Discourse in the architectonics of language pragmatics
Keywords:
communication, deliberative democracy, discourse, institutions, legitimation, principle of morality, norms, pragmaticAbstract
The article deals with studying public discourse as an integrative factor and important element in the evolution of institutions of deliberative democracy (also known as “consultative democracy”, “discussion democracy”, “discourse democracy”) in today’s society. The author presents both wide interpretation of the concept of “discourse” as speech practices, and a more narrow understanding of the discourse as communication, in which problematic claims for meaning and relevance become subject of discussion. Discourse is analyzed as socially reflective form of clarification of problematic senses of society. It is argued in the article that only those political practices, norms and institutions are legitimate that have been based upon the discourse principle. Social content of the discourse reveals itself in the institutionalization of the public discourse, which becomes a regulative principle and social meta-institution of critical check of consensus, reached through arguments, in different fields of society. As a regulative idea, the discourse presupposes an equal participation of all people (including the next generations) in the process of justification of social, legal and moral norms. It also presupposes an unhindered (without coercion) agreement about the legitimacy of these norms. Therefore, the discourse principle is a moral principle. The author also discloses a contradictory nature of development of discoursive practices and public sphere in Ukraine. He shows that in this country communicative action aimed to achieve mutual understanding is often substituted with a strategic action aimed to attain particularistic goals that creates a non-transparent quasi-reality of false communication, hidden perlocutives and simulative democracy. At the same time, the article shows that in today’s Ukrainian society, especially after the Revolution of Dignity, despite distortions and deformations, genuine public sphere develops itself, and discoursive and argumentative practices find their ways in the social development.
References
Apel, K.-O. (1986). Kann der postkantische Standpunkt der Moralität noch einmal in substantielle Sittlichkeit «aufgehoben» werden. Im: Kuhlmann W. (Hrsg.). Moralität und Sittlich keit. Frankfurt a.M., Suhrkamp.
Apel, K.-O. (1998). Praktische Philosophie als Diskurs-und Verantwortungsethik (Zweiter Vortrag). Im: Apel, K.-O., Hösle, V., Simon-Schaefer, R. Globalisierung. Herausforderung für die Philosophie. Bamberg, Universitäts-Verlag.
Apel, K.-O., Hösle V., Simon-Schaffer R. (1998). Die Tatsache der «Globalisierung» und die Aufgabe der Philosophie (Podiumsdiskussion). Im: Apel K.-O., Hösle V., Simon-Schaffer R. Globalisierung. Herausforderung für die Philosophie. Bamberg, Universitäts-Verlag.
Blüdorn, I. (2006). Billig will ich. Post-demokratische Wende und simulative Demokratie. Fors chungsjournal Neue Soziale Bewegungen, 4. https://doi.org/10.1515/fjsb-2006-0409.
Böhler, D. (Hrsg.). (1986). Die pragmatische Wende: norweg. Beitr. zur Pragmatik-Debate. Frankfurt a.M., Suhrkamp.
Böhler, D. (1984). Diskurs und Verstehen. Im: Apel, K.O., Böhler, D. (Hrsg.). Funkkolleg Praktische Philosophie / Ethik. Studientexte III. Frankfurt a.M., Fischer.
Böhler, D. (1994). In dubio contra projectum. Mensch und Natur im Spannungsfeld von Verstehen, Konstruieren, Verantworten. Im: Ethik für die Zukunft. Im Diskurs mit Hans Jonas. München, Beck.
Böhler, D. (2008). Mitverantwortung für die Menschheitszukunft. Die Aktualität vom Hans Jonas. Im: Sapper M., Weichsel, V. (Hrsg). Grünbuch. Politische Ökologie im Osten Europas.
Berlin, Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag.
Böhler, D. (2002). Moral und Sachzwang. Im: Ethik im Management. Zürich, Orel Füssli Ferlag.
Böhler, D. (2014). Responsibility for the future from the global prospect. Translated from German, afterword, notes by A. Yermolenko [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Stilos.
Böhler, D. (2007). The idea and obligation of responsibility for the future, Hans Jonas and dialogue
ethics: the epoch spirit prospects. Translated from German by O. Vedrov, O. Shablii, Edited by A. Yermolenko. In: Filosofska dumka, 2.
Böhler, D. (2013). Verbindlichkeit aus dem Diskurs. Denken und Handeln nach der sprachpragmatischen Wende. München, Verlag Karl Alber.
Böhler, D. (2014). Verbindlichkeit aus dem Diskurs. Denken und Handeln nach der Wende zur kommunikativen Ethik — Orientierung in der ökologischen Dauerkrise. München, Verlag Karl Alber.
Böhler, D., Gronke, H. (1994). Diskurs. Im: Historisches Wörterbuch für Rhetorik. Bd. 2. Tü bingen:
Max Nimeyer Verlag.
Burckhart, H., Gronke, H. (2002). Die Berliner Diskurspragmatik in der Diskussion. Im: Burckhart, H. (Hrsg.), Gronke, H. Philosophieren aus dem Diskurs. Beiträge zur Dis kurs prag matik. Würzburg, Königshausen & Neumann.
Filosofia transcendentalpragmatica — Transzendentalpragmatische Philosophie — Scritti in onore Karl-Otto Apel per il suo 85° compleanno. A cura di Michele Borrelli e Matthias Kettner (2007). Cosenza, Pellegrini Editore.
