Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

 
Books on Amazon
Rorty II 32
Language/Communication/HabermasVsDerrida: Derrida denies both the existence of an "obstinate formally structured area of communicative everyday practice" and an "autonomous field of fiction". Because he denies both, he can analyze any discourse according to the pattern of poetic language. Thus, he does not need to determine language.
---
II 33
RortyVsHabermas: Derrida is neither compelled nor willing to let "any language" be "determined" by anything. Derrida could fully agree with Habermas that "the world-developing power of interpretive language must prove itself" before metaphors become literary used and socially useful tools.
RortyVsHabermas: he seems to presuppose that X is a special case of Y in order to treat X as Y. As if you could not just treat X as Y to see what happens.

Ha I
J. Habermas
Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne Frankfurt 1988

Ro I
R. Rorty
Der Spiegel der Natur Frankfurt 1997

Ro II
R. Rorty
Philosophie & die Zukunft Frankfurt 2000

Ro III
R. Rorty
Kontingenz, Ironie und Solidarität Frankfurt 1992

Ro IV
R. Rorty
Eine Kultur ohne Zentrum Stuttgart 1993

Ro V
R. Rorty
Solidarität oder Objektivität? Stuttgart 1998

Ro VI
R. Rorty
Wahrheit und Fortschritt Frankfurt 2000


> Counter arguments against Habermas
> Counter arguments in relation to Communication



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-25