Search

On April 22, 2023, the editorial board of the journal “St. Tikhon’s University Review. Theology. Philosophy. Religious Studies” with the participation of the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies of St. Tikhon’s University, within the framework of the annual conference “Research in Religion: Past, Present, Future”, a round table dedicated to the problems associated with the concept of “post-secular”. The presentations and the subsequent discussion addressed the issues of modern understanding of the boundaries and conditions for the use of the term “post-secular”, the relationship between theories of secularization and the concepts of post-secular, the so-called problem “post-secular hybrids”, questions about the relationship between the real social and discursive dimensions of the concepts of the post-secular, about the empirical foundations and metaphysical premises of the theories of secularization and the concepts of the post-secular, the problem of Eurocentricity of the concept of the post-secular and its applicability to other cultural regions, the impact of the concept of the post-secular on the understanding of religion in general, the problems of correlation religion and science in modern consciousness, various aspects of the position of religion in modern society. We bring to the attention of the readers the materials of the round table.

Los cien años del nacimiento de la llamada Escuela de Fráncfort resultan un momento propicio para reflexionar acerca de la relevancia y aportes de sus miembros, agrupados en sus distintas generaciones. Jürgen Habermas, muy probablemente la figura más destacada de la segunda generación, continua la senda de los primeros francfortianos en cuanto a ciertas ideas transversales como la crítica a la razón instrumental, la compleja relación entre teoría y praxis, el rechazo a toda forma de totalitarismo, entre otras. Esto puede verse reflejado en algunos de los tópicos habermasianos identitarios que se abordan en el presente texto, a saber, racionalidad comunicativa, sistema y mundo de la vida, política deliberativa, ética del discurso. Dicha lectura tiene como punzante ingrediente un conjunto de reflexiones -no exhaustivas ni excluyentes, por cierto- desde Latinoamérica respecto del pensamiento del germano.

Copyright of Ideas y Valores is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista de Sociología is the property of Universidad de Chile and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The criticism of C.H. Ratschow and Knud E. Løgstrup towards Bultmann's existentialist theology serves as a starting point to raise the question of the possibility of metaphysical thinking in theology. Various forms of criticism towards metaphysics are mentioned, particularly that of Jürgen Habermas. After a brief presentation of the concept of time in Luther's De servo arbitrio, Løgstrup's philosophy of creation is introduced as a plausible theological metaphysics. The common concern of Ratschow and Løgstrup is to expand the understanding of God in Bultmann's influenced existential theology and to formulate a theological metaphysics that encompasses God both in existential relationship and in the context of worldly experience. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Ideas y Valores is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

One of the urgent problems requiring special research is the comprehensive crisis of legitimacy that accompanies globalization, and one of the manifestations of which is the fragmentation of the phenomenon of legitimacy due to the fragmentation of the mechanisms of legitimation associated with different aspects of legitimacy being: power legitimacy, religion legitimacy, moral legitimacy, etc. State power legitimacy crisis has political and communicative grounds, such as: problematization of state sovereignty existence and state power existence; expanding political and non-political actors will to power; partial or complete lack of political will among citizens, which in turn is caused by a low level of public involvement in politics, which in turn is due to the usual functioning of political communication. The rules of language games (political, legal, cultural) are not created by the participants themselves in the result of a consensus-communicative discourse, but are set from the outside and are no longer shared by all members of a particular communicative community. The shaking of habitual traditions and norms of behavior leads to the imposed rules rejection and disruption of the consensus-communicative public discourse mechanisms functioning. These circumstances require a rethinking of the very phenomenon of power and the development of strategies for overcoming the crisis. From the point of view of a deliberative strategy (J. Rawls, J. Cohen, J. Habermas, S. Benhabib), the organization of a communicative power could become a way out of the crisis. This process requires all interested in the decision parties consensus expression. According to the agonistic strategy (C. Mouff), power is not interpreted as a purely external relation that develops between two given identities, but as something that establishes these identities themselves. According to J. Rawls and J. Habermas, it is necessary to find a way to eliminate power, because the more democratic a society is, the less power is present in its social relations. But according to C. Mouff, power relations are the basis of social relations, and the main issue of democratic politics is not how to eliminate power, but how to create such forms of power that could be more compatible with democratic values. Both approaches have the ability to bring the legitimacy of power out of the crisis, as long as the authorities will demonstrate its creative potential , which consists in protecting the fundamental rights of citizens; harmonious combination of public and private spheres; freedom realization.

