A Critique of the Habermassian Theory of Communicative Action viewed through the Prism of the Post-operaist Theses

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18800/arete.202102.003

Keywords:

Habermas, Post-operaist, Post-Fordist, Negri, Virno

Abstract

This article revisits the post-operaist critique of Jürgen Habermas’s Theory of communicative action in light of the political issues prompted by the post-Fordist production system. It examines the post-operaist and Habermassian interpretation of Marx’s Grundrisse, focusing in particular on the concept of living labor. We also analyze the extent to which the hermeneutic potential of communicative action is annulled by shifting the problem from the ontological level to the ethical realm. Lastly, we argue that the duality between material labor and immaterial labor presented by post-operaism does not replicate the habermassian duality between communicative action and instrumental action.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Antonio Gómez Villar, University of Barcelona

    Profesor de Filosofía en la Universitat de Barcelona (UB). Sus principales líneas de investigación tienen que ver con los modos en que se ha redefinido el campo conceptual de recomposición de clase atendiendo a la transformación de las subjetividades y las nuevas relaciones culturales y políticas; y con el análisis de los repertorios de acción colectiva desde una perspectiva antagonista. Es autor del libro de E. Laclau y Ch. Mouffe: Hegemonía i populismo (Gedisa, 2021); y editor de los libros Maradona, un mito plebeyo (Ned, 2021); Working Dead. Escenarios del postrabajo (La Virreina, 2019), junto a María Ruido y Marta Echaves; y de Vidas dañadas. Austeridad y vulnerabilidad en la era de la austeridad (Artefakte, 2014), junto a Sonia Arribas.
    antonio.gomez.villar@hotmail.com

Downloads

Published

2021-11-25

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

A Critique of the Habermassian Theory of Communicative Action viewed through the Prism of the Post-operaist Theses. (2021). Areté, 33(2), 245-264. https://doi.org/10.18800/arete.202102.003