Habermas and the Postal Rule

1979

For an English-speaking public, the work of the Frankfurt School is doubly inaccessible: not only are the primary texts written, for the most part, in a foreign language, but ?even more daunting?they draw heavily on sociological and philosophical traditions whose reception in the English speaking world has only barely begun. When?as is the case for the rapidly expanding oeuvre of J?rgen Habermas?all of these difficulties are, in addition, compounded by a primary literature which is widely scattered and only partly translated, then the need for some kind of general overview of the available literature becomes fairly pressing. Such, at any rate, has been the experience of the authors, and we present this bibliography in the hope that it may function as a resource for other scholars in this field. This bibliography comprises, to the best of our knowledge, the first full documentation of all Habermas's published work2, and we have supplemented this with a list of all English translations, as well as some eighty reviews and review articles in both languages. (A bibliography of secondary literature is in preparation.) To facilitate easy usage of this bibliography, the following points should be born in mind. The publications?185 in all?are arranged chronologically, by year, from 1952 onwards: for each entry the number of reprints, new editions, translations, and reviews (where applicable) are indicated. The numbering system is meant to serve as a guide to the contents of the bibliographic items This paper is a revised, translated, and updated version of: "J?rgen Habermas: een primaire bibliographie" in: Kennis en Methode (Amsterdam) 2, No. 2, 1978, by one of the authors. (R.G.) The Dutch coding convention for reprint dates has been retained: thus 19765 is to be read as: reprinted for the fifth time, in 1976. 2With the exception of one publication of which the details are not available: a review of A.Gehlen's Urmensch und Spatkultur (sometime in 1956).

Heathwood Press, 2014

In a previous piece on the Heathwood website, we argued that Frankfurt School critical theory falls into two distinct periods. 1 In the first, which runs from the 1920s until the 1970s, the School's writings remain challenging and forward-looking and inspirational. In the second, during which Habermas and (following Habermas) Honneth are the main figures, Frankfurt School theorising loses its critical and revolutionary edge. In the present contribution, we add detail to these generalisations.

Studies in Social and Political Thought, 2018

Kenneth Baynes' book on Habermas is another outstanding addition to the Routledge Philosophers series. Baynes is the author of the most important early study of Kant, Rawls and Habermas, and of several 'must read' articles on various aspects Habermas's work. He translated Habermas's 1986 Tanner Lectures, which were crucial to the development of his political and legal theory. He is the co-editor of a superb collection of essays in English on Between Facts and Norms. He is probably the foremost scholar of Habermas's moral and political theory. 1 The range of reference needed to contextualise and make sense of Habermas's work is broad and varied. Baynes has that range. He is as knowledgeable about Habermas's primary sources in German, about the vast secondary literature in both German and English, and about the areas of analytic philosophy that Habermas draws on, as he is scholarly and assured when writing about Heidegger and Hegel. Baynes's book is comprehensive in its coverage, ranging from Habermas's early critical theory to his recent work on post-secularism and cosmopolitanism. It is judicious in its selection of topics and clearly argued. The book is pitched at a somewhat higher level than some other volumes in the series. Several of its chapters read like articles. It is thus both an advanced introduction to Habermas's thought and a substantial scholarly work in its own right, which will be required reading for postgraduate students and professional scholars for the foreseeable future. Baynes is a charitable interpreter of Habermas. However, he is not entirely uncritical. For example, he calls out Habermas for his misreadings of Political Liberalism. And he is both critical and combative in his defense of Habermas from his opponents. In the main, however, Baynes offers a friendly reconstruction and defense of Habermas's theory. This is no doubt one reason why it succeeds as an introduction, so much better than, say, Uwe Steinhoff's peevishly uncharitable The Philosophy of Habermas. A Critical Introduction. Baynes, by contrast, has a good eye for what is of enduring significance in Habermas-his social, moral and political theory-and forbears unproductive lines of criticism.

European Journal of Social Theory, 1999

Criticism, 2004

2013

Introduction Chapter 1: The Theory of Communicative Action Chapter 2: An Outline of Habermas' Democratic Theory Chapter 3: Rationalization of the Life World Chapter 4: Colonization of the Life World Chapter 5: The Public Sphere as a Source of Legitimacy Chapter 6: The Reception of Habermas' Work Bibliography Index

Ancilla Iuris, 2014

Since the publication of Between Facts and Norms, it appears to have gone largely unremarked by critical theorists that Habermas has wholly abandoned the neo-Parsonian systems-theoretic account of social systems developed in his middle period. In this paper, I argue not only that Habermas has developed a new vocabulary and theoretical structure for dealing with social systems such as law, but also that this new approach to social systems is incompatible with the neo-Parsonianism of social systems developed in that arly work. This is not to say that Habermas' work in Between Facts and Norms should be set aside, but rather that the Parsonianism of The Theory of Communicative Action must be abandoned if Habermas' jurisprudential project is to go ahead.

Since the publication of Between Facts and Norms, it appears to have gone largely unremarked by critical theorists that Habermas has wholly abandoned the neo-Parsonian systems-theoretic account of social systems developed in his middle period. In this paper, I argue not only that Habermas has developed a new vocabulary and theoretical structure for dealing with social systems such as law, but also that this new approach to social systems is incompatible with the neo-Parsonianism of social systems developed in that early work. This is not to say that Habermas' work in Between Facts and Norms should be set aside, but rather that the Parsonianism of The Theory of Communicative Action must be abandoned if Habermas' jurisprudential project is to go ahead.

Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, 1985