What do you think?
Rate this book
Постметафізичне мислення
Книжка всесвітньо відомого німецького філософа Юргена Габермаса присвячена аналізу особливостей і проблем сучасного мислення. В центрі уваги знаходиться евристичний потенціал класичних форм раціональності й ті новації (зокрема, прагматичний поворот), які характеризують філософський дискурс сучасності. Актуальність книги полягає в тому, що вона пропонує продуктивний сценарій подолання тієї непевності й навіть кризи інтелектуальної культури, яка пов’язана з викликом постмодерну та деструкцією класичних теоретичних парадигм. Стверджуючи власну позицію як постметафізичну, автор полемізує, з одного боку, з новітніми спробами повернення до метафізики філософії свідомості, а з іншого – з контекстуалістськими варіантами критики розуму.
Для науковців, викладачів, студентів і всіх, хто цікавиться етикою, соціальною філософією та філософською антропологією.
Для науковців, викладачів, студентів і всіх, хто цікавиться етикою, соціальною філософією та філософською антропологією.
280 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
23 people are currently reading
281 people want to read
About the author
Jürgen Habermas
378 books695 followersJürgen Habermas is a German sociologist and philosopher in the tradition of critical theory and American pragmatism. He is perhaps best known for his work on the concept of the public sphere, the topic of his first book entitled The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. His work focuses on the foundations of social theory and epistemology, the analysis of advanced capitalistic societies and democracy, the rule of law in a critical social-evolutionary context, and contemporary politics—particularly German politics. Habermas's theoretical system is devoted to revealing the possibility of reason, emancipation, and rational-critical communication latent in modern institutions and in the human capacity to deliberate and pursue rational interests.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
September 24, 2025
You can find my review of all three volumes here.
December 5, 2024
Important book! because Habermas puts his lifetime of thinking to use on the most knotty problem facing humanity. The reconciliation of religious and scientific or rational thinking with the goal of a world of tolerance and peace. Habermas tries to flip himself out of the Western Mindset and consider what might be necessary to set the scene to reach better global understanding.
This book is inevitably a collection of Habermas’ ideas put to work to answer these questions of how humans can survive the next period of their evolution whilst not losing what has been achieved of value in the last 1500 years, and in particular freedom and democracy. The world has been globalised by business and at the same time religions seem to be thriving. How do we do we negotiate the secular rationalism of the imperial West’s literary enlightenment and the best of its scientific insights with an aim to communicate respectfully with the major world cultures and religions, which have had a very different development but also share many aspects.
At the core of his hope for the future is the common human power of language to reach agreements (initially on what a word means!) and to go on to solving collective problems, negotiate moral standards and the best ways of living together. This was originally explored back in 1980 in Habermas' ‘Theory of Communicative Action’ (I wrote a long summary which was the basis of a Wikipedia mash-up but is preserved as a ebook...)
As he says in his introduction this is a retirement project motivated by the enjoyment of having time to read the core texts. He is looking back over philosophy in the light of all the other theorising he has done about human reasoning. Is is accessible to the ordinary reader? Habermas has an uneven style but if you skate over the abstruse sections there's always a gleaming summary waiting. At the end of the book is an overview of the three volumes - with some general knowledge you can see what to expect. Mostly names I at least recognise and a smattering of names that are new to me, but look juicy, even tho I wonder if he can make me ‘fully’ understand Kant and Hegel for the first time! I reread the preface and it is accessible and clear - a few long sentences need reading twice but it looks promising.
The last chapter is a summary, if you tire of the detail... It is titled 'First Intermediate Reflection: The conceptual trajectories of the Axial Age'.
As a sociologist philosopher he has long studied religion and of course a deeper history of ‘post-metaphysical’ thought needs to look at those struggles and to consider what might be lost…. There is mention of ritual and so I’m looking forward to what he might elucidate about how ‘ritual’ might be needed for certain knowledge.
I was disappointed that there seemed an inevitable return to an emphasis on the situation in ancient Greece of a separation between philosophy and religion. This was also a separation of society into an intellectual elite and a common mass that were kept in order by religion. The philosophy that flourished in this situation gave an unique advantage which in spite of the dominance of Christianity in Europe and its tortured intellectual negotiation with the classics, gave rise to the development of a rational investigation of the world. Which in turn led to the obvious advantage of Maths science and technology to Europes industrial colonialist global domination.