El pensamiento cientifista moderno que pretende obtener certezas mediante la búsqueda de afirmaciones indiscutibles sobre hechos irrefutables derivados de la protocolización y estandarización de procedimientos que nos alejen del debate sobre los valores e intereses particulares, ha olvidado que la formalización que requiere el diseño de todo procedimiento aplicable a casos concretos supone siempre la incorporación de finalidades relativas a valores e intereses. Este olvido, propio del pensamiento moderno, se ha visto acompañado de otra actitud: la hiperespecialización de las disciplinas, de manera que sus consecuencias y los debates sobre las mismas en una especie de constante reinvención de la rueda se han reproducido estérilmente. Mediante un estudio interdisciplinar que pone de manifiesto las líneas comunes en debates paradigmáticos en los campos del derecho, la retórica, la lingüística, la ciencia cognitiva y la inteligencia artificial simbólica, así como la teoría política, pretendemos poner de manifiesto la incapacidad de las teorías procesualistas de satisfacer esa aspiración de certeza y neutralidad absoluta propia de las sociedades postmetafísicas en sentido habermasiano.

A fourth generation of human rights is actually under development that includes, among others, the content of human deployment in light of communication and information technologies within the cyberspace. This article is a reflection of this matter, specifically from the perspective of two readings. On the one hand, as to the possibilities of configuring such prerogatives based on the concept of «discursive rights», from the statements of Jürgen Habermas, but now revisited in this new scenario. On the other hand, from the view of cyberhumanism, which allows to enrich and complement Habermas’ prism, given its limitations in the virtual environment. The question for the human rights in the cyberspace demands both a re-reading of existing rights and an elucidation of new prerogatives within the framework of today’s technological society.

The main goal of this article is to apply a critical discourse analysis based on the original methodology of J. Habermas to the study of a particular case. Therefore, as the subject of the research is chosen the case of public hearings on the construction of a subway ventilation shaft in the public park "Zyuzino". The author of the article combines the original methodology of critical discourse analysis, first established by W. Cukier and others, with the original institutional analysis based on the principles of the "ideal speech situation" by J. Habermas. This allows us to identify from various sides deviations and shortcomings that exist in public hearings in Russia.

The article examines the idea of a direct link between modernization and the loss of plausibility of religious belief, explores the contemporary image of the relation between religion and rationality, and shows why it is not possible to say that the advance of science leads to secularization. In view of the question regarding whether postsecularization entails the mutual exclusion of religion and rationality, it examines the proposals of J. Habermas and N. Wolterstorff, in a search for normative criteria for the dialogue between religious and non-religious rationalities.

The aim of this paper is to investigate Brandom’s conception of the objectivity of norms. In Making It Explicit Brandom supports a weak notion of objectivity based on his understanding of the perspectival structure of linguistic practices. In his following works, he resorts to the Hegelian notion of recognition, adding a historical dimension to his account. I contend that this notion of objectivity can be successfully defended against the objections raised by the commentators. In particular, it does not jeopardise the same possibility of communication, as claimed by Habermas and others, unless a strongly objective notion of communication is assumed. However, the paradigm shift from a strong to a weak understanding of objectivity entails a consequent revision of the conception of social criticism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ideas y Valores is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article provides a theoretical-political interpretation of Gadamer’s fusion of horizons, arguing that, from a hermeneutical point of view, political dialogue should be understood as the process of questioning and challenging the horizons of meaning underlying social practices. Likewise, the article holds that dialogue establishes a common question-scenario that opens up the social horizon of meaning to contingency and uncertainty, and that it never seeks a procedural or substantial consensus that eliminates conflicts and reconciles different perspectives in a homogeneous point of view.

