|
The Foucault–Habermas debate is a dispute concerning whether Michel Foucault's ideas of "power analytics" and "genealogy" or Jürgen Habermas's ideas of "communicative rationality" and "discourse ethics" provide a better critique of the nature of ''power'' within society. The debate compares and evaluates the central ideas of Habermas and Foucault as they pertain to questions of power, reason, ethics, modernity, democracy, civil society, and social action. The debate was a dialogue between texts and followers; Foucault and Habermas did not actually debate in person, though they were considering a formal one in the U.S. before Foucault's death in 1984. Habermas' essay, ''Taking Aim at the Heart of the Present'' (1984) was altered before release in order to account for Foucault's inability to reply. Nancy Fraser's contentious, but oft-quoted, claim that Foucault's work is a mixture of "empirical insights and normative confusions" exemplifies the most common strategy of critique by those favouring Habermas. It attempts to demonstrate the incoherence of Foucault's practice of critical reflection while at the same time appropriating those aspects considered valuable. Demonstrating this incoherence is necessary from the Habermas position since he sought to establish ''the'' form of critical reflection, whereas Foucault sought to establish only ''a'' form of critical reflection.〔Samantha Ashenden and David Owen. 'Introduction: Foucault, Habermas and the Politics of Critique' in Ashenden, S. and Owen, D. (eds) ''Foucault contra Habermas: Recasting the Dialogue between Genealogy and Critical Theory''. Sage Publications. London, 1999.〕 In response, many of Foucault's advocates argue the Habermasian critique presupposes what it seeks to show and that the critique is based on a misunderstanding of Foucault's work. In 1999, Ashenden and Owen published an edited volume of papers entitled ''Foucault contra Habermas: Recasting the dialogue between genealogy and critical theory'' in an attempt to re-engage the debate and shift the dialogue to new ground. Specifically, they aimed to 1) illuminate the stakes of the encounter between the different practices of critical reflection, 2) evaluate some major criticisms of genealogy made in the course of the debate, and 3) offer a critical response to Habermas' position from the perspective of Foucault's practice in relation to contemporary political-philosophical and political issues.〔 ==See also== ;Books *''Rationality and Power'' ;Topics * Power (social and political) * Rationality 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Foucault–Habermas debate」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|