The article describes Habermas on the “rationalization” concept at the core of modern thinking on critical reflection, Habermas pointed out that the distinction between the ideals and norms of modernity and its unreasonable forms of capitalism that Rationalization of the crisis does not mean there is a modern rationality and its own crisis, and that, regardless of Habermas in the face of modern dialectical attitude, or his modern theory of the research agenda itself is of great realistic significance. But I did not think Habermas will be able to replace Marx’s critical theory of capitalism.
First, Philosophy and Modernity
R J Bernstein has been keen to point out:”We can perhaps understand Habermas’s entire program of reason and his basic position as a new one.” In Dialectics of Enlightenment ” an injustice to the Enlightenment tradition. The dark side is used to explain the reasons for it, and to deliver freedom, justice and well being of hope for those still stubbornly opposed to reason. The program of modernity is neither cruel illusions, nor is it ] become one of violence and terror naive Ideology, but still a guide for our conduct and provides direction and gives practical tasks to be achieved. ” This understanding is of the modern theory of Habermas and the thrust of the significance is of great significance.
Germany’s modern tradition of philosophy runs through a modern sense of problems starting with Hegel’s criticism of civil society, Marx’s alienation of labor and commodity fetishism theory, the rationalization of Weber’s theory of luck, Lukacs’s theory as materialized, as well as Huo Kehai Farmer and Adorno’s Critique of Rational tools, which are the core issues in a rational modernity in the fate of the diagnosis.
Habermas is in this tradition is its own study to determine the direction and the issues of life and philosophy. As he said himself: “I read Adorno and it gave me the courage to grasp the system and Lukacs, and Korsch’s history of the state as a sense of the rationalization of Weber’s theory materialized. It was also during that time, I am concerned about that the problem has become a modern issue, that is rational in the form of distorted history in order to achieve a modern pathology, ” as the rationalization of the modern theory he uses to explain the concept itself is not only rational terms but also its modern culture and social system.
However, it seems Habermas, Marx, Weber, Lukacs, Adorno and Horkheimer and others have made research and conclusions of the existence of the problem. Their departure from the traditional sense of philosophy of reason and rationalization of research, can not fully grasp the connotation of the concept of rationality, “Dialectics of Enlightenment” came to the conclusion that rational pessimism has made it clear that critical theory is in crisis. Habermas hopes to go beyond the theoretical paradigm of the transition difficulties. He said: ” the theory of paradigm shift is in fact to turn around from the termination of the critical tools for rational place to start; this allows us to see why a critical social theory failed to complete the mission which others have taken up.”
Habermas’s theory of modernity has obvious advantages. He not only tried to reveal the full rationality of the concept of content and structure, they are also trying to grasp in modern society and the history of the object in the form of not only the norms of reasonable standard, but for the provision of universal criticism of modern values and norms and also through the experience of modern society, historical research, identification and diagnosis of modern society in a rational distortion, deformation, alienation and self-destruction of the causes and consequences.
Jane Braaten, Habermas’s Critical Theory of Society, State University of New York Press, 1991.
J.G. Finlayson, Habermas: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2004.
Raymond Geuss, The Idea of a Critical Theory, Cambridge University Press, 1981.
Thomas McCarthy, The Critical Theory of Jürgen Habermas, MIT Press, 1978.