Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorIvković Marjan
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-26T02:34:19Z
dc.date.available2019-10-26T02:34:19Z
dc.date.created2017-09-29 23:04
dc.date.issued2006-01-01
dc.identifieroai:doaj.org/article:27074b986ff74e8a81bd8e4fead54fa5
dc.identifier10.2298/FID0630059I
dc.identifier0353-5738
dc.identifierhttps://doaj.org/article/27074b986ff74e8a81bd8e4fead54fa5
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/1537747
dc.description.abstractThe paper considers the possibility of detecting points of contact between Michel Foucault’s theory of power and the theory of communicative agency formed by Jurgen Habermas. In the beginning, the development of the philosophical discourse of modernity, which Habermas analyzes in his work bearing the same title, is laid out, with the aim to gain insight into the nature of Habermas’s critique of Foucault. After having reviewed some of the basis of Foucault’s theory, the author points out Habermas’s depiction of the theory of power as the pinnacle of Nietzschean, anti - modernist stream of the philosophical discourse. The critique is based on Habermas’s assumption that Foucault’s analyses of power fails to comprehend the complexity of modernity. Foucault, according to Habermas, over - emphasizes one dimension of the process of modernization - gradual strengthening of the disciplinatory power based on the "control of the spirit". The author, however, wishes to point out the importance the theory of power ascribes to the preservation of insight into the complexity of history. Through the insight into multiple and divergent nature of historical processes that are responsible for the formation of modern society, the individual becomes historically self - conscious and able to step out of the paradigm of self - relating subject. As the theory of communicative agency also tends to transcend the "limits of the subject - philosophy", the author concludes that Foucault’s work is, to the same extent as Habermas’s, imbued with the idea of "modernity as an unrealized undertaking". Towards the end of the paper the author analyzes Foucault’s relation to Enlightenment, in order to show the essentially modern nature of his thought.
dc.languageDE
dc.languageEN
dc.languageSR
dc.publisherInstitute for Philosophy and Social Theory, Belgrade
dc.relation.ispartofhttp://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0353-5738/2006/0353-57380630059I.pdf
dc.relation.ispartofhttps://doaj.org/toc/0353-5738
dc.sourceFilozofija i Društvo, Vol 2006, Iss 30, Pp 59-76 (2006)
dc.subjectmodernity
dc.subjectdiscourse
dc.subjectinter subjectivity
dc.subjectHabermas
dc.subjectpower
dc.subjectpractices
dc.subjectFoucault
dc.subjecthistory
dc.subjectgenealogy
dc.subjectcomplexity
dc.subjectEnlightenment
dc.subjectPhilosophy (General)
dc.subjectB1-5802
dc.subjectPhilosophy. Psychology. Religion
dc.subjectB
dc.subjectDOAJ:Philosophy
dc.subjectDOAJ:Philosophy and Religion
dc.titleFoucault versus Habermas: Modernity as an unfinished endeavor vs. the theory of power: An inevitable conflict or possibility of communication
dc.typeArticle
ge.collectioncodeOAIDATA
ge.dataimportlabelOAI metadata object
ge.identifier.legacyglobethics:11679887
ge.identifier.permalinkhttps://www.globethics.net/gel/11679887
ge.lastmodificationdate2017-09-29 23:04
ge.lastmodificationuseradmin@pointsoftware.ch (import)
ge.submissions0
ge.oai.exportid148600
ge.oai.repositoryid52
ge.oai.setnameLCC:Philosophy (General)
ge.oai.setnameLCC:Philosophy. Psychology. Religion
ge.oai.setnameDOAJ:Philosophy
ge.oai.setnameDOAJ:Philosophy and Religion
ge.oai.setspecTENDOlBoaWxvc29waHkgKEdlbmVyYWwp
ge.oai.setspecTENDOlBoaWxvc29waHkuIFBzeWNob2xvZ3kuIFJlbGlnaW9u
ge.oai.setspecRE9BSjpQaGlsb3NvcGh5
ge.oai.setspecRE9BSjpQaGlsb3NvcGh5IGFuZCBSZWxpZ2lvbg~~
ge.oai.streamid2
ge.setnameGlobeEthicsLib
ge.setnameGlobeTheoLib
ge.setspecglobeethicslib
ge.setspecglobetheolib
ge.linkhttps://doaj.org/article/27074b986ff74e8a81bd8e4fead54fa5


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record