Why we need to avoid theorizing about rationality: A putnamian criticism of habermas’s epistemology

Social Epistemology

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 117-131

  Cummings, Louise ^a  

^a NOTTINGHAM TRENT UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011187087     PISSN: 02691728     EISSN: 14645297     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02691720210150761     Document Type: Note

References (11)

1. BURLESON, B., 1978, Rhetorical criticism as the critique of ideology: the perspective of Jurgen Habermas. Cited in J.W. Wenzel (1979) Jurgen Habermas and the dialectical perspective on argumentation. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 16, 83–94.
2. CARNAP, R., 1950, Empiricism, semantics and ontology. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 4, 20–40.
3. HABERMAS, J., 1972, Knowledge and Human Interests (London: Heinemann).
4. HABERMAS, J., 1979, Legitimation Crisis (London: Heinemann).
5. HABERMAS, J., 1984, The Theory of Communicative Action – Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society (London: Heinemann).
6. HAHN, H., NEURATH, O. and CARNAP, R., 1973, The scienti. c conception of the world: the Vienna Circle, in M. Neurath and R.S. Cohen (eds) Empiricism and Sociology (Dordrecht/Boston: D. Reidel).
7. MCCARTHY, T., 1978, The Critical Theory of Jurgen Habermas (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
8. MYERSON, G., 1994, Rhetoric, Reason and Society: Rationality as Dialogue (London: SAGE Publications).
9. PUTNAM, H., 1981, Reason, Truth and History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
10. PUTNAM, H., 1983, Realism and Reason: Philosophical Papers, Volume 3 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
11. PUTNAM, H., 1994, Words and Life, edited by James Conant (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).