Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T05:56:03.560Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dialogue among Friends: Toward a Discourse Ethic of Interpersonal Relationships

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2020

Jean Keller
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Despite clear parallels between Jürgen Habermas's discourse ethics and recent scholarship in feminist ethics, feminists are often suspicious of discourse ethics and have kept themselves mostly separate from the field. By developing a sustained application of Habermas's discourse ethics to friendship, Keller demonstrates that feminist misgivings of discourse ethics are largely misplaced and that Habermas's theory can be used to develop a compelling moral phenomenology of interpersonal relations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 23 , Issue 4 , December 2008 , pp. 158 - 181
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackelsberg, Martha. 1983. ‘Sisters” or “comrades”: The politics of friends and family. In Families, politics, and public policy, ed. Diamond, Irene. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Allen, Amy. 2000. Reconstruction or deconstruction? A reply to Johanna Meehan. Philosophy and Social Criticism 26 (3): 53–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, Amy. 2007. Systematically distorted subjectivity? Philosophy and Social Criticism 33 (5): 641–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baehr, Amy. 1996. Toward a new feminist liberalism: Okin, Rawls, and Habermas. Hypatia II (1): 49–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla. 1992. The debate over women and moral theory revisited. In Situating the self: Gender, community, and postmodernism in contemporary ethics. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chambers, Simone. 1995. Feminist discourse/practical discourse. In Meehan, , Feminists read Habermas.Google Scholar
Cohen, Jean. 1995. Critical social theory and feminist critiques: The debate with Jürgen Habermas. In Meehan, , Feminists read Habermas.Google Scholar
Cooke, Maeve. 1993. Habermas and consensus. European Journal of Philosophy 1 (3): 247–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Marilyn. 1993. Friendship and moral growth. In What are friends for? Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Gilligan, Carol. 1993. In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1984. The theory of communicative action, Vol. 1. Trans. McCarthy, Thomas. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1987. The theory of communicative action, Vol. 2. Trans. McCarthy, Thomas. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1990a. Discourse ethics: Notes on a program of philosophical justification. In Moral consciousness and communicative action. Trans. Lenhardt, Christian and Nicholsen, Shierry Weber. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1990b. Moral consciousness and communicative action. In Moral consciousness and communicative action.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1990c. Morality and ethical life: Does Hegel's critique of Kant apply to discourse ethics? In Moral consciousness and communicative action.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1992. Individuation through socialization: On George Herbert Mead's theory of subjectivity. In Postmetaphysical thinking: Philosophical essays. Trans. Hohengarten, William Mark. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1993a. Lawrence Kohlberg and neo‐Aristotelianism. In Justification and application: Remarks on discourse ethics. Trans. Cronin, Ciaran P.Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1993b. On the pragmatic, the ethical, and the moral employments of practical reason. In Justification and application.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. Between facts and norms. Trans. Rehg, William. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1998. Actions, speech acts, linguistically mediated interactions, and the lifeworld. In On the pragmatics of communication, ed. Cooke, Maeve. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Keller, Jean. 2002. Friendship and dialogue. In Wissen, Macht, Geschlecht: Knowledge, gender, power. Zurich: Chronos Verlag.Google Scholar
Kohlberg, Lawrence, and Kramer, R. 1969. Continuities and discontinuities in child and adult moral development. Human Development 12: 93–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lugones, Maria. 2003. Playfulness, “world”‐traveling, and loving perception. In Pilgrimages/peregrinajes: Theorizing coalition against multiple oppressions. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Lyotard, Jean‐Francois. 1984. The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. Trans. Bennington, Geoff and Massumi, Brian. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
McCarthy, Thomas. 1996. Practical discourse: On the relation of morality to politics. In Habermas and the public sphere, ed. Calhoun, Craig. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McPherson, Miller, Smith‐Lovin, Lynn, and Cook, James. 2001. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology. 27: 415–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meehan, Johanna. 1994. Autonomy, recognition and respect: Habermas, Benjamin, and Honneth. Constellations 1 (2): 270–85.Google Scholar
Meehan, Johanna. 1995. Feminists read Habermas. Gendering the subject of discourse. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Meehan, Johanna. 2000. Feminism and Habermas's discourse ethics. Philosophy and Social Criticism 26 (3): 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyers, Diana. 1987. The socialized individual and individual autonomy: An intersection between philosophy and psychology. In Women and moral theory, ed. Kittay, Eva Feder and Meyers, Diana T.Totowa, N.J.: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart 1869/1988. The subjection of women. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller 1989. Justice, gender, and the family. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Rehg, William. 1994. Insight and solidarity: The discourse ethics of Jürgen Habermas. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Schweickart, Patrocinio. 1987. Engendering critical discourse. In The current in criticism, ed. Koelb, Clayton and Lokke, Virgil. West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University Press.Google Scholar
Tronto, Joan. 1993. Moral boundaries. New York: Routledge Press.Google Scholar
Verbrugge, Lois M. 1977. The structure of adult friendship choices. Social Forces 56: 576–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, Richard. 1999. Friendship: Ancient and modern. International Philosophical Quarterly 39 (1): 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Charles. 2004. Particularity and perspective taking: On feminism and Habermas's discourse theory of morality. Hypatia 19 (4): 49–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar