BETWEEN PLURALISM AND CONSENSUS: A Habermasian Project of Dialogue in Public Sphere
Keywords:
Antagonism, Communication, Consensus, Intersubjective, Modernity, Pluralism, Public Sphere, Universalization, Democracy, Speech ActsAbstract
Consensus, however necessary to ward off the danger of relativism, can endanger political otherness. Political space is constitutively marked by a kind of irreducible heterogeneity. Hence democratic society needs to be situated in the ambiguous gap between the procedural rules of communication leading to consensus and the ever-possible dissent that cannot be strangled. Democracy is constantly confronted by uncertainty and the heterogeneity of individual interests and ends. There is, in the heart of all true democracy, rebellion to one unified system. This irreducible otherness is the foundation of democratic pluralism, source of social conflicts and political crises. This article, through an analysis of the political philosophy of Habermas—particularly of his idea of dialogue in public sphere, seeks to show that this “agonistic dynamic of politics”1 should be situated between consensus and pluralism.
References
Michal Walzer, Spheres of Justice, A Defense of Pluralism and Equality, New York: Basic Books, 1984.
Claude Lefort, Writing: The Political Test, trans. David Ames Curtis, Durham: Duke University Press, 2000.
Claude Lefort, The Political Forms of Modern Society: Bureaucracy, Democracy, Totalitarianism, trans. and ed. John B. Thompson, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986, 214.
Chantal Mouffe, On the Political, London: Routledge, 2005, 3.
Immanuel Kant, Practical Philosophy, trans. and ed. Mary J. Gregor, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, 21.
Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue, South Bend: Notre Dame University Press, 1981, 52.
Max Horkheimer, Eclipse of Reason, London: Oxford University Press, 1947, 4.
Jürgen Habermas, “Modernity: An Unfinished Project,” in Habermas and the Unfinished Project of Modernity: Critical Essays on the Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, ed. Maurizio Passerin d’Entrèves and Seyla Benhabib, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996, 38-55.
Jürgen Habermas, The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures, trans. Frederick G. Lawrence, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1990.
Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. Thomas Burger, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1989, 52.
Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 1, trans. Thomas McCarthy, Boston: Beacon Press, 1985, xxxiii.
Karl-Otto Apel, “Normatively Grounding ‘Critical Theory’ through Recourse to the Lifeworld? A Transcendental-Pragmatic Attempt to Think with Habermas against Habermas,” in Philosophical Interventions in the Unfinished Project of Enlightenment, ed. Axel Honneth, Thomas McCarthy, Claus Offe and Albrecht Wellmer, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992, 125-170.
Jürgen Habermas, “What is Universal Pragmatics?” in Communication and the Evolution of Society, trans. Thomas McCarthy, Boston: Beacon Press, 1979, l-68.
Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 1, 99.
Noam Chomsky, Language and Mind, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, 58.
Paul Ricœur, Oneself as Another, trans. Kathleen Blamey, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995, 24.
Jürgen Habermas, Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, ed. Ciaran P. Cronin and Pablo De Greiff, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998, 42.
John Rawls, A Theory of Justice as Fairness, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971, 3. See also Marshall Cohen, “The Social Contract Explained and Defended,” New York Times, 16 July 1972, 1.
John Rawls, Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press, 1993, 50.
Rawls, Political Liberalism, 4ff. See also John Rawls, 1985. “Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 14, no. 3 (July 1985): 223 – 51.
Jürgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms, trans. William Rehg, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990, 64.
Jürgen Habermas, “Reconciliation through the Public Use of Reason: Remarks on John Rawls's Political Liberalism,” The Journal of Philosophy 92, no. 3 (March 1995): 109-131.
Richard J. Arneson, “Rawls versus Utilitarianism in the Light of Political Liberalism,” in The Idea of a Political Liberalism: Essays on Rawls, ed. Victoria Davion and Clark Wolff, Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 1999, 231-252.
Martin Rhonheimer, The Common Good of Constitutional Democracy: Essays in Political Philosophy and on Catholic Social Teaching, Washington: The Catholic University of America Press, 2013, 326.
Kant defines “unsociable sociability” as the “propensity [of human beings] to enter into society, which, however is combined with a thoroughgoing resistance that constantly threatens to break up this society.” Immanuel Kant, “Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim,” trans. Allen W. Wood, in Anthropology, History, and Education: The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant, ed. Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011, 111.
Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, trans. George Schwab, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007, 30.
Paul Ricœur, The Conflict of Interpretations, trans. Don Ihde, London: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005, 12.
Jack Mendelson, “The Habermas-Gadamer Debate,” New German Critique, no. 18 (1979): 46.
Edouard Delruelle, Le consensus impossible, Bruxelles: Ousia, 1993, 13-14.
Jürgen Habermas, Philosophical-Political Profiles, trans. Frederick G. Lawrence, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1985.
Vincent Descombes, Philosophie par gros temps, Paris: Minuit, 1989, 53.
Elias Canetti, Crowds and Power, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1962.
Geoff Boucher, “Psychoanalysis and Tragicomedy: Measure for Measure after Žižek’s Lacanian Dialectics,” in Lacan, Psychoanalysis, and Comedy, ed. Patricia Gherovici and Manya Stein Koler, New York: Cambridge University Press, 162
Jean-François Lyotard, The Differend: Phrases in Dispute, trans. George Van Den Abbeele, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988, 13.
Julien Freund, L’Essence du politique, Paris: Sirey, 1986, 210.
Chantal Mouffe “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?” Social Research (1999): 754-755.
Claude Lefort, Writing: The Political Test, trans. David Ames Curtis, Durham: Duke University Press, 2000.
Claude Lefort, The Political Forms of Modern Society: Bureaucracy, Democracy, Totalitarianism, trans. and ed. John B. Thompson, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986, 214.
Chantal Mouffe, On the Political, London: Routledge, 2005, 3.
Immanuel Kant, Practical Philosophy, trans. and ed. Mary J. Gregor, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, 21.
Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue, South Bend: Notre Dame University Press, 1981, 52.
Max Horkheimer, Eclipse of Reason, London: Oxford University Press, 1947, 4.
Jürgen Habermas, “Modernity: An Unfinished Project,” in Habermas and the Unfinished Project of Modernity: Critical Essays on the Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, ed. Maurizio Passerin d’Entrèves and Seyla Benhabib, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996, 38-55.
Jürgen Habermas, The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures, trans. Frederick G. Lawrence, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1990.
Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. Thomas Burger, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1989, 52.
Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 1, trans. Thomas McCarthy, Boston: Beacon Press, 1985, xxxiii.
Karl-Otto Apel, “Normatively Grounding ‘Critical Theory’ through Recourse to the Lifeworld? A Transcendental-Pragmatic Attempt to Think with Habermas against Habermas,” in Philosophical Interventions in the Unfinished Project of Enlightenment, ed. Axel Honneth, Thomas McCarthy, Claus Offe and Albrecht Wellmer, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992, 125-170.
Jürgen Habermas, “What is Universal Pragmatics?” in Communication and the Evolution of Society, trans. Thomas McCarthy, Boston: Beacon Press, 1979, l-68.
Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 1, 99.
Noam Chomsky, Language and Mind, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, 58.
Paul Ricœur, Oneself as Another, trans. Kathleen Blamey, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995, 24.
Jürgen Habermas, Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, ed. Ciaran P. Cronin and Pablo De Greiff, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998, 42.
John Rawls, A Theory of Justice as Fairness, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971, 3. See also Marshall Cohen, “The Social Contract Explained and Defended,” New York Times, 16 July 1972, 1.
John Rawls, Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press, 1993, 50.
Rawls, Political Liberalism, 4ff. See also John Rawls, 1985. “Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 14, no. 3 (July 1985): 223 – 51.
Jürgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms, trans. William Rehg, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990, 64.
Jürgen Habermas, “Reconciliation through the Public Use of Reason: Remarks on John Rawls's Political Liberalism,” The Journal of Philosophy 92, no. 3 (March 1995): 109-131.
Richard J. Arneson, “Rawls versus Utilitarianism in the Light of Political Liberalism,” in The Idea of a Political Liberalism: Essays on Rawls, ed. Victoria Davion and Clark Wolff, Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 1999, 231-252.
Martin Rhonheimer, The Common Good of Constitutional Democracy: Essays in Political Philosophy and on Catholic Social Teaching, Washington: The Catholic University of America Press, 2013, 326.
Kant defines “unsociable sociability” as the “propensity [of human beings] to enter into society, which, however is combined with a thoroughgoing resistance that constantly threatens to break up this society.” Immanuel Kant, “Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim,” trans. Allen W. Wood, in Anthropology, History, and Education: The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant, ed. Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011, 111.
Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, trans. George Schwab, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007, 30.
Paul Ricœur, The Conflict of Interpretations, trans. Don Ihde, London: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005, 12.
Jack Mendelson, “The Habermas-Gadamer Debate,” New German Critique, no. 18 (1979): 46.
Edouard Delruelle, Le consensus impossible, Bruxelles: Ousia, 1993, 13-14.
Jürgen Habermas, Philosophical-Political Profiles, trans. Frederick G. Lawrence, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1985.
Vincent Descombes, Philosophie par gros temps, Paris: Minuit, 1989, 53.
Elias Canetti, Crowds and Power, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1962.
Geoff Boucher, “Psychoanalysis and Tragicomedy: Measure for Measure after Žižek’s Lacanian Dialectics,” in Lacan, Psychoanalysis, and Comedy, ed. Patricia Gherovici and Manya Stein Koler, New York: Cambridge University Press, 162
Jean-François Lyotard, The Differend: Phrases in Dispute, trans. George Van Den Abbeele, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988, 13.
Julien Freund, L’Essence du politique, Paris: Sirey, 1986, 210.
Chantal Mouffe “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?” Social Research (1999): 754-755.
Downloads
Published
2017-09-29
How to Cite
A. Irudayadason, N. (2017). BETWEEN PLURALISM AND CONSENSUS: A Habermasian Project of Dialogue in Public Sphere . Journal of Dharma, 42(3), 289–310. Retrieved from https://dvkjournals.in/index.php/jd/article/view/252
Issue
Section
Articles
