Habermas’s Theory of Communicative Action and the Colonization of the Lifeworld
The chapter introduces Jürgen Habermas’s concepts that can be made operative when we analyze the themes of Death Café “death talk” in Chapter 4. The concepts are primarily derived from Habermas’s classic two-volume work, The Theory of Communicative Action as well as from his other publications. The chapter discusses Habermas’s contention that democracy need not be embodied by macro-level institutional mechanisms that promote elections, a process that is dependent on bureaucratic mechanisms that operate only during election cycles. He contends that attributes of democracy can be unearthed in a potentially free communication that can exist in the lifeworld, a world of everyday activities, and its corresponding communication content to facilitate these activities.
- Alexy, Robert. 1996. “Jurgen Habermas’s Theory of Legal Discourse.” Cardozo Law Review 17(4–5): 1027–1034.Google Scholar
- Calhoun, Craig. 1994. Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Chriss, James J. 1998. “Review Essay of Jürgen Habermas’s Between Facts and Norms.” Sociology & Criminology Faculty Publications. Paper 100.Google Scholar
- Frank, Arthur. 2000. “Notes on Habermas: Lifeworld and System.” University of Calgary, Dept. of Sociology. WEBSITE accessed on June 11, 2014. http://people.ucalgary.ca/~frank/habermas.html.
- Fromm, Erich. 2012. To Have or To Be. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
- Habermas, Jürgen. 1971. Knowledge and Human Interests. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
- Habermas, Jürgen. 1975. Legitimation Crisis. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
- Habermas, Jürgen. 1984. The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
- Habermas, Jürgen. 1987. The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functional Reason. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
- Habermas, Jürgen. 1994. Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Kemmis, Stephen, and McTaggart Robin. 2007. “Participatory Action Research: Communicative Action and the Public Sphere..” In Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, edited by Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, 271–330. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Krey, Peter. 2002. “The Life-World and the Two Systems.” Scholardarity. WEBSITE accessed on November 28, 2015. http://www.scholardarity.com/?s=krey+life-world+two+systems.
- Miles, Lizzy, and Charles A. Corr. 2017. “Death Café: What Is It and What We Can Learn from It.” Omega—Journal of Death and Dying. 75(2):151–165.Google Scholar
- Oldenburg, Ray. 1999. The Great Good Place. New York: Marlowe & Company.Google Scholar
- Reay, Diane. 2013. “Universities and the Reproduction of Inequality.” In A Manifesto for the Public University, edited by J. Holmwood, 112–126. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
- Slaughter, Shiela, and Gary Rhoades. 2004. Academic Capitalism and the New Economy: Markets, State, and Higher Education. Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
- Szczelkun, Stefan. 1999. “Summary of the Theory of Communicative Action.” Royal College of Art, London. WEBSITE accessed on June 8, 2016. http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/publsbm01.htm.
- Warren, Mark E. 1993. “Can Participatory Democracy Produce Better Selves? Psychological Dimensions of Habermas’s Discursive Model of Democracy.” Political Sociology 14(2): 209–234.Google Scholar
- Yetim, Fahri. 2005. “A Discourse-Based Meta-Communication Model for Collective Sense-Making.” Paper presented at The Language Acton Perspective on Communication Modelling, Kiruna, Sweden, June 19–20, 2005.Google Scholar