ハーバーマス理論における「コミュニケーション観」の批判的検討 : アドルノのミメーシス概念のコミュニケーション的解釈を巡って

スポンサーリンク

概要

• 論文の詳細を見る

• Though Habermas is a so-called second generation of the Frankfurt school, his theory and practice are diferrent from those of the first generation, Adorno and Horkheimer. Such a difference is eminent in a new paradigm Habermas bases in constructing critical theory. As opposed to the paradigm of philosophy of consciousness, Habermas relies on the paradigm of philosophy of language. This shift in paradigm is a key point of Habermas's critique of Adorno and Horkheimer. When Habermas tries to understand Adorno's theory both sympathetically and critically, it becomes apparent that his paradigmatic shift has much importance for critical theory. Habermas tries to interpret the implication of"Mimesis", which is one of the most important terms of Adorno's aesthetics, not subjectivelly but inter-subjectively. In other words, based on the paradigm of philosophy of language, Habermas makes an attempt to re-interpret Mimesis not as aesthetic experience but as rational communication. Such a theoretical strategy in constructing critical theory has many advantageous points. I do not deny this, but can't help feeling that Habermas has thrown the baby out with the bath water in the process of re-interpreing Adorno based on the communicative action paradigm. In this article, I want to shed light on this point. According to the Habermasian view of communication, linguistically mediated communication that is oriented to reaching mutual understanding is free of domination and repression. So"linguisticalisation"(linguistic articulation) of individual inner nature is a crucial step toward human emancipation. Adorno's view of language is contrary. In his theory, language is seen as typical"identification logic"that is the resource of modern domination. As Habermas remarks, the late Adorno's distrust in modern rationality is total and excessive, so we cannot support his pessimistic view of language and communication. However, can we not say the same thing about Habermas's view of communication, if only opposite? I think that the Habermasian view of communication, which is excessively rationalistic, cannot critically grasp the domination that is immanent in communication. Of course, we cannot deny the liberating potential of linguistically mediated communication that Habermas tries to clarify, but at the same time, I think we must be sensitive to the repressive potential which lurks in language and communication. The lack of such an ambivalent attitude toward communication makes us unable to critically grasp the so-called"information society". Through the critical survey of Habermas's view of communication, I have tried to make a step toward a critical theory of information society that can grasp both repressive and liberating potential of modern society.

• 日本マス・コミュニケーション学会の論文
• 1990-04-30

著者

• 阿部 潔

  東京大学

関連論文

• 英国のカルチュラル・スタディズにおける「批判性」再考 : ポスト・モダンの批判的コミュニケーション理論か?
• ハーバーマス理論における「コミュニケーション観」の批判的検討 : アドルノのミメーシス概念のコミュニケーション的解釈を巡って

スポンサーリンク