>Geez, once you get your mits on, you don't let go, do ya!
heh.
ken sez, as per usual:
>>One might consider, moral for whom? For Hegel, the Absolute, the
>>Althusser, the Subject, for Habermas, the Unlimited communicative community.
>>In short - the Other.
it is not Unlimited, ken. it is always in the context of a particular time and place and it is always subject to revision. it is about a particular group of people, coming together to obtain some sort of social change, to accomplish a collective goal. CUPE 3902 for instance. more on that in Quote Mongering Slam, Pt 2 b/c i wouldn't want anyone to accuse yoshie of being the only Quote Mongerer.
>The communicative community is only 'the other' on some accounts, Ken.
and not only that, sometimes, communicative communities emerge because the demands of the Other have been thrown into question -- are no longer taken for granted. i don't especially understand why it is presumed that Habermas is suggesting here that this is the way we *always* communicate. he makes no claim to that other than to say that, in terms of consensual communicative action aimed at achieving social action, then people come to the communicative community with the assumptions that those validity claims might be redeemable, but for the most part they aren't. assuming that they are and can be, though, is important for otherwise no one would trust one another to even begin.
>What about that 'co-origination' stuff H goes on about in BFN? Ain't we
>essentially social? Doesn't he say in BFN: 'To the extent that we become
>aware of the inter-subjective constitution of freedom, the
>possessive-individualist illusion of autonomy as self-ownership
>disintegrates'? Is this the insight that really annoys the
>anarcho-individualist in you?
and he says this all the hell over the place. it's why he wanted to reformulate marx's unfinished, not fully developed historical materialism which he complained had focused too narrowly on economic production leaving out how that production is accomplished also in terms of the social relations of production--culture, social institutions, etc and so on.
rob, since you get the diff b/t moral and ethical,, pls 'splain me coz i never get it when ken 'splains it.
kelley