论文部分内容阅读
阿佩尔把对话的游戏规则或前提所包含的理性与一般的人类理性的要求关联起来,他以此提出对话理性的概念,试图在喧嚣一片的理性批判声中重构理性概念。其思路与哈贝马斯有关交往理性的基本思路大抵一致,但在具体的环节上却有较大的差别。阿佩尔强调通过先验语用学的反思可以获得对有实质内容的对话前提的认知,并且认为对话理性直接就是一般的人类理性的要求;哈贝马斯则基于一种普遍语用学的立场,认为对交往行动的前提只能做形式化的重构,对话原则所包含的规范要求只具有程序意义。阿佩尔的理性诉求强于哈贝马斯,其思想内部也有更为严密的逻辑一贯性,但进一步的追究表明,支撑阿佩尔对话理性概念的终极奠基思想似乎包含了一些难以克服的困难。
In his connection with the general rationality of human reason, Apparently relates the connotations of the game’s rules or premises to the theory of dialogue, and attempts to reconstruct the concept of rationality in the noisy, rational critique. The basic idea of Habermas’s communicative rationality is roughly the same, but there are big differences in specific links. Appel emphasizes that through the reflection of the a priori pragmatics can obtain the understanding of the substance of the dialogue premise, and that dialogue rationality is directly required by the general human rationality; Habermas is based on a universal pragmatics . He held that formal preconditions for the interaction can only be formally reconfigured and that the normative requirements contained in the principle of dialogue have procedural significance. Appel’s rational appeal is stronger than that of Habermas and there is a more rigorous logical consistency within its thinking. However, further investigations show that the ultimate foundation stone proposition that supports the concept of Apoll’s dialogue seems to contain some insurmountable difficulties .