This book reminds me of that Sixties trend to 'get into' world religions. I myself took on Thai Buddhist meditation practice for over a year that gave me mental breakthrough. Looking back it was because it filled a gap in Western knowledge of the self. European rationality was hemmed in by the oppression it served in spite of the efforts of Spinoza and Marx. I wonder if the other two volumes will address this? Looking at his Overview of the next two volumes it seems to me that his need to go methodically through the canon of philosophy might not allow him to make such a radical break.
For anyone wanting to consider philosophy's place in the wider world of ideas this is essential reading.
This book is inevitably a collection of Habermas’ ideas put to work to answer these questions of how humans can survive the next period of their evolution whilst not losing what has been achieved of value in the last 1500 years, and in particular freedom and democracy. The world has been globalised by business and at the same time religions seem to be thriving. How do we do we negotiate the secular rationalism of the imperial West’s literary enlightenment and the best of its scientific insights with an aim to communicate respectfully with the major world cultures and religions, which have had a very different development but also share many aspects.
At the core of his hope for the future is the common human power of language to reach agreements (initially on what a word means!) and to go on to solving collective problems, negotiate moral standards and the best ways of living together. This was originally explored back in 1980 in Habermas' ‘Theory of Communicative Action’ (I wrote a long summary which was the basis of a Wikipedia mash-up but is preserved as a ebook...)
As he says in his introduction this is a retirement project motivated by the enjoyment of having time to read the core texts. He is looking back over philosophy in the light of all the other theorising he has done about human reasoning. Is is accessible to the ordinary reader? Habermas has an uneven style but if you skate over the abstruse sections there's always a gleaming summary waiting. At the end of the book is an overview of the three volumes - with some general knowledge you can see what to expect. Mostly names I at least recognise and a smattering of names that are new to me, but look juicy, even tho I wonder if he can make me ‘fully’ understand Kant and Hegel for the first time! I reread the preface and it is accessible and clear - a few long sentences need reading twice but it looks promising.
The last chapter is a summary, if you tire of the detail... It is titled 'First Intermediate Reflection: The conceptual trajectories of the Axial Age'.
As a sociologist philosopher he has long studied religion and of course a deeper history of ‘post-metaphysical’ thought needs to look at those struggles and to consider what might be lost…. There is mention of ritual and so I’m looking forward to what he might elucidate about how ‘ritual’ might be needed for certain knowledge.
I was disappointed that there seemed an inevitable return to an emphasis on the situation in ancient Greece of a separation between philosophy and religion. This was also a separation of society into an intellectual elite and a common mass that were kept in order by religion. The philosophy that flourished in this situation gave an unique advantage which in spite of the dominance of Christianity in Europe and its tortured intellectual negotiation with the classics, gave rise to the development of a rational investigation of the world. Which in turn led to the obvious advantage of Maths science and technology to Europes industrial colonialist global domination.
This book reminds me of that Sixties trend to 'get into' world religions. I myself took on Thai Buddhist meditation practice for over a year that gave me mental breakthrough. Looking back it was because it filled a gap in Western knowledge of the self. European rationality was hemmed in by the oppression it served in spite of the efforts of Spinoza and Marx. I wonder if the other two volumes will address this? Looking at his Overview of the next two volumes it seems to me that his need to go methodically through the canon of philosophy might not allow him to make such a radical break.
For anyone wanting to consider philosophy's place in the wider world of ideas this is essential reading.
June 30, 2013
A difficult reading, but worth the persistence. One reading is not enough, and one must try to fully understanding the connections between the different themes collected in this book, for linguistic turn, metaphysics, communicative/strategic action, life-world, individualism and individuation - the main concepts around which Habermas's thought here revolves - are interwoven in a unique manner. Definitely a good read.
Uma leitura difícil, mas merece bem a insistênica. Uma leitura não é suficiente e é preciso tentar compreender completamente a ligação entre os diferentes temas desta obra. A viragem linguística, metafísica, agir comunicativo/estratégico, mundo da vida (Humboldt), o individualismo e individuação - os principais conceitos em torno dos quais circula o pensamento de Habermas - encontram-se aqui entrelaçam de uma maneira única. Definitivamente uma boa leitura.
