This is a fascinating area of debate and one crucial to those of us that
still wish to engage with dominant social / economic relations.
Im also at work so most of this is from memory but there is a book by Mark
Poster called "Poststructuralism and critical theory" (i think thats the
title) he examines this debate in a lucid way and is a good starting point.
To get the ball rolling I think the main area of diveregnce was H's claim
that modernist reason was still a force for good. That is, rational and fair
dialogue (discourse ethics) and the univerisal aspects of reason were
starting points for critical engagement. F would of course reject any
universalist theory which made emancipatory claims. H argues that we can
break reason down into two areas :
1) Instrumental rationality = Bad.
2) Communicative Rationality = Good.
Whereas F seems to reject wholesale modernist reason.....
As i say im at work so a bit sketchy, but its intended to generate debate.
Doug.
>Relating to the topic of Foucault and the Frankfurt School, there is a
>fascinating book entitled "Critique and Power: Recasting the
>Foucault/Habermas Debate," edited by Michael Kelly (MIT, 1994). It brings
>into focus many of the issues central to the connections and tensions
>between Foucault and the Frankfurt School, and situates Foucault in the
>center of debates in Critical Social Theory. I was wondering if anyone else
>is familiar with the book (or even Habermas's critique of Foucault in "The
>Philosophical Discourse of Modernity") and would care to engage in a
>discussion of Foucault and Habermas, specifically?
>
>(I would start off with some thoughts of my own but I'm at work and don't
>have my books with me!)
>
>Brian
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
still wish to engage with dominant social / economic relations.
Im also at work so most of this is from memory but there is a book by Mark
Poster called "Poststructuralism and critical theory" (i think thats the
title) he examines this debate in a lucid way and is a good starting point.
To get the ball rolling I think the main area of diveregnce was H's claim
that modernist reason was still a force for good. That is, rational and fair
dialogue (discourse ethics) and the univerisal aspects of reason were
starting points for critical engagement. F would of course reject any
universalist theory which made emancipatory claims. H argues that we can
break reason down into two areas :
1) Instrumental rationality = Bad.
2) Communicative Rationality = Good.
Whereas F seems to reject wholesale modernist reason.....
As i say im at work so a bit sketchy, but its intended to generate debate.
Doug.
>Relating to the topic of Foucault and the Frankfurt School, there is a
>fascinating book entitled "Critique and Power: Recasting the
>Foucault/Habermas Debate," edited by Michael Kelly (MIT, 1994). It brings
>into focus many of the issues central to the connections and tensions
>between Foucault and the Frankfurt School, and situates Foucault in the
>center of debates in Critical Social Theory. I was wondering if anyone else
>is familiar with the book (or even Habermas's critique of Foucault in "The
>Philosophical Discourse of Modernity") and would care to engage in a
>discussion of Foucault and Habermas, specifically?
>
>(I would start off with some thoughts of my own but I'm at work and don't
>have my books with me!)
>
>Brian
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com