>
> This is turning out to be a good thread after all:
>
>
>
> Bryan Alexander Department of English
> email: bnalexan@xxxxxxxxx University of Michigan
> phone: (313) 764-0418 Ann Arbor, MI USA 48103
> fax: (313) 763-3128 http://www.umich.edu/~bnalexan
>
> On Tue, 12 Mar 1996, jln wrote:
>
> > Sam,
> >
> > I don't think there is a question about whether people should read
> > Habermas. I think they should. He has some very interesting and
> > insightful ideas. For example, I find his explanation of the colonization
> > of the lifeworld very powerful in explaining just what is goin on. The
> > lifeworld, our world of menaning, is being debunked of its
> > "meaning-giving" power b the forces of (bad) rationalization. Meaning is
> > taken away by the use of money and bureacracy which is not concerned with
> > meaning but only with action. This harkens back to my comments about the
> > early Frankfurt School in that they hold that architectonic structures like
> > Kant's system are devoid of any substantial goals- that is goals of meaning
> > and freedom.
>
> I can't see any way Habermas adds to the work of Horkheimer and esp.
> Adorno on this. They took on the administered world decades before H.
>
> >...
>
Well, obviously you haven't read THE PHILOSOPHICAL DISCOURSES OF
MODERNITY, specifically the chapter on DIALECTIC OF ENLIGHTENMENT
Dan
------------------
> This is turning out to be a good thread after all:
>
>
>
> Bryan Alexander Department of English
> email: bnalexan@xxxxxxxxx University of Michigan
> phone: (313) 764-0418 Ann Arbor, MI USA 48103
> fax: (313) 763-3128 http://www.umich.edu/~bnalexan
>
> On Tue, 12 Mar 1996, jln wrote:
>
> > Sam,
> >
> > I don't think there is a question about whether people should read
> > Habermas. I think they should. He has some very interesting and
> > insightful ideas. For example, I find his explanation of the colonization
> > of the lifeworld very powerful in explaining just what is goin on. The
> > lifeworld, our world of menaning, is being debunked of its
> > "meaning-giving" power b the forces of (bad) rationalization. Meaning is
> > taken away by the use of money and bureacracy which is not concerned with
> > meaning but only with action. This harkens back to my comments about the
> > early Frankfurt School in that they hold that architectonic structures like
> > Kant's system are devoid of any substantial goals- that is goals of meaning
> > and freedom.
>
> I can't see any way Habermas adds to the work of Horkheimer and esp.
> Adorno on this. They took on the administered world decades before H.
>
> >...
>
Well, obviously you haven't read THE PHILOSOPHICAL DISCOURSES OF
MODERNITY, specifically the chapter on DIALECTIC OF ENLIGHTENMENT
Dan
------------------