Interiorization of intersubjectivity in the “I”-concept and co-responsibility in transcendental pragmatics
Modern philosophy of mind: prospects for development
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15407/fd2020.06.006Keywords:
discourse, responsibility, communicative competence, internalization, “I”-conceptAbstract
The article discusses the concepts of communicative practical philosophy as a component of hermeneutic-linguistic-pragmatic-semiotic turn in philosophy, associated with the transition from the paradigm of subjectivity to the paradigm of intersubjectivity. In particular, the concept of “I” is considered as a factor in the internalization of intersubjectivity, because it is from the very beginning woven into the context of speech practice with the pronoun “I”, which is marked by the reflective “I am I”. The transcendental “I” is the internalization of the transcendental communicative community; the classic concept of “adulthood”, associated with “the courage to be guided by one’s own mind”, is an internal manifestation of communicative competence, which in an internalized form is part of the structure of identity. The mind appears in such de- finitions as “discourse”, “argumentation”, “consensus”. In turn, discourse differs from other speech practices, such as conversation, talk, debate, dialogue, which also have their own inter- nalizations, forming a complex identity structure. The article deals with the internal “mainte- nance of discourse” both in the process of substantiation of human knowledge and in the process of justification (legitimation) of the correctness of moral duty. In particular, this is manifested in the formulation of the categorical imperative of moral practice, which is considered in the light of the transition from the monologue dimension to the transcendental-pragmatic one. The arti- cle also shows the need to move from a monologue concept of responsibility to a communicative concept of shared responsibility. It is emphasized that such a transition is an urgent need of mo- dern times, a sign of which is the desire to overcome the crisis civilization of “risks and threats” and the formation of a civilization of dialogue based on the argumentative understanding, for which the guiding idea is the “transcendental consensus”.
References
REFERENCES
Boehler, D. (2014). Responsibility for the future from a global perspective. The relevance of Hans Jonas’s philosophy and ethics of discourse / Tr. by A. Yermolenko. [In Ukrainian]. Кyiv: Stylos.
Yermolenko, A. (2010). Social ethics and ecology. Human dignity — respect for nature. [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Libra.
Apel, D. (2019). Wahrhaftigkeit als Selbstverantwortung zur Mitverantwortung. Eine transzenden-talpragmatische Untersuchung. Ethik+Diskurs, 4 (1 y 2), SS. 7–23.
Apel, K.-O. (1984). Sprechakttheorie und transzendentale Sprachpragmatik. Zur Frage ethischer Normen. In: K.-O. Apel (Hrsg.), Sprachpragmatik und Philosophie (SS.10–174). Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Apel, K.-O. (1987). Fallibilismus, Konsenstheorie der Wahrheit und Letztbegründung. In: W. von Kuhlmann (Hrsg.), Forum für Philosophie Bad Homburg — Philosophie und Begründung (SS. 116–211). Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Apel, K.-O. (1990). Nichtmetaphysische Letztbegr ndung? In: Nachmetaphysische Philosophie (SS. 27–49). Köln: Karl-Reiner-Akademie.
Apel, K.-O. (1998). Transzendentale Semiotik und die Paradigmen der ersten Philosophie (Erster Vortrag). In: K.-O. Apel, V. Hösle, R. Simon-Schaefer, Globalisierung. Herausforderung für die Philosophie (SS. 21–47). Bamberg: Universitäts-Verlag.
Böhler, D. (1984). Diskurs und Verstehen. In: K.-O. Apel, D. B hler (Hrsg.), Funkkolleg Praktische Philosophie / Ethik. Studientexte III (S.985–996). Frankfurt a.M.: Fischer.
Böhler, D. (1985). Rekonstruktive Pragmatik. Von der Bewußtseinsphilosophie zur Kommunika- tionreflexion: Neubegründung der praktischen Wissenschaften und Philosophie. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Böhler, D., Gronke, H. (1994). Diskurs. In: Historisches Wörterbuch für Rhetorik (Bd. 2, SS. 764– 819). Tübingen: Max Nimeyer Verlag.
Böhler, D (2008). Mitverantwortung für die Menschheitszukunft. Die Aktualität vom Hans Jonas. In: M. Sapper, V. Weichsel (Hrsg.).Grünbuch. Politische Ökologie im Osten Europas (SS. 20– 35). Berlin: Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag.
Böhler, D. (2013). Verbindlichkeit aus dem Diskurs. Denken und Handeln nach der sprachpragmatischen Wende. München: Verlag Karl Alber.
Habermas, J. (1971). Vorbereitende Bemerkungen zu einer Theorie der kommunikativen Kompetenz. In: J. Habermas, N. Luhmann, Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie? (SS. 101– 141). Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Habermas. J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. B.2. Zur Kritik der funktionalistischen Vernunft. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Habermas, J. (1984). Wahrheitstheorien. In: J. Habermas, Vorstudien und Ergänzungen zur Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (SS. 127–183). Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Habermas, J. (1988). Nachmetaphysisches Denken. Philosophische Aufsätze. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Habermas, J. (2003). Zur Architektonik der Diskursdifferenzierung. In: D. Böhler, M. Kettner, G. Skirbek (Hrsg.), Reflexion und Verantwortung. Auseinandersetzung mit K.-O. Apel (SS. 44–64). Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Kant, I. (1977). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. In: Immanuel Kant: Werke in zwölf Bänden. B.7. Herausgegeben von Wilhelm Weischedel (SS. 11–112). Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Ritter, J. (Hrsg.) (1984). Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie. B.6. Basel: Schwabe. Tugendhat, E., Wolf, U (1988). Logisch-semantische Propedeutik. Stuttgart: Reclam.
Downloads
-
PDF (Українська)
Downloads: 234
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).
