Search

This thesis was scanned from the print manuscript for digital preservation and is copyright the author. Researchers can access this thesis by asking their local university, institution or public library to make a request on their behalf. Monash staff and postgraduate students can use the link in the References field.

The idea of a critical theory has colonized the social consciousness of academia, and become an integral part of the pursuit of higher knowledge. Competing ideas have thereby become standard bearers in that critical theory acts as a measure of true understanding and/or social rank in institutional settings. The only problem, however, is that many of the distinct – and competing – theories similarly answering to the description raise two related questions – namely, ‘what is a critical theory?’ and what is ‘critical’ about the ‘theory’ (or theories) in question? The idea of a critical theory is not only itself subject to criticism, it also remains open to questioning and contestation. The following research provides an answer by questioning what has traditionally been taken as given. It addresses a perceived lack in the literature regarding the idea’s standard and/or truth- bearing and interrogates the relation between thought and language in (a) critical theory. The proposed book explores the problematic connection between criteria and critique, or the distinct ways in which the relation between thought and language directs contested ideas of a critical theory. The thesis primarily considers the critical theories of Derrida, Lyotard and Habermas via the circle of understanding. Heidegger and Gadamer pave the way towards the idea of a critical theory via hermeneutics’ conception of the circular relation between thought and language. The book moves towards Derrida, Lyotard and Habermas to follow the distinct ways in which the circle calls itself into being and/or question. The book’s contribution to scholarship is twofold 1) to recall the problematic of hermeneutics as a critical methodology and 2) to act as a stimulus for future research into the question of the direction of fit between thought and language: to what extent do they direct (inform, perform) each other within the circle of understanding? The aim is to rethink the hermeneutical circle via a consideration of the critical theories in question. The approach is performative in that the competing critical theories are interpreted as parts that form a complex whole, and are understood (questioned) with respect to each other. The critical theorists prove to be ‘critical’ in the following way: in prioritising linguistic parts over a complex whole – Derrida (the syntactic), Lyotard (the semantic) and Habermas (the pragmatic) – the corresponding critical theories return us to the circle in conflicting ways. The conflict of interpretations directs our questioning accordingly: in what ways do the related moving parts bring forth and/or hold back the complex whole being questioned? We argue that the critical issue between them is a normative conception of our practical and/or linguistic identities (moral being). The methodological approach to the circle therefore serves a critical function in that it is performed (enabled and directed) through the very idea(s) in question.

Is it worst to be killed by a crazed mob wielding machetes or to die via conveyor belt and filing system? The Better Angels of Our Nature keeps falling victim to the halo effect, creating an aura around reason itself. The question, then, is whether the book should be viewed as a jewel in reason's crown or as among its costume jewellery.