사회적 합의형성에 있어서 하버마스 의사소통 행위론의 가능성과 한계성 = The Possibilities and Limitations of Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action for Social Integration

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to provide a comprehensive examination on the possibilities and limitations of Habermas' theory of communicative action and show its significance for consensus-building and social integration. For this purpose this study focuses on clarifying the following four specific questions : (1) What is the underlying meaning of the notion of critique, common to major works of the preeminent members of the Frankfurt School such as Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse and Habermas? (2) What is the nature of Habermas' disagreements with the first generation of critical theorists? (3) What is the meaning of Habermas' thesis that the life-world of communicative rationality is increasingly colonized by the penetration of purposive rationality? (4) What does Habermas mean by the idea of universal pragmatics and what is its significance for consensus-building in such a conflictridden society as Korea?
The concept of critical theory combines, at least, two meanings of the word critique which were developed in German philosophy, notably by Kant, Hegel and Marx. One retains the Kantian sense of self-reflective examination of the limitsand validity of knowledge and signifies the testing of legitimacy ; the other meaning goes back to the young Hegelians' attitude to the opposition of theory and practice and therefore signifies negation. In short, the underlying meaning of the notion of critique is the intervention of reason in the concrete circumstances of socio-historical reality and the realization of emancipation of humanity from structural constraints.
The Frankfurt School of Horkheimer and Adorno remained totally unimpressed by the postitive aspects of Marxism, namely the idea of the prolitariat as a metasubject and the concept of the vanguard party as the surrogate for Hegelian Absolute Spirit. The only possible course open to them was negation of the status quo and the critical reflection on reified social consciousness. In expressing this scepticism, they are certaninly legitimate heirs of Nietzsche. Habermas' disagreement with the first generation of the School is that he has still undiminished hopes of overcoming reification and dealienation
mainly through recovering communicative rationality.
Habermas categorically distinguishes the two types of rationalization. The former takes place according to technical rules, while the latter according to social norms which define mutual expectations of interaction. With increasing tendency of state intervention and the rapid progress of science and technology today, the everyday life-world of communicative action is progressively subjected to the imperatives of the dynamic of advanced industrial society. This is what he called the colonization of life-world by penetration of purposive rationality.
According to Habermas, the locus of conflict and crisis of the advanced industrial society is not the economic base. It is rather the realm of politics and culture. To overcome this crisis and conflict, he argues, the capacity to engage in self-reflection and communication must be effectively raised. The idea of universal pragmatics with the validity claims of comprehensibility, truth, sincerity and rightness is of great significance for social integration.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서 론
• Ⅱ. 비판이론의 비판정신
• Ⅲ. 초기 비판이론
• 1. 전통이론과 비판이론
• 2. 계몽의 변증법
• 3. 문화산업비판
• 4. 부정의 변증법
• Ⅳ. 비판이론의 재구성
• 1. 지식과 관심
• 2. 사적유물론의 재구성
• Ⅴ. 의사소통 행위이론
• 1. 언어적 전회
• 2. 생활세계와 체계
• Ⅵ. 결 론
• 後 註
• 參考文獻
• 英文要約