dc.contributor.author | Grad, Paweł | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-02-13T11:40:22Z | |
dc.date.available | 2017-02-13T11:40:22Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2015 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1689-4286 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11089/20537 | |
dc.description.abstract | A context of my paper is the debate on reason, tradition and traditional
communities, in which this moral and epistemological issues were
discussed as a part of general socio-philosophical theory of modernity.
In particular I intend to locate my considerations in the context of
formal-pragmatic theory of modern communicative rationality
developed by Jürgen Habermas and Robert Brandom. I will provide a
competitive model of the rationality of tradition by applying a
conceptual toolkit of pragmatically oriented analysis to explain
practices connected with vocabulary of tradition. I argue that tradition
as a communication system has a fully rational structure. My main claim
is that communicative structure of tradition has a rational structure of
language game. This structure includes defined principles of
communication for members of closed tradition-grounded community
and rule of inclusion for potential new members.
Firstly I consider closely internal principles of communication
within the framework of tradition contrasting them shortly with
normative-deontic rules of the postenlightenment idea of pragmatic
communication discussed by Jürgen Habermas and Robert Brandom.
After that I examine the rule of inclusion — the rule, which mediates
between closed system of tradition-based community and his
environment. | pl_PL |
dc.description.sponsorship | Numer został przygotowany przy wsparciu Ministerstwa Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego. | pl_PL |
dc.language.iso | en | pl_PL |
dc.publisher | Instytut Filozofii Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego | pl_PL |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Internetowy Magazyn Filozoficzny Hybris;30 | |
dc.subject | rationality | pl_PL |
dc.subject | inferentialism | pl_PL |
dc.subject | tradition | pl_PL |
dc.subject | modernity | pl_PL |
dc.title | Tradition as a Communication System. A Pragmatic Approach | pl_PL |
dc.type | Article | pl_PL |
dc.rights.holder | © Internetowy Magazyn Filozoficzny HYBRIS 2015 | pl_PL |
dc.page.number | 1-15 | pl_PL |
dc.references | Brandom, Robert, 2008, Between Saying and Doing: Towards an Analytic Pragmatism, Oxford UP. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Brandom, Robert, 2009, The Reason in Philosophy: Animating Ideas, Harvard UP. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Giddens, Anthony, 1944, Living in a Post-Traditional Society, [in:] U. Beck, A. Giddens, S. Lash, Reflexive Modernization. Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 56–108. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Habermas, Jürgen, 1984, The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1: Reason and The Rationalization of Society, T. McCarthy (trans.), Boston: Beacon Street | pl_PL |
dc.references | Habermas, Jürgen, 1987, Theory of communicative action, vol. 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason, T. McCarthy (trans.), Boston: Beacon Press. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Habermas, Jürgen, 1998, A Genealogical Analysis of the Cognitive Content of Morality, [in:] C. Cronin and P. de Greiff (eds.), The Inclusion of the Other. Studies in Political Theory, Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 3–48. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Kant, Immanuel, 1966, Critique of Pure Reason, W. S. Pluhar (trans.), Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company. | pl_PL |
dc.references | MacIntyre, Alasdair, 1988, Three rival versions of moral enquiry: encyclopedia, genealogy, and tradition, London: Duckworth. | pl_PL |
dc.references | MacInytre, Alasdair, Whose Justice? Which Rationality?, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Shils, Edward, 1981, Tradition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. | pl_PL |