Gronke, G. (2006). Socratic dialogue. Discoursive ethics as social ethics of responsibility and its dialogic practice (Translation from German by Kebuladze, V.) [In Ukrainian]. In: Values of civil society and moral choice: Ukrainian experience. Kyiv, Etna-1.
Habermas, J. (1999). Actions, speech acts, speech interactions and life world. In: Yermolenko, A.M. Communicative practical philosophy [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Libra.
Habermas, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Bd.1, 2. Frankfurt a.M., Suhrkamp.
Habermas, J. (1984). Über Moralität und Sittlichkeit — Was macht eine Lebensform «rational»? Im: Schnädelbach, H. (Hrsg.). Rationalität. Frankfurt a.M., Suhrkamp, S.219.
Habermas, J. (1983). Wahrheitstheorien. Im: Fahrenbach H. (Hrsg.). Wirklichkeit und Reflexion. Pfüllingen, Neske.
Habermas, J. (2003). Zur Architektonik der Diskursdifferenzierung. Im: Böhler, D. (Hrsg.), Kettner, M. (Hrsg.), Skirbek, G. (Hrsg.). Reflexion und Verantwortung. Auseinandersetzung mit K.-O. Apel. Frankfurt a.M., Suhrkamp.
Hostle, B. (2003). Practical philosophy in the present world. (Translation from German, afterword, and comment. by A. Yermolenko) [In Ukranian]. Kyiv, Libra.
Jonas, G. (2001). Principle of responsibility. In search of ethics for technologic civilization (Translation from German by A. Yermolenko, V. Yermolenko) [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Libra.
Jünger, E. (1963). Heliopolis. Im: Jünger E. Werke im 10 Bd. Bd. 10. Stuttgart.
Kuhlmann, W. (2009). Unhintergehbarkeit. Studien zur Transzendentalpragmatik. Wirzburg, Koenigahausen & Neumann.
Kurreck, J. (2002). Die Pflicht zu wissen und das Recht auf Unwissen. Im: Burckhart, H. (Hrsg.), Gronke, H. (Hrsg.) Philosophieren aus dem Diskurs. Beiträge zur Diskurspragmatik. Würzburg, Königshausen & Neumann.
Lisovyi, V.S. (1971). Logic-philosophic study of everyday language, abstract of Cand. Sc. (philosophy)
thesis [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Institute of Philosophy, NAS of Ukraine.
Lisovyi, V.S. (2014). Reminiscences. Poetries [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Smoloskyp.
Loy, A.N. (2014). Pathogenesis of social integrations in the post-Soviet society [In Russin]. In: Politicheskaya mysl, 3.
Luhmann, N. (1980). Gesellschaftsstruktur und Semantik: Studien zur Wissenssoziologie der modernen Gesellschaft. Bd.1, 2. Frankfurt a.M., Suhrkamp.
Lukyanets, V.S. (2002). Discourse. Philosophic encyclopedic dictionary [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, H.S. Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy, NAS of Ukraine.
Malakhov, V.A. (2006). Communication ethics [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Lybid.
Popovich, M.V. (1971). Logic and scientific knowledge [In Russian]. Kyiv, Naukova dumka.
Popovich, M.V. (2003). Notion of discourse in metaphoric and logic-linguistic sense [In Ukrainian]. In: Filosofska dumka, 1
Popovich, M.V. (1975). Philosophic problems of semantics [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Naukova dumka.
Ritter, J. (Hrsg.), Gründer, K. (Hrsg.) (1984). Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie. Bd. 6. Basel, Stuttgart, Schwabe.
Schelsky, H. (1975). Die Arbeit tun die anderen. Klassenkampf und Pristerherrschaft der In tellektuallen. Opladen, Westdeutsch Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-96986-6.
Schelsky, H. (1983). Politik und Publizität. Stuttgart, Degerloch.
Sitnichenko, L.A. (1996). Origins of communicative philosophy [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Lybid.
Skirbek, G. (2007). Religion und Moderne. Die Modernisierung des Bewusstseins und die Notwendigkeit der Religionskritik. Im: Filosofia transcendentalpragmatica. Trans zen den tal pragmatische Philosophie. Skritti in onore di Karl-Otto Apel per il suo 85% compleanno. Cosenza, Pellegrini Editore.
Tur, M.G. (2006). Nonclassical models of legitimation of social institutes [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Pa ra pan.
Vasyliev, S.A. (1974). Philosophic analysis of hypothesis of linguistic relativity [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Naukova dumka.
Vedrov, O.I. (2014). Sciences about the society and social progress: Ethical and epistemiological principles of social sciences from the viewpoint of communication philosophy. Kyiv, Stilos.
Vysotska, O.E. (2009). Communication as the basis of social transformations (in the context of formation of post-modern society) [In Russian]. Dnepropetrovsk, Innovatsia.
Werner, M.H. (2003). Diskursethik als Maximenethik. Von der Prinzipienbegründung zur Handlung sorientierung. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
Yermolenko, A.M. (1999). Communicative practice and philosophy. Manual. [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Libra.
Yermolenko, A.M. (1996). Discourse of ethical norms and values in the present German philosophy, abstract of Dr. Sc. (philosophy) thesis [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv, Institute of Philosophy, NAS of Ukraine.
Downloads
-
PDF (Українська)
Downloads: 378
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).