Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociais (Porto Alegre. Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/index.php/civitas/article/view/27866 |
Resumo: | Jürgen Habermas seminally criticized Alfred Schutz. This paper traces the disagreement back to a different role of idealization. Schutz’s social theory is based on “types” as idealizations with an inherent dynamics, while Habermas’s social theory is based on ideally stable “rules”. First, a rule model of linguistic communication is assessed against analyses from linguistics and the philosophy and sociology of language. A rule model, it is found, fails to meet its theoretical goal of explaining linguistic communication. Hypothetical rules of language would not explain our intuitive understanding of the minimal propositional contents expressed by utterances. The rules would be both insufficient and unreliable in every single instance of language use. Against this background, the relation between language and “lifeworld” is then re-evaluated. A lifeworld cannot build on a rule model of language as its foundation. Nor can it supplement such a model in order to save it. Unlike a rule model, Schutz’s claim that language and lifeworld are interconnected and structured by “types” that can accommodate the flexibility and precision of linguistic communication. While further research is needed, this conclusion indicates that phenomenology has been unduly neglected in social philosophy and should receive as much attention as it has in sociology. |
id |
PUC_RS-17_134702bc32efda629624e9e453636a20 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br:article/27866 |
network_acronym_str |
PUC_RS-17 |
network_name_str |
Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociais (Porto Alegre. Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealizationLanguage and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealizationLanguage and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealizationTheories of communication. Typification. Linguistic rules. Phenomenology of the lfe-world. John Searle.Teorias da comunicação. Tipificação. Regras linguísticas. Fenomenologia do mundo-da-vida. John Searle.Jürgen Habermas seminally criticized Alfred Schutz. This paper traces the disagreement back to a different role of idealization. Schutz’s social theory is based on “types” as idealizations with an inherent dynamics, while Habermas’s social theory is based on ideally stable “rules”. First, a rule model of linguistic communication is assessed against analyses from linguistics and the philosophy and sociology of language. A rule model, it is found, fails to meet its theoretical goal of explaining linguistic communication. Hypothetical rules of language would not explain our intuitive understanding of the minimal propositional contents expressed by utterances. The rules would be both insufficient and unreliable in every single instance of language use. Against this background, the relation between language and “lifeworld” is then re-evaluated. A lifeworld cannot build on a rule model of language as its foundation. Nor can it supplement such a model in order to save it. Unlike a rule model, Schutz’s claim that language and lifeworld are interconnected and structured by “types” that can accommodate the flexibility and precision of linguistic communication. While further research is needed, this conclusion indicates that phenomenology has been unduly neglected in social philosophy and should receive as much attention as it has in sociology.Jürgen Habermas seminally criticized Alfred Schutz. This paper traces the disagreement back to a different role of idealization. Schutz’s social theory is based on “types” as idealizations with an inherent dynamics, while Habermas’s social theory is based on ideally stable “rules”. First, a rule model of linguistic communication is assessed against analyses from linguistics and the philosophy and sociology of language. A rule model, it is found, fails to meet its theoretical goal of explaining linguistic communication. Hypothetical rules of language would not explain our intuitive understanding of the minimal propositional contents expressed by utterances. The rules would be both insufficient and unreliable in every single instance of language use. Against this background, the relation between language and “lifeworld” is then re-evaluated. A lifeworld cannot build on a rule model of language as its foundation. Nor can it supplement such a model in order to save it. Unlike a rule model, Schutz’s claim that language and lifeworld are interconnected and structured by “types” that can accommodate the flexibility and precision of linguistic communication. While further research is needed, this conclusion indicates that phenomenology has been unduly neglected in social philosophy and should receive as much attention as it has in sociology.***Linguagem e mundo-da-vida: Schutz e Habermas sobre idealização***Jürgen Habermas criticou Alfred Schutz de maneira seminal. Este artigo traça tal divergência até a diferença na conceitualização de idealização. A teoria social de Schutz é baseada em “tipos” enquanto idealizações com uma dinâmica inerente, enquanto a teoria social de Habermas é baseada em “regras” idealmente estáveis. Primeiramente, um modelo de regra de comunicação linguística é avaliado de acordo com análises da linguística, da filosofia e da sociologia da linguagem. É constatado que um modelo falha em alcançar seu objetivo teórico de explicar a comunicação linguística. Regras de linguagem hipotéticas, portanto, não explicariam nossa compreensão intuitiva de conteúdos proposicionais mínimos expressos em enunciados. As regras seriam tanto insuficientes quanto incertas em todas as instâncias do uso da linguagem. Neste contexto, a relação entre linguagem e “mundo-da-vida” é reavaliada. Um mundo-da-vida não pode ser constituído sobre um modelo de linguagem, nem mesmo suplementar tal modelo a fim de preservá-lo. Diferentemente de um modelo, Schutz reivindica que linguagem e mundo-da-vida estão interconectados e estruturados em “tipos” que podem acomodar a flexibilidade e a precisão da comunicação linguística. Embora