Piet Strydom, “The Cognitive Order of Society: Radicalizing the Ontological Turn in Critical Theory,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 80, no. 3 (2024): 1049–76, https://doi.org/10.17990/RPF/2024_80_3_1049.
| Item Type | Journal Article |
|---|---|
| Author | Piet Strydom |
| Abstract | Investigating Habermas’s radicalization of the ontological turn in the philosophy of language that eventuated in his universal or formal pragmatics, this article finds that he has not pursued his avowed radicalization far enough. By contrast with his claim that due to its conceptual thrust his type of formal pragmatics is required over and above the empiricist approach to sharpen social analysis, it emerges that his three world-concepts are social-theoretically underspecified. The direction in which the proposed radicalization beyond Habermas is pursued is determined by the core assumption that the ontological properties at issue are of a cognitive nature. The central argument is therefore that the ontological turn in Critical Theory represented by Habermas needs to be cognitive-sociologically radicalized, the result of which is the introduction of the concept of the cognitive order of society. The unique ontological status of the cognitive order thus also needs explication. Finally, that the lack of this concept systematically leaves a conspicuous theoretical gap in contemporary Critical Theory is briefly indicated with reference to some recent key publications by Honneth and Forst and Günther. |
| Date | 2024 |
| Language | English |
| Rights | © 2024 Aletheia - Associação Científica e Cultural |
| Volume | 80 |
| Pages | 1049-1076 |
| Publication | Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia |
| DOI | 10.17990/RPF/2024_80_3_1049 |
| Issue | 3 |
| ISSN | 0870-5283 ; 2183-461X |
| Date Added | 10/30/2024, 8:54:35 PM |
| Modified | 10/30/2024, 9:19:10 PM |
Apel, Karl-Otto. The Transformation of Philosophy. Translated by Glyn Adey and David Frisby. London: Routledge, 1980.
Bergman, Mats. “Pragmatism as a Communication-Theoretical Tradition,” European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 4, no. 2 (2012): 208-221. DOI.org/10.4000/ejpap.785.
Bohman, James. New Philosophy of Social Science. Cambridge: Polity, 1994.
Durkheim, Emile. The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. Translated by Joseph Ward Swain. London: Allen & Unwin, 1976.
Durkheim, Emile and Marcel Mauss. Primitive Classification. Translated by Rodney Needham. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1963.
Eder, Klaus. “Cognitive Sociology and the Theory of Communicative Action,” European Journal of Social Theory 10, no. 3 (2007): 389-408. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431007080702.
Evans, Vyvyan. “Lexical Concepts, Cognitive Models and Meaning Construction”, Cognitive Linguistics 17, no. 4 (2006): 491-534. DOI.org/10.1515/COG.2006.016.
Forst, Rainer and Klaus Günther, eds. Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen. Frankfurt: Campus, 2011.
Goffman, Erving. “The Interaction Order,” American Sociological Review 48, no. 1 (1983): 1-17. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1224%28198302%2948%3A1%3C1%3ATIOASA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X.
Habermas, Jürgen. Communication and the Evolution of Society. Translated by Thomas McCarthy. London: Heinemann, 1979.
Habermas, Jürgen. The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1. Translated by Thomas McCarthy. London: Heinemann, 1984.
Habermas, Jürgen. The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 2. Translated by Thomas McCarthy. Cambridge: Polity, 1987.
Habermas, Jürgen. Postmetaphysical Thinking. Translated by William Mark Hohengarten. Cambridge: Polity, 1992.
Habermas, Jürgen. Between Facts and Norms. Translated by William Rehg. Cambridge: Polity, 1996.
Habermas, Jürgen. Truth and Justification. Translated by Barbara Fultner. Cambridge: Polity, 2003.
Honneth, Axel. Das Recht der Freiheit. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2011.
Husserl, Edmund. Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1950.
Husserl, Edmund. Formal and Transcendental Logic. Translated by Dorion Cairns. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1969.
Luhmann, Niklas. Social Systems. Translated by John Bednarz with Dirk Baecker. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1995.
Mithen, Steven. The Prehistory of the Mind. London: Phoenix, 1998.
Piaget, Jean. The Moral Judgement of the Child. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1983.
Peirce, Charles S. The Essential Peirce, Vol. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1998.
Simmel, Georg. Soziologie, Gesamtausgabe, Vol. 11. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1992.
Strydom, Piet. “Triple Contingency: The Theoretical Problem of the Public in Communication Societies,” Philosophy and Social Criticism 25, no. 2 (1999): 1-25. DOI.org/10.1177/019145379902500201.
Strydom, Piet. Contemporary Critical Theory and Methodology. London: Routledge, 2011.
Strydom, Piet. “Toward a Global Cosmopolis? On the Formation of a Cosmopolitan Cultural Model,” Irish Journal of Sociology 20, no. 2 (2012a): 28-50. Dx.doi.org/10.7227/IJS.20.2.3.
Strydom, Piet. “Cognition and Recognition: On the Problem of the Cognitive in Honneth,” Philosophy and Social Criticism 38, no. 6 (2012b): 591-607. DOI.org/10.1177/0191453712442141.
Strydom, Piet. “The Latent Cognitive Sociology in Habermas: Extrapolated from Between Facts and Norms”, Philosophy and Social Criticism 41, no. 3 (2015): 273-291. DOI.org/10.1177/0191453714563877.
Strydom, Piet. “The Critical Theory of Society: From its Young-Hegelian Core to its Key Concept of Possibility”, European Journal of Social Theory 26, no. 2 (2023): 153-179. DOI.org/10.1177/3684310221130914.
Strydom, Piet. “Towards a Sociology of the Future: An Exploration in Cognitive Social Theory”, European Journal of Social Theory 27, no. 2 (2024): 241-259. DOI.org/10.1177/3684310241226615.
Strydom, Piet. “Modelling Society – Immanence, Transcendence, Reality: On Society’s Threefold Structure and Realist Ontological Underpinnings”, Preprint (2024). DOI.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11720.94723.
Temmerman, Rita. “Questioning the Univocity Ideal,” Hermes: Journal of Linguistics 10, no. 18 (1997): 51-90. DOI.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v10i18.25412.
Tsilipakos, Leonidas. “The Poverty of Ontological Reasoning,” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 42, no. 2 (2012): 201-19. DOI.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.2012.00486.x