Copyright of Franciscanum is the property of Universidad de San Buenaventura and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this paper I will compare A. Honneth's neo-socialist project with J. Habermas' proposal of a post-secular society. Since both of these approaches are aimed to contrast with neoliberal theories, I will give explanation of my preference for Habermas'. I will do that by considering the relationship between the concepts of utopia, liberty and society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ideas y Valores is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article addresses Michael Burawoy’s call for a public sociology. While it takes a critical view of Burawoy’s proposition, it accepts the basic idea of conceptualizing sociology as a discipline inherently engaged with the public. To this end, it draws on the philosophy of Hans-Georg Gadamer formulated in his Truth and Method. While Burawoy understands public sociology as a distinct type of sociological work complementary to traditional professional sociology, using Gadamer’s philosophy I attempt to avoid this division and to conceptualize sociology on the basis of the intersection between professional and public sociology. I understand sociology not as a research field formulating theories that describe society, but as a distinct interpretative tradition that participates in contemporary discussions seeking answers to the social-related questions posed by the public. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the difficulties posed by Jürgen Habermas’s proposal regarding the role of religion in the public sphere, in order to clarify and analyze its philosophical assumptions. The article then goes on to set forth five objections on the basis of the debate over same-sex marriage, and to relate those objections to Habermas’s philosophical assumptions, in order to show the need for a more detailed review of the problem.

This paper discusses some of the proposals raised within the contemporary debate about normative models for a new international order. In the first part, the argumentative strategies of political realism, of John Rawls’ liberalism and of Jürgen Habermas’ deliberative model are presented. These authors’ objections to the cosmopolitan idea of a transformation in the international order based on the demands for global economic justice are debated. In the last part, the text shows that the proposal f global justice presented by Thomas Pogge is insufficient because, although it shows the implication of the global economic order in the increase of poverty and formulates a global redistributive proposal, it does not consider the problem of the transformation of the prevailing system of power relations within the current capitalist order.

Resumo Este artigo é uma discussão introdutória acerca da importância das concepções de espaço e tempo na modernidade. O objetivo deste texto é enfatizar os aspectos teóricos e práticos dos conceitos de espaço e tempo, mediante a apresentação de três perspectivas de interpretação desta questão na filosofia desenvolvida na modernidade. Palavras-chave: Modernidade, Espaço, Tempo, Filosofia Moderna, J. Habermas. Abstract This article is an introductory debate about the importance of space and time conceptions in modernity. The objective from this text is emphasize the theoretical and practical aspects of space and time concepts, by presentation of three interpretation perspectives of this question in the philosophy developed in modernity. Keywords: Modernity, Space, Time, Modern Philosophy, J. Habermas.

O artigo aborda a principal questão da teoria política: a legitimidade. O tema é desenvolvido a partir dos conceitos básicos da filosofia política iluminista: individualismo, liberalismo e filosofia da história, com a ajuda da historiografia conceitual de Reinhart Koselleck, para demonstrar, como resultado, uma aporia política. A articulação específica entre esses conceitos é então utilizada para ler os principais trabalhos de Friedrich August von Hayek, como um exemplo da adaptação desse conjunto conceitual para o neoliberalismo, e, de outro lado, para ler o núcleo da obra de Jürgen Habermas, como exemplo da versão social-democrata dessa adaptação. A conclusão aponta para a teoria de sistemas de Niklas Luhmann como uma possível alternativa à aporia política herdada do arcabouço conceitual do Iluminismo.The paper addresses the main issue of political theory: legitimacy. The theme is developed beginning with the basic concepts of the political philosophy of the Enlightenment: individualism, liberalism and philosophy of history, with the help of the conceptual historiography of Reinhart Koselleck, to point out a political aporia. The specific articulation between those concepts is then used to read the main works of Friedrich August von Hayek, as an example of the adaptation of that framework to neoliberalism and, on the other hand, to read the core of the work of Jürgen Habermas, as an example of the social-democratic version. The conclusion points to the systems theory of Niklas Luhmann as a possible alternative to the political aporia inherited from the basic conceptual framework of the Enlightenment.

