BRADFORD SCHOLARS

    • Sign in
    View Item 
    •   Bradford Scholars
    • Social Sciences
    • Social Sciences Publications
    • View Item
    •   Bradford Scholars
    • Social Sciences
    • Social Sciences Publications
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of Bradford ScholarsCommunitiesAuthorsTitlesSubjectsPublication DateThis CollectionAuthorsTitlesSubjectsPublication Date

    My Account

    Sign in

    HELP

    Bradford Scholars FAQsCopyright Fact SheetPolicies Fact SheetDeposit Terms and ConditionsDigital Preservation Policy

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Discourse Ethics and 'the Rift of Speechlessness': The Limits of Argumentation and Possible Future Directions.

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Publication date
    2006
    Author
    Kelly, Ute
    Keyword
    Discourse ethics
    Moral discourses
    Habermas
    Religious discourses
    Peer-Reviewed
    Yes
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Jürgen Habermas's discourse ethics ¿ and within this framework, particularly the idea of 'moral discourses', which focuses on 'what is good for all' and is intended as a means of addressing situations where a shared substantive 'background consensus' does not exist or has broken down ¿ is premised on the assumption that participants attempt to engage with and persuade each other through reasoned argumentation. Where does this leave (potential) participants with strong religious convictions? In several recent publications, Habermas himself has started to reflect on this question. His reflections are motivated not least by (responses to) 11 September 2001. In this context, Habermas has suggested that those with secular commitments engage in a process of self-reflection about the meaning of secularisation, the losses involved in the questioning of religious world views, and the question of how we might respond to these losses. Yet while these reflections are interesting and suggestive, Habermas's framework, as it stands, cannot easily accommodate his own recognition of the need to overcome what he has called 'the rift of speechlessness' that threatens to divide religious and secular discourses. Against this background, I consider elements of William E. Connolly's recent reflections on Neuropolitics as one example of a body of work that suggests possible alternative responses to the challenges Habermas identifies ¿ and as a contribution that deserves to be taken seriously by those interested in the further development of discourse ethics and/or deliberative democracy.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10454/3536
    Version
    not applicable paper
    Citation
    Kelly, U. (2006). Discourse Ethics and 'the Rift of Speechlessness': The Limits of Argumentation and Possible Future Directions. Political Studies Review. Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 3-15.
    Link to publisher’s version
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-9299.2006.00033.x
    Type
    Article
    Collections
    Social Sciences Publications

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.