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.
Similar posts
Back soon
Comments