Habermas and Derrida via Wikipedia

---

Who knows how long a passage at Wikipedia will be allowed to persist; so, I've recorded the following. (Who wrote this rather amazing passage?)

---

Habermas and Jacques Derrida, perhaps Europe's two most influential philosophers, engaged in somewhat acrimonious disputes beginning in the 1980s and culminated in a refusal of extended debate and talking past one another. Following Habermas's publication of "Beyond a Temporalized Philosophy of Origins: Derrida" (in The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity), Derrida, citing Habermas as an example, remarked that, "those who have accused me of reducing philosophy to literature or logic to rhetoric ... have visibly and carefully avoided reading me" ("Is There a Philosophical Language?," p. 218, in Points...).

life becomes the primordial venue of theoretical practice

---

Normative validity of lifeworld practices looks proximally the same as factical acceptance. The difference depends on the ability of the truly normative claim to work with validation processes when (inasmuch as) they’re required. People working pre-critically do much the same things as people working in ordinary life critically, because most unquestioned presumptions are established for (once-overtly) good reason, though the good reason is beyond ordinary understanding or has been forgotten.

---

Anyway, a theoretically valid practice is not the same as a theoretical practice! How to do things with words, for example, is not practically about linguistic analysis (and/or showing mastery of surrealizing narrativity).

Nonetheless, love of “theory” is something that fellow lovers best understand.

internetting Habermas

---

A discussion group address is, like any Internet address, part of an evolving Internet paradigm of interconnectivity.

Sept. 2021: An earlier referenced Yahoo! Group/Habermas address no longer exists because Yahoo! gave up sponsoring discussion groups.

A Habermasian interest in a group discussion address expresses at least an interest in that evolution, i.e., generally, a philosophical “Human Interest” or general human interest in discursive interconnectivity, especially that which contributes to [insert pithy synoptic of JH’s project]—which, by the way, is ultimately not a matter of JH’s view of The Project (or “research program”) in which he participates as leading exemplar (while that fact is, of course, no license to ingenuinely misrepresent his difficult views, e.g., to create a straw man in order to have one’s “own” view).