Anyone doing interesting deconstruction of Habermas?

1

Anyone doing interesting deconstruction of Habermas?

I've read him, and he's interesting, even if not politically radical enough for me. His philosophy of meta-ethics may work for me, especially if supplemented with phenomenology, which it can be to an extent.

To be more specific, and I hope this doesn't sound facile, but what would the 'ideal speech situation' (the possibility of which I believe is meant to secure "morality") be like without phallogocentrism?

Can anything further more appealing be constructed of Habermas via deconstruction?

user50495

Posted 2021-02-26T02:17:34.217

Reputation:

1Do you refer to the early (up to the first explicit formulation in 1971) conceptions, the mature theory from 1981, or later works? Habermas accepted criticisms of his work that pointed out the lack of Leiblichkeit (bodily existence), whereafter he modified his system accordingly up to the last decade. Like with many of the "great ones" of the 20th century, there are several "Habermases". – Philip Klöcking – 2021-02-26T07:56:58.137

any of them really @PhilipKlöcking not read in ages, but if there were no need for revisions there would be few works of philosophy (i.e. does it matter) – None – 2021-02-26T09:37:26.993

1Well I ask because of the phallogocentrism. In his mature theory already, (1981/1983) we are speaking of communicative acts, which are made with the background of concrete life-worlds by bodily agents. This is criticised as only "metaphorical" instead of making material use, though. I am somewhat lost as of the question since there are quite a lot of critical perspectives from psychoanalytical and phenomenological sides on Habermas, but as far as I can see, most of them are in German. – Philip Klöcking – 2021-02-26T10:18:56.940

1Most English sources are either focusing on how to reconcile Derrida and Habermas, like they themselves did (they authored a book together), or they kind of report about how they wrote about one another. This does explicitly lay aside that which deconstruction could have done with Habermas' theory, ie. the application of the methodological approach of deconstruction on Habermas' work. – Philip Klöcking – 2021-02-26T10:20:27.457

yeah quite possibly far too broad @PhilipKlöcking lis he explicitly being deconstructionist in those later works? i only ask because life-world can be broad, and obviously deconstructionists do play games. thanks for your time, again! – None – 2021-02-26T10:37:38.333

Thomassen, Deconstructing Habermas. – Conifold – 2021-02-26T12:42:35.563

No answers