Uma leitura difícil, mas merece bem a insistênica. Uma leitura não é suficiente e é preciso tentar compreender completamente a ligação entre os diferentes temas desta obra. A viragem linguística, metafísica, agir comunicativo/estratégico, mundo da vida (Humboldt), o individualismo e individuação - os principais conceitos em torno dos quais circula o pensamento de Habermas - encontram-se aqui entrelaçam de uma maneira única. Definitivamente uma boa leitura.
November 25, 2023
I couldn’t finish this book and this review is the first time I have ever given a negative review on Goodreads. I might have to read some more philosophy texts to understand this book and be able to enjoy it. This book is extremely dense, ultra technical and written in a way that I found myself looking up words and phrases.
The premise of of the book is of interest to me since I thoroughly enjoyed Critique and Praxis but I don’t think I have enough philosophical knowledge to enjoy or understand this book.
The premise of of the book is of interest to me since I thoroughly enjoyed Critique and Praxis but I don’t think I have enough philosophical knowledge to enjoy or understand this book.
March 29, 2020
Post-metaphysics
The post-metaphysical thinking is thought provoking work. Not an easy read and requires additional reading in order to get to the point but it is worthwhile.
The post-metaphysical thinking is thought provoking work. Not an easy read and requires additional reading in order to get to the point but it is worthwhile.
September 10, 2023
يبدو كتاباً مذهلاً ومشوقاً كالعادة من الفيلسوف الألماني يورغن يورغن هابرماس. وسانتظر النسخة المترجمة إلى العربية من هذا الكتاب على أحر من الجمر.
October 19, 2024
A RECENT COLLECTION OF HABERMAS’S ESSAYS ON PHILOSOPHICAL TOPICS
Jürgen Habermas (born 1929) is a German philosopher and sociologist who is one of the leading figures of the Frankfurt School. He wrote many books, such as 'The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society,' 'The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason,' 'The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere,' 'Truth and Justification,' 'The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity,' 'Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action,' etc.
The translator wrote in his Introduction to this 1988 collection, “The essays collected in this volume take up and expand upon a line of argument begun by the author in ‘The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity.’ Like most contemporary thinkers, Habermas is critical of the Western metaphysical tradition and its exaggerated conception of reason. At the same time, however, he cautions against relinquishing that conception altogether… he argues that the wholesale rejection of the metaphysical tradition inevitably undercuts the possibility of radical critique itself. He thus defends the view that genuinely postmetaphysical thinking can remain critical only if it preserves the idea of reason derived from the tradition while stripping it of its metaphysical trappings.”
In the essay ‘Metaphysics After Kant,’ Habermas says, “Frankly, analytic materialism never impressed me very much---precisely because it is a metaphysical position, whereby I mean one that sticks to what is universal when the real issue is carrying through an abstractly posed program with scientific means. Such abstract attempts to establish an objectivistic self-understanding of the human being with one blow, as it were, thrive upon the scientistic background assumption that the natural sciences … do in general furnish the model and the ultimate authority for all knowledge that is still acceptable.” (Pg. 21)
He explains, “Communicative or strategic action is required when an actor can only carry out his plans of action interactively, i.e., with the help of the actions of another actor (or their omission). Beyond that, communicative action must satisfy certain conditions of cooperation and mutual understanding: * The participating actors must conduct themselves cooperatively and attempt to reach an agreement about their plans… on the basis of common (or sufficiently overlapping) situation interpretations. * The participating actors must be prepared to achieve the intermediate goals of a common situation definition and of action coordination in the roles of speakers and hearers by way of processes of reaching understanding, i.e., by means of the unreserved and sincere pursuit of illocutionary aims.” (Pg. 79-80)
He observes, “Transcendental thinking once concerned itself with a stable stock of forms for which there were no recognizable alternatives. Today, in contrast, the experience of contingency is a whirlpool into which everything is pulled: everything could also be otherwise, the categories of the understanding, the principles of socialization and of morals, the constitution of subjectivity, the foundation of rationality itself. There are good reasons for this. Communicative reason, too, treats almost everything as contingent, even the conditions for the emergence of its own linguistic medium. But for everything that claims validity WITHIN linguistically structured forms of life, the structures of possible mutual understanding in language constitute something that cannot be gotten around.” (Pg. 139-140)
He points out, “The later Heidegger still distinguishes between thinkers and poets. But he treats texts by Anaximander and Aristotle no differently than texts by Hölderlin and Trakl. Paul de Man reads Rousseau no differently than Proust and Rilke. Derrida works on Husserl and Saussure no differently than on Artaud. Is it not an illusion to believe that texts by Freud and texts by Joyce can be sorted according to characteristics that definitively identify them as theory on the one hand and as fiction on the other?” (Pg. 206)
This book will be of key interest to those studying Habermas, and the development of his thought.
