>I am clueless, This seems to beg all the questions that I said it it. I
>am, say, a slavemaster. I say, Slave, build me a pyramid. You, the slave,
>say,, You know, Habermas teaches that you can't say that and expect to be
>understood without implicitly presupposing that we are free and equal
>particpants in a noncercive speech situation, so even talking to me shows
>that you are committed to the view that you have no right to give that command.
christ on a broken crutch.
firstly, H uses analytical ideal types. like weber did. they're tools secondly, the conversation here is instrumental action, not communicative action.
communicative action involves people trying to understand one another in a disagreement.
is the master trying to understand the point of view of the slave? no.