Abstract
Thispaper examines Jurgen Habermas' attitude towards modernity. It is evident that it is characterized by his emphasis on the importance of rational communication. Habermas judged modernity by objectively evaluating its strengths and weaknesses through rational debate. The paper shows that in his view, the demise of modernity demonstrated that when rational debate is cast aside in favor of a rigid reliance upon a particular sociological theory, that theory will ultimately be discredited. In other words, sociological theories like modernism cannot replace rational thinking, they must reflect rational thinking.

Tags:habermas, and, modernity

Abstract
This paper explains that Jurgen Habermas, in his theory of knowledge as social theory, elaborates on the important relationship between the natural sciences and the science of man with knowledge as its bridge. The author points out that this theory elicits the sense of reading Marxist social and economic theories, alternating with Hegelian concepts of dialectics. The paper relates that the theory of discourse ethics, which can be divided into categories of cognitivism, justice vs. good and universalization, is an exacting form of argumentation because it ensures the participation of all sides will not be threatened by coercion, save for the soundness and force of the argument.

Table of Contents:
Habermas' Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory
Discussion
Critique
Habermas' Discourse Ethics
Discussion
Critique

From the Paper
"On the other hand, the theory of relativity by Einstein will only remain up in the air if it were not tested by the discovery of nuclear fusion and fission, which in turn created nuclear reactors for electricity and its evil counterpart - the nuclear bombs of every kind and size threatening the world with annihilation. This then verifies Habermas' assertions on control of the natural processes being an instrument of control of social life processes. For the longest time since the Atom Bomb, the world has been shrieking in fear at the thought of a nuclear war between superpowers, especially during the Cold War."

Tags:marx, hegel, coercion, revolutionary, superstructures

Abstract
This paper discusses and compares the social theories of Anthony Giddens, Jurgen Habermas and Pierre Bourdieu. The writer explains that according to Giddens, Habermas, and Bourdieu, the agency serves a very specific purpose for the individual within society. Giddens in 1984 in his "Constitution of Society," proposed the social theory of structuration, using structural perspectives such as agency/structure and subjective/objective. The writer explores how Bourdieu and Habermas add to Giddens' theory and perspectives and how each theorist diverges in their approach to the humanistic side of the structuration. Giddens identifies the structuration process overall as an organic and autonomous process arising from the conventional forces in society, Habermas distinguishes three categories of the influence of human cognition on the structuration process in society, and Bourdieu, the most philosophical of the three, identifies the means by which the subjectivity of man gives rise to an ordering that results in a society's bureaucratic and hierarchical formation.

From the Paper
"Giddens agrees with Habermas as far as the individualized approach to social structure, demonstrating the means by which certain bureaucratic qualities are imparted and specifically designed to address the forward progress, evolution, and social development that is being inculcated with the development of society. While Giddens acknowledges the social structure as specifically maintaining overarching social tendencies within the social bureaucracy, he sees structuration as a combination between the development of ideals of the human intellectual instinct as well as the social forces within the environment."

Tags:construction, hierarchy, on-agent, culture, communication, perception, truth, empirical

Abstract
The paper clarifies Jurgen Habermas' staunch opposition to postmodernism and explains how the concept of "communicative action" is a means to revive the project of modernism. The paper shows how Habermas appeals to the intrinsic powers of language, beyond those of logic and rationality, to effect understanding and conciliation. The paper also highlights the relevance of Kant and Weber to Habermas' argument, and addresses the postmodernist camp's fierce opposition to Habermas' ideas.

From the Paper
"Jurgen Habermas does not believe that postmodernism renders modernism defunct. Despite the triumph of postmodernism, characterized by the preponderance of relativism and fragmentation, Habermas insists that modernism is a project that remains functional. He describes it as an unfinished project, and one that has as its goals the realization of the promise of the Enlightenment. In order to revive the project he introduces the concept of 'communicative action'. This is not a new philosophical strategy, but is rather a novel meta-narrative that explains the inner workings of the Enlightenment and modernism. The claim of postmodernism is that all meta-narratives that pre-suppose the triumph of universal reason, as well as upholding the doctrine of universal progress, have been nullified by the modern principle of relativism. Habermas believes, however, that this new meta-narrative is capable of overcoming this objection. He hopes that his exposition of communicative action will be able to carry forward the Enlightenment Project."

