/ kalebeul / 2004 / 09 / 01 / locke habermas /
If someone pulls the “Locke-Habermas” flashcard on you, you’ll probably mutter something along the lines of “critique by the latter of the belief of the former in the compatibility of capitalism and freedom mine’s a pint.” So it’s interesting to note–spin aside–how close the two seem to each other, as well as to certain dead Greeks, when they come to set out a theory of knowledge. I read Knowledge and Human Interests ages ago, thinking (wrongly) that it would impress a phenomenally attractive Indian anthropologist I had met, but I hadn’t seen the Locke’s Essay Concerning Human Understanding until prompted by this Mark Liberman post. Here’s a summary of Habermas with Locke tucked round the back:
| knowledge-constitutive interests | the different sciences | forms of social action | locke |
| Technical: concerned with control and survival | Empirical-analytical sciences | Labour | Physica |
| Practical: seeking mutual understanding within a common tradition | Historical-hermeneutical sciences | Social interaction | Practica |
| Emancipatory: freedom from a dogmatic and controlling past | Socially-critical sciences | Communication via the ideal speech situation | Semeiotike |
The first three columns are nicked from Dermot Lane’s “Habermas and praxis” in Foundations for a Social Theology, via Richard Kearney’s Modern Movements in European Philosophy, but I did actually read the original (in German), and it has to be said that, in terms of clarity, Locke has his nose in front.
Trackback link.
Tell me if the spam dragon gives you a hard time. Log in if you want to be really foul.