Straipsnyje analizuojama etikos pagrindimo problema postmoderniojoje kultūroje, kuri atsisako etiką galinčių pagrįsti metapasakojimų, nusivilia istorija, kuri galėtų pateikti etinių sprendimų kriterijų, ir leidžia įsiviešpatauti objektui, taip užkirsdama kelią bet kokiems etiniams teiginiams apie realybę (čia nesvarstomas platesnis postmodernumo sampratos taikymo klausimas). Tačiau antrosios XX amžiaus pusės socialiniai, moksliniai ir ekologiniai iššūkiai privertė atnaujinti etinę diskusiją. Atmetus tradicinius etikos pagrindimus įstatymu ar prigimtine teise (protu), beliko vadovautis naudos principu. Etikos diskusiją atnaujinę autoriai kaip tik ir rėmėsi utilitarizmo filosofija, tačiau stengėsi peržengti jai būdingus ribotumus, ypač jos kriterijaus egoistiškumą, kuris didino ir šiaip grėsmingą visuomenės solipsizmą. Vienas iš tokių projektų buvo J. Habermaso diskursyvioji etika, pasinaudojusi tokiais praėjusio amžiaus mąstymo laimėjimais kaip pagarba asmens orumui ir laisvei bei dialogo filosofija, kuri remiasi ne individualistine, bet solidarumo antropologija. Ispanė A. Cortina papildė šią teoriją svarstymu apie praktinį jos pritaikomumą – minimumų etikų samprata. Pliuralistinėje visuomenėje jos vaidina maksimumų etikų derinimo ir įstatymų pagrindimo vaidmenį. Nors diskursyvioji etika turi trūkumų, tačiau ji yra puiki erdvė tęsti etinį diskursą postmoderniojoje kultūroje.

Copyright of Ideas y Valores is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Ideas y Valores is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Ideas y Valores is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Resumo Procurou-se aproximar algumas das reflexões de J. Habermas, decorrentes de sua Teoria da ação comunicativa (1981) e rediscutidas em Verdade e justificação (1999) às atuais possibilidades de construção de conhecimentos em plataformas interativas da Web que se sustentam, por sua vez, em pilares comunicacionais de interação e colaboração. Palavras-chave ciência da informação; pragmática; J. Habermas; web.; justificação Abstract Some approximations made to the reflections of J. Habermas, arising from his Theory of communicative action (1981) and revisited in Truth and justification (1999) to the present opportunities of knowledge construction in interactive Web platforms that are self supported in communicative interaction and collaboration. In this context, the article has as its main objective to analyze some implications of the pragmatics, the construction of truth and validation of information in terms of virtual communication arguments, considering a study of locus of Science information. Keywords information science; pragmatics; J. Habermas; web; justification

Copyright of Ideas y Valores is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Logos: A Journal, of Religion, Philosophy Comparative Cultural Studies & Art (08687692) is the property of Logos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Ideas y Valores is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Modernity has always blamed the authority of tradition for hindering emancipation while at the same time affirming, for fear of abstraction, the creative energies of traditions. Can the Enlightenment's abstract universal character be overcome without succumbing to the dogmatism of the appeal to Tradition? Paul Ricoeur's philosophical project aims at surpassing this opposition by forging the concept of living tradition in which history and universal find a new articulation. This paper brings to light the originality of the dynamic relationship between present and past elaborated in Ricoeur's philosophical hermeneutics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Normative basis has always been the focus point of discussion by Frankfurt School's theorists. Habermas held that Marx's social theory lacks a definite normative basis and proposed a priori framework for three kinds of cognition in view of Quasi-Kantianism. But, what he proposed was regarded as the "epistemological foundationalism", then he gave up on the attempt to reconstruct the epistemological basis and turned to universal pragmatics, thus he suggested the theory of communicative behavior with the understanding of language as core. In such a background he presented the concept of communicative rationality and tried to lay it as the normative foundation of social theory, thus avoiding the blame ,so as to get rid of the dilemma in which the consciousness philosophy was taken as paradigm. In this way he depicted a wonderland where the people all over the world will communicate with each other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Implemental reason and communicative reason, rationally implemental action and communicative action, system and life world are the basic categories of the three pairs of opposite concepts in Habermas's theory of communicative action. Habermas differentiated the implemental reason from communicative reason so as to interpret why the rational reason is possible and differentiated the rationally implemental action from communicative action so as to interpret why the social action is possible. Furthermore, he split the dual concept of society into the system and the life world, thus interpreting why the social order is possible. Grasping the interrelationship between the three pairs of categories and their developmental logic will benefit theoretically our understanding of the theme of the theory of communicative action, i.e. , the modernity is actually a plan to be completed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the suspension of ethics and the problem of self-understanding in existentialist tradition. It relates the author's analysis of Søren Kierkegaard's thesis of suspension of ethics on three levels including its relation to I. Kant and its relation to existential tradition or Ernst Tugendhat. Moreover, the key role, the accidental plays in human action creates a non-universalistic way of self-understanding , in which individuality definitely predominates universality.