Rectification Redux: Jürgen Habermas Meets Confucius New Mexico-Texas Philosophical Society 2014 Spring Conference University of Texas at El Paso Robert Ferrell & Joe Old El Paso Community College

Our impulse... Media lies and distortion lead to anything but democracy John Kyl's statement on Planned Parenthood on the floor of the US Senate is iconic for and emblematic of statements ranging from  Weapons of Mass Destruction  To Voter Suppression  To Deregulation and trickle-down economics “The statement was not intended as a factual statement.”

US Sen. John Kyl (R-AZ) said On the floor of the US Senate on April 8, 2011 That abortion is “over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does.” Called on this, his office issued this statement: “His remark was not intended to be a factual statement.” The facts are that about only 3 percent of Planned Parenthood's resources are devoted to abortion

The problem: Part 1 Kyl's statement represents instrumental reason (even when it's not based on reality) to achieve the strategic goal of eliminating Planned Parenthood This approach does not represent the beliefs of the majority of the community (the US population) Such reasoning is widely used in American politics today, e.g.,  Obstructionism directed at entire Obama agenda from inauguration day  Filibuster in the Senate and continued attempts to repeal Obamacare

The

This is not a new issue Confucius Solon Thomas More James Madison And now... Jürgen Habermas

The problem: Part 1 Kyl's statement represents instrumental reason (even when it's not based on reality) to achieve the strategic goal of eliminating Planned Parenthood This approach does not represent the beliefs of the majority of the community (the US population) Such reasoning is widely used in American politics today, e.g.,  Obstructionism directed at entire Obama agenda from inauguration day  Filibuster in the Senate and continued attempts to repeal Obamacare

Confucius: Rectification of Names Provincial Museum of Shandong, China

Jürgen Habermas

Lifeworld vs System Copy JO slide

Habermas on “instrumental reason” He is not opposed to instrumental reason where it is and has been most effective, e.g., in science and goal oriented projects However, he is committed to a clear separation of systems analysis (SYSTEM) and the more significant aspects of life as it's lived (LIFEWORLD) Instrumental reason has short-term interests at heart, subject/object/first-person grammatical structure, and strategic goal orientation

The ultimate problem: colonization Instrumental reason threatens the Lifeworld with domination, oppression, alienation, and totalizing objectification, displacing the goals of the entire community with limited such as profit, ending in something much like Social Darwinism, which is quite effective for the few.

The Problem: Part 2 Instrumental Reason sees nothing wrong with distortion (even lies) if it is strategically effective This more widespread and important than Kyl's “Noble Lie” The biggest problem (we believe) is corporate domination of the political system, partly via coopting politicians through campaign contributions (a la Citizens United) And manipulating the public through enormous spending on the media (much of it secretly) Congress, for example, often puts vested interests above community interests

Habermas's project Second generation Frankfurt School theorist Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno's Dialectic of the Enlightenment and extreme pessimism Postmodernism's limitation of rationality Positivism's ignorance of all but instrumental reason Enlightenment as an “unfinished project” Habermas would maintain communicative action against the onslaught of instrumental reason

“Ideal Speech Situation” Habermas's use of JL Austin's Speech Act Theory was widely misunderstood As idealist metaphysics But it was describing a goal for a process of discourse Universally seen as major opponent of Derrida's thinking, but ended as “friends” exemplifying democratic discourse on the issue of world politics Habermas's Discourse Principle is radically democratic

“Ideal” discourse Habermas change the term to “idealization” Instead of a revolutionary and static “ideal” situation, Habermas was referring to a on-going, “dialogic” learning process always open to revision

Communicative Action Theory For Habermas rationality is inherent in the very attempt at communication  Involves the very expectation of understanding  Without which there would be no point in even trying CA Theory is directed at norm development through consensus, which instrumental reason is not prepared to deal with He gets there through “universal pragmatics”  The conditions necessary for communication to take place  People with different goals are able to create norms

Habermas's Discourse Principle Openness and full inclusion of everybody affected Symmetrical distribution of communication rights The absence of force in which the “forceless force of the better argument” is decisive The sincerity of the utterances of all participants is assumed The outcome of such a rational discourse is a rational consensus to which all possibly affected persons could assent as participants

Our proposal, following Madison... Create in the democratic wing of the Democratic Party a “faction” that would follow Habermasian principles  And engender Discourse Ethics  Attracting a political following that can influence American political discourse While even Habermas felt an element of pessimism over the role of politics in Lifeworld discourse, his original impulse was to overcome the pessimism of his Frankfurt School predecessors

For Enlightenment and Democracy It's our only hope!