Ethical foundations of the left

Kelley kwalker2 at gte.net
Tue Jul 31 21:26:47 PDT 2001


A standard distinction when I was first introduced to Marxist theory was the difference between freedom from and freedom to. Freedom from entails instrumental rationality; freedom to entails reason.

freedom from freedom to rationality reason instrumenal rationality value rationality Zweckrationalitaet Wertrationalitaet knowing how knowing why

etc.

The spread of rationality without reason can be understood in light of H's effort to formulate an epistemology which is at the same time a theory of history. H's initial concern is to clarify the relation b/t knowledge and human interests, those basic orientations inherent in human activity which guide the way we secure our existence and make and remake ourselves, each other and society.

Habermas identifies three fundamental human interests.

The first is a technical interest in extending certainty and control. The technical interest is expressed in our relationship to nature. We seek to control, master, manipulate and dominate nature in an effort to satisfy physical and material needs. Labor mediates our interaction with nature.

In our interactions with others, we are guided by a second interest, namely, a practical interest in expanding intersubjective understanding. This relation is mediated by language and communication. We interact with others not to manipulate and dominate them, but to increase mutual understanding, to formulate commonly shared and consensually validated norms and values.

These two interests are regulated by a third, our emancipatory interest---an interest in the emancipation of man from the pattern of established natural and socio-historical laws. In other words, we are able to understand why we do what we do, why we seek to achieve greater control over nature and greater mutual understanding in terms of the interest in emancipation. Human emancipation is made possible by advancements both in productive activity which improve our control over nature and in communicative activity which enhance the our capacity to discuss and decide, together, what kind of life we wish to live together.

These three interests make possible three categories of knowledge:

1.Information that expands our power of technical control 2.Interpretations that make possible the orientation of action within common traditions 3. Analyses that free consciousness from its dependence on hypostatized power. (direct quote, but reorganized)

Information, then, is associated with technical interests and provides data upon which we are better able to control social and natural phenomena. To know something in this regard means we have the knowledge to control it.

The interpretations entailed in the practical interest enhance the possibility of communication. Such knowledge as Brian Fay writes,

"creates the conditions for mutual understanding between different members of the same social order or between members of different social orders, which is to say that it makes possible communication between them where none existed before, or where, if it did exist, such communication was distorted. Moreover, in so far as it open challenges of communication, such knowledge expands the horizons of those who are now able to engage in discourse, because learning how to communicate is learning both new ways of characterizing oneself as well as highlighting one's own presuppositions."

When we apprehend reality in terms of the interest in emancipation, we acquire knowledge in the form of critical analyses that highlight human history as a socially-constituted process and thereby restore to people a recognition of themselves as the active, yet historically limited, makers of history. Critical analyses, if true, emancipate humans from dependence on seemingly natural and immutable forces. Knowledge in this form initiates a transformation of both the knower and the known, a transformation that brings people closer to the realization of the interest in human emancipation.

Habermas's three-fold model affords the basis for conceptualizing society as composed of two action systems:

a. purposive rational action secures our capacity to satisfy human material needs

b. symbolic interaction systems which form the institutional framework of society based upon grammatical rules and social norms that enable us to engage in communication and interaction.

Each dimension has a logic of rationalization.

a. Technical or instrumental rationalization occurs as the productive forces, the means by which we control nature, come to rely more and more on scientism, formalism standardization, calculation and administration.

b. Rationalization on the level of social interaction and practices entails the removal of restrictions on communication. As structurally oppressive, systemic and systematic, social barriers to open discourse are eliminated, more and more people might participate in the formulation of cultural ends, values, and ideals. "Practical rationalization does not lead per se to the (more efficient) functioning of social systems, but would furnish the members of society with the opportunity for further emancipation and progressive individuation. The growth of productive forces is not the same as the intention of the "good life". It can at best serve it."

Technical rationalization,frees us from hunger, toil, and the exigencies of nature, but such 'freedom from' is not the same as human emancipation, which also requires 'freedom to' reflect on what we are doing and what we want to do. For critical theory, reason involves "a notion of freedom that signifies both freed from the blind necessity of natural causality and freedom to self-consciously determine one's own action" emancipation requires practical as well as technical rationalization.

In class society, our interactions with others are guided by the principles that regulate our relation to nature. The technical interest in domination and control reigns and we seek interaction with others not to enhance mutual understanding in order to arrive at a shared view of how we ought to live our lives together. Rather, just as in our interaction with nature, we aim to manipulate, exploit and dominate others. Information in the service of domination and control replaces understand and interpretation and critical analysis. Economists provide information for controlling business cycles. Political scientists gather information for controlling the perceptions and attitudes of the electorate. Psychologists amass information used by advertisers to manipulate consumers. Sociologists offer information which enable managers to control their workers better.

Technical or instrumental rationality serves the interests of domination, not human freedom.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list