Jürgen Habermas (born 1929) is a German philosopher and sociologist who is one of the leading figures of the Frankfurt School. He wrote many books, such as 'The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society,' 'The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason,' 'The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere,' 'Truth and Justification,' 'The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity,' 'Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action,' etc.
The translator wrote in his Introduction to this 1988 collection, “The essays collected in this volume take up and expand upon a line of argument begun by the author in ‘The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity.’ Like most contemporary thinkers, Habermas is critical of the Western metaphysical tradition and its exaggerated conception of reason. At the same time, however, he cautions against relinquishing that conception altogether… he argues that the wholesale rejection of the metaphysical tradition inevitably undercuts the possibility of radical critique itself. He thus defends the view that genuinely postmetaphysical thinking can remain critical only if it preserves the idea of reason derived from the tradition while stripping it of its metaphysical trappings.”
In the essay ‘Metaphysics After Kant,’ Habermas says, “Frankly, analytic materialism never impressed me very much---precisely because it is a metaphysical position, whereby I mean one that sticks to what is universal when the real issue is carrying through an abstractly posed program with scientific means. Such abstract attempts to establish an objectivistic self-understanding of the human being with one blow, as it were, thrive upon the scientistic background assumption that the natural sciences … do in general furnish the model and the ultimate authority for all knowledge that is still acceptable.” (Pg. 21)
He explains, “Communicative or strategic action is required when an actor can only carry out his plans of action interactively, i.e., with the help of the actions of another actor (or their omission). Beyond that, communicative action must satisfy certain conditions of cooperation and mutual understanding: * The participating actors must conduct themselves cooperatively and attempt to reach an agreement about their plans… on the basis of common (or sufficiently overlapping) situation interpretations. * The participating actors must be prepared to achieve the intermediate goals of a common situation definition and of action coordination in the roles of speakers and hearers by way of processes of reaching understanding, i.e., by means of the unreserved and sincere pursuit of illocutionary aims.” (Pg. 79-80)
He observes, “Transcendental thinking once concerned itself with a stable stock of forms for which there were no recognizable alternatives. Today, in contrast, the experience of contingency is a whirlpool into which everything is pulled: everything could also be otherwise, the categories of the understanding, the principles of socialization and of morals, the constitution of subjectivity, the foundation of rationality itself. There are good reasons for this. Communicative reason, too, treats almost everything as contingent, even the conditions for the emergence of its own linguistic medium. But for everything that claims validity WITHIN linguistically structured forms of life, the structures of possible mutual understanding in language constitute something that cannot be gotten around.” (Pg. 139-140)
He points out, “The later Heidegger still distinguishes between thinkers and poets. But he treats texts by Anaximander and Aristotle no differently than texts by Hölderlin and Trakl. Paul de Man reads Rousseau no differently than Proust and Rilke. Derrida works on Husserl and Saussure no differently than on Artaud. Is it not an illusion to believe that texts by Freud and texts by Joyce can be sorted according to characteristics that definitively identify them as theory on the one hand and as fiction on the other?” (Pg. 206)
This book will be of key interest to those studying Habermas, and the development of his thought.
September 4, 2024
To me, the only postmetaphysical thinkers he addressed in this book were Adorno, Foucault and Derrida. But those are basically my top three philosophical idols. Is Habermas a postmetaphysical thinker? I would think that is much too steeped in the analytical tradition to be read as a metaphysical thinker and that, conversely, his writing displays little regard for the type of lyrical metaphysics Heiegger accused Nietzsche of harboring. While I am not able to say that I have a grasp on his body of work as a whole, it seems to me that Habermas does not consider it feasible to establish a body of discourse that does not stand in opposition to a realm of knowledge, as the postmodernists are said to do. Three stars. (Is that written correctly? idk)
January 18, 2025
A challenging but satisfy analysis of modern meaning structured around Jaspers' axial theory. Daunting but worth the effort.
December 20, 2023
Parts are engaging, but he also seems to follow every thread and spend lots of time and pages on stuff that I'm not sure how much it matters to the central points.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews