Habermas and Communication Theory

Communication is a central concept in the philosophy of the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas.

This term is also about misunderstandings because it is often associated with the ordinary meaning. However, the concept of communication is the opposite of the same concept used in science communication. It is not in this case a strategic activity to present a project or aspects of reality in one hand, by optimizing the admissibility of those who are the object and on the other hand, to minimize or even hide the disadvantages or consequences, or Habermas, communication is contrary to the basic activity in which two or more subjects are able to spontaneously get agreement on a draft joint action or a shared reality in the public sphere.

Habermasian definition of communication:

We can therefore define communication as strictly what happens between two or more talking seriously about something that exists or should exist in the world, but no one disputes the validity of the statements or suggestions made by and each other. Communication therefore uses a medium in and through which it occurs: the language.

In this sense, communication is commonplace and everyday, but it is also vital and is, indeed, a necessary condition for the symbolic reproduction of the world, sharing information, learning process, etc.. We can therefore say that structure the world of everyday life.

Communication and discussion:

It should be confused with communication and discussion, even if the contact points between the pragmatic of Apel and the philosophical Habermas partly explain this assimilation.

The discussion in the German thinker, is not communication in the strict sense, however, it is communicative in the sense that communication and understanding are its purpose, it should be noted, however, that the communication is interrupted by the disagreement the conflict or dispute. There is no solution of continuity between communication and discussion in the strict sense, because the argumentative discourse that unfolds in the discussion is latent in communication, it is present as a regulator underlying, but we do not use it itself.

Thus, the validity claims are issued in the communication in the strict sense.

You may also like...