A Critique of Habermas' Theory of Practical Rationality

D I SCUS S I ON

2 6 5

25 Ibid., pp. 68--94. 26 Ibid., pp. 84--86. 27 Ibid., pp. 73--90. 28 Ibid., pp. 130--177.

29 The literature on externalities and spill-over costs represents a partial recognition of this issue within neo-classical economic theory. See R. Marris, (ed.), The Corporate Society, 1974, Macmillan Press, pp. 251--399. 30 H. Marcuse, Eros and Civilization, 1962, Vintage Books, pp. 96--114. 31 For an example of the contextual theory of meaning see T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 1970, University of Chicago Press. 32 See A. J. Ayer, Language, Truth and Logic, 1952, Dover Publications. 33 Extreme statements of this position may be found in Veblen, McLuhan, and Ellul. See. L. Winner, Autonomous Technology, 1977, MIT Press, pp. 237--305. 34 M. Weber, 'The Meaning of Ethical Neutrality' in Methodology of the Social Sciences, 1949, Free Press, pp. 19--27. 3s An insightful discussion of the contradictory interests of intellectuals can be found in A. W. Gouldner, The Future of Intellectuals and the Rise of the New Class, 1979, Seabury Press. 3~ j. Habermas, 1971, pp. 280--2. 37 K. Marx, Capital, Vol. I. 1967. International Publishers, pp. 484--488. 3s K. Marx, Capital, Vol. I. 1977, Vintage Books, pp. 163--77. 39 j. Ellul, The TechnologicalSociety, 1970, Alfred Knopf, pp. 428--36. 40 A. Toffier, The Third Wave, 1980, William Morrow & Company, pp. 408--460.

Carleton College, Department of Sociology~Anthropology, Northfield, MN 55057, U.S.A.

NADER SA I ED I