Tags:pluralism, relativism, enlightenment, anarchy, progress, optimism, pessimism, Kant, Durkheim

Abstract
This paper provides a brief overview and discussion of the debate between John Rawls and Jurgen Habermas. The writer describes the context of the debate and the problem that sparked it, and explains key elements of Rawls' theory, Habermas's criticism of Rawls, and key elements of Habermas' theory. Some of their significant differences are explored, as, for example, where Rawls universalizes the principles of public reason (overlapping consensus), Habermas universalizes the principles of rational discourse (ethics of discourse). The writer contends that both theories are significant for theological ethics, since both strive to reach some sort of agreement leading to fairness and equality of people of distinct comprehensive doctrine.

From the Paper
"The main problem that is before us is one of a reassessment of the foundations of modernity. The two world wars which caused unparalleled numbers of deaths and, in particular that of WWII with its unprecedented atrocities and crimes against humanity, seem to provide evidence or proof for something that could be in put in place to prevent wars that could no longer solely be blamed on religion or class struggles. The fundamental question at stake was whether the great confidence in reason and science (technology) has been perhaps overemphasized and was not a reliable means to ensure a peaceful existence for humanity amongst our vast differences. Both Rawls and Habermas are looking at the same problem and both start at the same point, namely the incompatibility of different comprehensive doctrines."

Tags:God dynamics philosophy pluralism theology, democratic society

Abstract
This paper will discuss the reasons why public speaking by government representatives and business interest are playing a part in breaking down the democratic nature of United States government. By realizing that there are more secret interests, such as business groups and political factions, we can see how the public speaking modem is being transformed into a regime for self-interests, rather one for the people of the country. Jurgen Habermas and Carl Schmitt's opinions on the subject will revealed here to illuminate this point.

Abstract
This study will explain and compare Jurgen Habermas's philosophy of communicative reason and John Locke's concept of the social contract, focusing on the roles of reason and the definitions of knowledge in both philosophies. The study will argue that Habermas is concerned with the process whereby communicative reason takes place between individuals, while Locke is concerned with developing a rationale for the construction and continuity of a society in which completely free individuals (in the state of nature) agree to form a society which relieves them of some of that freedom but gives them in return protection for their life and property.

From the Paper
"This study will explain and compare Jurgen Habermas's philosophy of communicative reason and John Locke's concept of the social contract, focusing on the roles of reason and the definitions of knowledge in both philosophies. The study will argue that Habermas is concerned with the process whereby communicative reason takes place between individuals, while Locke is concerned with developing a rationale for the construction and continuity of a society in which completely free individuals (in the state of nature) agree to form a society which relieves them of some of that freedom but gives them in return protection for their life and property. Habermas presupposes an orderly but free society is which his communicative reason can take place, whereas Locke presupposes a state of nature--part free, part rational, part warring--which necessitates the social contract which, in ..."

Abstract
Although Jurgen Habermas functioned primarily within the context of the Critical School, he developed his own analysis and critique of several systems of thought, such as Marxism, advanced or late capitalism, and the liberal-democratic society. This paper will discuss the historical context and theoretical orientation of his arguments, as well as the central concepts and primary conclusions of his analysis.

Abstract
This six-page junior level paper is about the explication and evaluation of the critical reconstruction that Jurgen Habermas carries out in "Knowledge and Human Interests". Jurgen Habermas is the leading scholar of the second generation of the Frankfurt School, a group of philosophers, cultural critics and social scientists associated with the Institute for Social Research, founded in Frankfurt in 1929. The Frankfurt School is best known for its program of developing a "critical theory of society".

Abstract
The paper reports that Joseph Schumpeter talked about democracy as elite selection. The author points out that Robert Dahl was a staunch defender of democracy, seeing it as a process that needed to be extended into every area of society including the economic and political spheres. The paper explains that Jurgen Habermas argued that real democracy was not simply just the compilation of views about majority rules but a social process in which people met, had dialogue and tried to reach agreement.