A Critique of Habermas' Theory of Practical Rationality

256

DISCUSSION

expresses something intended by the speaker; and it must count as fight insofar as it conforms to socially recognized expectations. 21Undistorted communication implies that all validity claims are agreed upon by the participants in dialogue. As soon as any of the validity claims is doubted by a hearer, the communicative act stops. In this case, "argumentative discourse" should take place. In a discourse, the force of the argument is the only criterion, and the correctness of norms is corroborated by consensus achieved through argumentative reasoning. 22 We can see that Habermas' theory of universal pragmatic corresponds with his theory of rationality. In fact, the claim of rationality is assumed by Habermas to be inherent in the formal presuppositions of speech acts and dialogue. It is interesting to see that Habermas' distinction between "elocutionary" and "propositional" structures of utterance correspond to his notions of practical rationality and instrumental rationality, respectively.23 (4) Finally, I should briefly refer to Habermas' assumptions with regard to human psychology as an anthropological premise of his theory of rationality. Contrary to the structuralist perception of the individual as passive embodiment of social relations, Habermasian theory finds the structural definition and requirement of a rational society already present in the logic of the personality development of individuals. For Habermas, the basic dynamics of personality develop- ment is a move toward increasing autonomy, self-consciousness, and responsibility. Identity, Habermas argues, is produced through two successive stages of "socialization" and "individuation". 24 While the stage of socialization is represented by the development of "natural identity" and later "role identity", the stage of individuation is charac- terized by development of an "ego identity".25 It is at this stage of "ego identity" that the process of need-interpretation -- which until then depended on an uncontrolled cultural tradition -- can itself become the object of discursive will-formation.26 Habermas' psychological theories are mostly influenced by Kohlberg's stages of moral consciousness, re- formulated within a general action-theory framework. 27 It is interesting to see that Habermas' positive conception of personality development not only accords with his theory of rationality, but also finds parallels between historical developments and personality dynamics.28