Philosophy Dictionary of Arguments

Screenshot Tabelle Begriffe

Arbitrariness: A. Arbitrariness is an everyday expression for a non-justified behavior or the refusal to give a reason for a behavior. For example, arbitrariness can arise in unfounded favor. B. In the narrower sense, arbitrariness is something subject to the will. Arbitrary action can be simulated by overriding regularities and thereby undermining expectability. See also conventions.

Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments.

Author Item Summary Meta data
III 352
Definition Formality/Law/Habermas: Modern law defines areas of legitimate arbitrariness of private individuals. The arbitrary freedom of legal entities in a morally neutralized area of private actions with legal consequences is assumed. Private law transactions can therefore be regulated negatively by restricting authorisations recognised in principle (instead of a positive regulation of concrete obligations and material bids). Anything that is not prohibited by law is permitted in this area.
Habermas: the system functionality corresponding to these characteristics results from legal structures in which procedural rational action can become general. It does not explain how these legal structures themselves are possible.
IV 45
Arbitrariness/Habermas: arbitrary are, for example, statements on non-standardised calls or imperatives. On the other hand, a call for help, for example, allows statements on criticizable claims for validity: the listener can dispute the statement in three respects, depending on whether it is extended to a statement, an expression of emotion or an order, its truthfulness or legitimacy can be called into question. ((s) Such inclusion in claims for validity prevents the classification of an utterance as arbitrary).
Habermas: in non-arbitrary action, the speech act offers owe their binding force to the internal relationship between claims for validity and reasons. Since claims for validity in communicative action cannot be rejected or accepted without reason, there is always a moment of insight in statements on a communication offer.

Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.
The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.

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

Jürgen Habermas
Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. I Frankfurt/M. 1981

Jürgen Habermas
Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. II Frankfurt/M. 1981

Send Link
> Counter arguments against Habermas

Authors A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  

Concepts A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  

Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2019-06-25
Legal Notice   Contact   Data protection declaration