Peirce’s Semiotics and its Relation with Habermas’s Discourse Ethics

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Zanette, José Luiz
Data de Publicação: 2013
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Cognitio (São Paulo. Online)
Texto Completo: https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/14587
Resumo: The purpose of this paper is to compare Peirce’s Semiotics with Habermas’ updated Discourse Ethics thus reworking his formal pragmatics related to the philosophical questions of truth, justification, correctness and moral legitimacy; he adopts Peirce’s Fallibilism for his concept of truth in accordance with Peirce’s philosophy and indicates, for issues that require moral correctness, an epistemic realism without representation, which arranges itself with a moral constructivism, able to claim a pretension of unconditionality for moral legitimacy under the assumption of an independent world which is more or less the same to everyone. He maintains, in his formal pragmatics, an “almost” ideal condition to speech, which keeps the tension between the empirical and the ideal. As opposed to Peirce, Habermas refutes the Peircean concept of final opinion of inquirers to ensure the fallible propositions taken as true, because he considers this request a priori, directive and transcendental, not applicable to the consensus of those involved in moral phenomena. It is concluded, however, that the solution of integrating all these philosophical questions given by Habermas, especially for the tension of ideality within his pragmatic bias, embodies substantial elements from Peirce’s philosophy that allows to assert that in updating his moral philosophy, there is an extension and elaboration of what existed in suggestions and roots in Peirce’s classical pragmatism.
id PUC_SP-15_f2b231a08f308d0a8ea892700eff6722
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/14587
network_acronym_str PUC_SP-15
network_name_str Cognitio (São Paulo. Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Peirce’s Semiotics and its Relation with Habermas’s Discourse EthicsA Semiótica de Peirce e a sua Relação com a Ética do Discurso de HabermasHabermasPeirceFalibilismoÉticaPragmatismoHabermasPeirceFallibilismEthicsPragmatismThe purpose of this paper is to compare Peirce’s Semiotics with Habermas’ updated Discourse Ethics thus reworking his formal pragmatics related to the philosophical questions of truth, justification, correctness and moral legitimacy; he adopts Peirce’s Fallibilism for his concept of truth in accordance with Peirce’s philosophy and indicates, for issues that require moral correctness, an epistemic realism without representation, which arranges itself with a moral constructivism, able to claim a pretension of unconditionality for moral legitimacy under the assumption of an independent world which is more or less the same to everyone. He maintains, in his formal pragmatics, an “almost” ideal condition to speech, which keeps the tension between the empirical and the ideal. As opposed to Peirce, Habermas refutes the Peircean concept of final opinion of inquirers to ensure the fallible propositions taken as true, because he considers this request a priori, directive and transcendental, not applicable to the consensus of those involved in moral phenomena. It is concluded, however, that the solution of integrating all these philosophical questions given by Habermas, especially for the tension of ideality within his pragmatic bias, embodies substantial elements from Peirce’s philosophy that allows to assert that in updating his moral philosophy, there is an extension and elaboration of what existed in suggestions and roots in Peirce’s classical pragmatism.O objetivo deste artigo é comparar a semiótica de Peirce com a Ética do Discurso de Habermas atualizada. Este reelabora a sua pragmática formal em relação às questões filosóficas sobre verdade, justificação, correção e legitimidade moral; adota o falibilismo para o conceito de verdade em conformidade com a filosofia de Peirce e indica, para as questões requerentes de correção moral, um realismo epistêmico sem representação que se concilie com um construtivismo moral, capaz de reivindicar pretensão de incondicionalidade para a legitimação moral na suposição de um mundo independente e mais ou menos igual para todos. Ele conserva na pragmática formal uma condição “quase” ideal de fala, o que mantém a tensão entre ideal e empírico. Em oposição a Peirce, Habermas refuta o conceito peirciano da opinião final dos investigadores para assegurar as falíveis proposições tidas como verdadeiras, pois considera essa requisição a priori, diretiva e transcendental, não aplicável ao consenso dos envolvidos nos fenômenos morais. Conclui-se, no entanto, que a solução de integração de todas essas questões filosóficas dadas por Habermas, principalmente para a tensão da idealidade dentro de seu viés pragmático, incorpora substanciais elementos da filosofia de Peirce e permite afirmar que, na atualização de sua filosofia moral, há uma extensão e elaboração do que havia de sugestões e raízes no pragmatismo clássico de Peirce.Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo2013-04-03info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/14587Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; Vol. 13 No. 2 (2012); 339-353Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; v. 13 n. 2 (2012); 339-3532316-52781518-7187reponame:Cognitio (São Paulo. Online)instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)instacron:PUC_SPporhttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/14587/10618Copyright (c) 2013 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessZanette, José Luiz2024-07-01T13:09:36Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/14587Revistahttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofiaPRIhttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/oairevcognitio@gmail.com2316-52781518-7187opendoar:2024-07-01T13:09:36Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Peirce’s Semiotics and its Relation with Habermas’s Discourse Ethics
A Semiótica de Peirce e a sua Relação com a Ética do Discurso de Habermas
title Peirce’s Semiotics and its Relation with Habermas’s Discourse Ethics
spellingShingle Peirce’s Semiotics and its Relation with Habermas’s Discourse Ethics
Zanette, José Luiz
Habermas
Peirce
Falibilismo
Ética
Pragmatismo
Habermas
Peirce
Fallibilism
Ethics
Pragmatism
title_short Peirce’s Semiotics and its Relation with Habermas’s Discourse Ethics
title_full Peirce’s Semiotics and its Relation with Habermas’s Discourse Ethics
title_fullStr Peirce’s Semiotics and its Relation with Habermas’s Discourse Ethics
title_full_unstemmed Peirce’s Semiotics and its Relation with Habermas’s Discourse Ethics
title_sort Peirce’s Semiotics and its Relation with Habermas’s Discourse Ethics
author Zanette, José Luiz
author_facet Zanette, José Luiz
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Zanette, José Luiz
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Habermas
Peirce
Falibilismo
Ética
Pragmatismo
Habermas
Peirce
Fallibilism
Ethics
Pragmatism
topic Habermas
Peirce
Falibilismo
Ética
Pragmatismo
Habermas
Peirce
Fallibilism
Ethics
Pragmatism
description The purpose of this paper is to compare Peirce’s Semiotics with Habermas’ updated Discourse Ethics thus reworking his formal pragmatics related to the philosophical questions of truth, justification, correctness and moral legitimacy; he adopts Peirce’s Fallibilism for his concept of truth in accordance with Peirce’s philosophy and indicates, for issues that require moral correctness, an epistemic realism without representation, which arranges itself with a moral constructivism, able to claim a pretension of unconditionality for moral legitimacy under the assumption of an independent world which is more or less the same to everyone. He maintains, in his formal pragmatics, an “almost” ideal condition to speech, which keeps the tension between the empirical and the ideal. As opposed to Peirce, Habermas refutes the Peircean concept of final opinion of inquirers to ensure the fallible propositions taken as true, because he considers this request a priori, directive and transcendental, not applicable to the consensus of those involved in moral phenomena. It is concluded, however, that the solution of integrating all these philosophical questions given by Habermas, especially for the tension of ideality within his pragmatic bias, embodies substantial elements from Peirce’s philosophy that allows to assert that in updating his moral philosophy, there is an extension and elaboration of what existed in suggestions and roots in Peirce’s classical pragmatism.
publishDate 2013
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2013-04-03
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://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/14587
url https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/14587
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/14587/10618
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2013 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2013 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; Vol. 13 No. 2 (2012); 339-353
Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; v. 13 n. 2 (2012); 339-353
2316-5278
1518-7187
reponame:Cognitio (São Paulo. Online)
instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)
instacron:PUC_SP
instname_str Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)
instacron_str PUC_SP
institution PUC_SP
reponame_str Cognitio (São Paulo. Online)
collection Cognitio (São Paulo. Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revcognitio@gmail.com
_version_ 1803387421329457152