or perennial deliberators and instead proposes the model of the philosopher-citizen who exhibits a computationally intense life of the mind. It first describes the ideal of the philosopher-citizen before considering how a theory of justice is to be employed by well-intentioned citizens by taking into account the views of John Rawls. It argues that the model of the philosopher-citizens tends to be monistic, collapsing the diversity of moral achievements that citizens can make in a democracy, and that this ideal should be separated from an account of the citizen's decision-making obligations. The chapter also examines the principles for citizens and for representatives in the context of Justice as Fairness and concludes by outlining the essential assumptions of a nonideal democratic theory.

Inclusion and Democracy. By Iris Marion Young. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. 304p. $29.95.

2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 200-201
Author(s):  
Barbara Cruikshank
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Democratic Theory ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
Iris Marion Young ◽  
Democratic Ideals ◽  
The Ideal ◽  
Oxford University Press

Engaging her contemporaries in debates over democratic ideals and processes, Iris M. Young offers a collection of seven essays that mitigate arguments on either side of those debates (participation vs. representation, localism vs. state, segregation vs. integration, identity vs. difference) by applying the critical ideal of inclusion. She argues that the normative legitimacy of democratic decisions rests upon the extent to which those affected by decisions are included in or have the opportunity to enter the decision making process. One might think that inclusion solves only one problem, the problem of exclusion, for democracy. However, Young extends the ideal of inclusion across manifold debates in democratic theory and speaks broadly to the less than ideal conditions under which we now practice democracy.

Towards a Social Democratic Theory of the State

1987 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 537-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Pettit
Keyword(s):  
Democratic Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
The Social ◽  
Equal Respect ◽  
The Ideal

The paper attempts two tasks. The first is to provide a characterization of the social democratic approach which sets it in contrast to liberal democratic theories. This is pursued by contrasting the different interpretations of the ideal of equal respect which are associated with the two approaches. The second task is to establish that the social democratic approach is, if not clearly superior, at least worth considering further. This task is pursued by the attempt to vindicate three assumptions which the social democratic approach must make about the state.

"They Ain't Making Elites Like They Used To": The Never Ending Trouble with Democratic Elitism

2009 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens Borchert
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Democratic Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Ideal

AbstractThis article identifies three central tenets of democratic elitism as developed by various authors. It then traces the fate of these ideas within democratic theory. Surprisingly, I find almost universal, if unacknowledged, acceptance of democratic elitism's principles in contemporary theories of democracy. In the public, however, there is still a strong yearning for a democracy that is closer to the ideal and more open to public participation. This is reflected in public criticisms of "detached" professional politicians. I argue that a conceptual solution to the tension between the state of democratic theory and the public's expectations may ironically be provided by one strand within the theory of democratic elitism, namely Robert Dahl's theory of polyarchy.

scholarly journals “Não se fazem mais elites como antigamente”: o incessante problema do elitismo democrático

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (38) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens Borchert
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Democratic Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Ideal

“NÃO SE FAZEM MAIS ELITES COMO ANTIGAMENTE”: O INCESSANTE PROBLEMA DO ELITISMO DEMOCRÁTICO  “THEY AIN’T MAKING ELITES LIKE THEY USED TO”: THE NEVER ENDING TROUBLE WITH DEMOCRATIC ELITISM  RESUMO: Este artigo identifica três princípios centrais do elitismo democrático, da forma como foram desenvolvidos por vários autores. Em seguida, segue a sorte dessas ideias dentro da teoria democrática. Surpreendentemente, eu encontro a aceitação quase universal, embora não reconhecida, dos princípios do elitismo democrático nas teorias contemporâneas da democracia. Entre o público, no entanto, ainda existe um forte anseio por uma democracia mais próxima do ideal e mais aberta à participação pública. Isso se reflete nas críticas públicas a políticos profissionais “distanciados”. Eu argumento que uma solução conceitual para a tensão entre o estado da teoria democrática e as expectativas do público pode, ironicamente, ser fornecida por uma corrente dentro da teoria do elitismo democrático, a saber, a teoria da poliarquia de Robert Dahl. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: teorias da democracia, profissionalismo político, autonomia da elite, participação, competição. ABSTRACT: This article identifies three central tenets of democratic elitism as developed by various authors. It then traces the fate of these ideas within democratic theory. Surprisingly, I find almost universal, if unacknowledged, acceptance of democratic elitism’s principles in contemporary theories of democracy. In the public, however, there is still a strong yearning for a democracy that is closer to the ideal and more open to public participation. This is reflected in public criticisms of “detached” professional politicians. I argue that a conceptual solution to the tension between the state of democratic theory and the public’s expectations may ironically be provided by one strand within the theory of democratic elitism, namely Robert Dahl’s theory of polyarchy. 

31. Habermas

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Baynes
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Social Theory ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Communicative Action ◽  
Political Legitimacy ◽  
Discourse Theory ◽  
Political Implications ◽  
Deliberative Politics ◽  
Validity Claims

This chapter examines Jürgen Habermas's major contributions to social and political thought. Habermas is regarded as one of the most influential figures in contemporary political theory. In his later work Habermas has begun to expand the normative political implications of his work in social theory and philosophy, culminating in Between Facts and Norms. This chapter first provides an overview of Habermas's earlier work, especially his study on the transformation of the liberal or bourgeois public sphere, before discussing his theory of communicative action (or action based on mutually supposed validity claims). It then considers Habermas's attempt, in Between Facts and Norms, to develop an account of deliberative politics anchored on the idea of political legitimacy and concludes with an analysis of cosmopolitanism as well as his views on discourse theory, democracy, the system of rights, and ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ publics.

Diskursethik, Politische Ökonomie und Volksabstimmungen

1993 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno S. Frey ◽  
Gebhard Kirchgässner
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Discourse Ethics ◽  
Decision Procedures ◽  
Decision Processes ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Politische Ökonomie ◽  
Discourse Process ◽  
The Ideal

AbstractFirst, the approaches of 'Diskursethik' (Discourse ethics) and of Modern Political Economy are described. While the latter investigates political decision processes, the former is concerned with the discourse process which takes place before a decision is made. This is shown by using referenda as an example. The discourse which takes place before referenda obviously does not conform to the ideal conditions defined in Diskursethik, but discourse and decisions in the context of referenda come nearer to the intentions of Diskursethik and Political Economy than other decision procedures which are used in representative democracies.

scholarly journals Assessing Democracy In Vitro, In Vivo, and In Actu and the Role of Democratic Theory Today

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 70-84
Author(s):  
Anastasia Deligiaouri ◽  
Jane Suiter
Keyword(s):  
Democratic Theory ◽  
Discourse Theory ◽  
Second Step ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Core ◽  
Ongoing Project

How can we define democracy today given the continuous changes that modern societies are undergoing? What is the role of a democratic theorist? This paper articulates a threefold argument in responding to these questions by analyzing the term of democracy in vitro, in vivo, and in actu. The first step is to secure a democratic minimum and the core principles of democracy. The second step involves studying democracy as an ongoing project and examining how the principles of this democratic minimum are encoded. In the third step we deploy the basic premises of discourse theory of Laclau and Mouffe when evaluating a specific discourse of democracy, as this approach encompasses both discursive and nondiscursive practices. Utilizing this three-level evaluative framework for democratic theory will allow us to not only articulate normative principles but also evaluate them according to their mode of implementation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document