seja necessário o aprofundamento da pesquisa, as conclusões apontam que a fenomenologia tem sido indevidamente negligenciada pela filosofia social, e deveria receber maior atenção, assim como tem recebido na sociologia.Editora da Pucrs - ediPUCRS2017-12-15info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/index.php/civitas/article/view/2786610.15448/1984-7289.2017.3.27866Civitas: journal of Social Sciences; Vol. 17 No. 3 (2017): Sociology and Phenomenology; 411-434Civitas: revista de Ciências Sociais; Vol. 17 Núm. 3 (2017): Sociologia e Fenomenologia; 411-434Civitas: revista de Ciências Sociais; v. 17 n. 3 (2017): Sociologia e Fenomenologia; 411-4341984-72891519-608910.15448/1984-7289.2017.3reponame:Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociais (Porto Alegre. Online)instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS)instacron:PUC_RSenghttps://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/index.php/civitas/article/view/27866/16275Copyright (c) 2017 Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociaishttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessStrassheim, Jan2019-02-28T15:06:06Zoai:ojs.revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br:article/27866Revistahttps://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/index.php/civitas/oaiPRIhttp://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/ojs/index.php/civitas/oaicivitas@pucrs.br1984-72891519-6089opendoar:2019-02-28T15:06:06Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociais (Porto Alegre. Online) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization |
title |
Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization |
spellingShingle |
Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization Strassheim, Jan Theories of communication. Typification. Linguistic rules. Phenomenology of the lfe-world. John Searle. Teorias da comunicação. Tipificação. Regras linguísticas. Fenomenologia do mundo-da-vida. John Searle. |
title_short |
Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization |
title_full |
Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization |
title_fullStr |
Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization |
title_full_unstemmed |
Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization |
title_sort |
Language and lifeworld: Schutz and Habermas on idealization |
author |
Strassheim, Jan |
author_facet |
Strassheim, Jan |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Strassheim, Jan |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Theories of communication. Typification. Linguistic rules. Phenomenology of the lfe-world. John Searle. Teorias da comunicação. Tipificação. Regras linguísticas. Fenomenologia do mundo-da-vida. John Searle. |
topic |
Theories of communication. Typification. Linguistic rules. Phenomenology of the lfe-world. John Searle. Teorias da comunicação. Tipificação. Regras linguísticas. Fenomenologia do mundo-da-vida. John Searle. |
description |
Jürgen Habermas seminally criticized Alfred Schutz. This paper traces the disagreement back to a different role of idealization. Schutz’s social theory is based on “types” as idealizations with an inherent dynamics, while Habermas’s social theory is based on ideally stable “rules”. First, a rule model of linguistic communication is assessed against analyses from linguistics and the philosophy and sociology of language. A rule model, it is found, fails to meet its theoretical goal of explaining linguistic communication. Hypothetical rules of language would not explain our intuitive understanding of the minimal propositional contents expressed by utterances. The rules would be both insufficient and unreliable in every single instance of language use. Against this background, the relation between language and “lifeworld” is then re-evaluated. A lifeworld cannot build on a rule model of language as its foundation. Nor can it supplement such a model in order to save it. Unlike a rule model, Schutz’s claim that language and lifeworld are interconnected and structured by “types” that can accommodate the flexibility and precision of linguistic communication. While further research is needed, this conclusion indicates that phenomenology has been unduly neglected in social philosophy and should receive as much attention as it has in sociology. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-12-15 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/index.php/civitas/article/view/27866 10.15448/1984-7289.2017.3.27866 |
url |
https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/index.php/civitas/article/view/27866 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.15448/1984-7289.2017.3.27866 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/index.php/civitas/article/view/27866/16275 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociais https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociais https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Editora da Pucrs - ediPUCRS |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Editora da Pucrs - ediPUCRS |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Civitas: journal of Social Sciences; Vol. 17 No. 3 (2017): Sociology and Phenomenology; 411-434 Civitas: revista de Ciências Sociais; Vol. 17 Núm. 3 (2017): Sociologia e Fenomenologia; 411-434 Civitas: revista de Ciências Sociais; v. 17 n. 3 (2017): Sociologia e Fenomenologia; 411-434 1984-7289 1519-6089 10.15448/1984-7289.2017.3 reponame:Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociais (Porto Alegre. Online) instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS) instacron:PUC_RS |
instname_str |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS) |
instacron_str |
PUC_RS |
institution |
PUC_RS |
reponame_str |
Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociais (Porto Alegre. Online) |
collection |
Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociais (Porto Alegre. Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Civitas - Revista de Ciências Sociais (Porto Alegre. Online) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
civitas@pucrs.br |
_version_ |
1799128807003652096 |