Jurgen Habermas

Habermas wants to illustrate his theory of communication and how it pertains to all in a society. His theory deals with various levels, and in each, Habermas shows how they contribute to an emancipated society - which is central to his theory. In order for Habermas theory of communication to function, all must be free and have equal standing, even if just on the level of communicating. (238). He later defines the difference between communication and discourse.
His levels of communication include 1) Reasona nd the public sphere, 2) The nature of human knowledge, 3) Life-world and system, 4) Universal pragmatics, 5) Validity claims, and 6) the idea of discourse. He proceeds to describe each of these levels. (128) Habermas describes the public sphere as a place where everyone has the same rights, other social factors don't matter, and a unified opinion can be formed. "The citizen is guaranteed a right of access to discussion in the public sphere by the virtue of the abstract right of humanness." (239). The second level, which is human knowledge, contains three seperate aspects that are defined as basic needs of all individuals and consist of work, interaction, and power (240-241). These all work together to form the human knowledge. The thrid level is lifeworld and system. According to Habermas, life world is all that is inherent, taken-for-granted, and universally accepted among a culture. He gives examples such as customs and traditions. In order to fully function, societies need a life world and a system. A sytem is seen as a stabalizing mechanism. Habermas's example is the stock market. (242-243) The fourth level is Universal pragmatics. Habermas states that the life world of a society is hidden in language, so language needs to have a means by which it is rejuvinated, which is the Universal pragmatic. His study of Universal language use led him to the spech act, which he focuses on alot. (245) A speech act is made of two dimensions, which include the words that are being spoken and the act being implied by the words. Habermas describes three different speech acts which inludes constatives, regulatives, and avowals. Constatives are a claim of truth such as "the grass is green" (245). Regulatives imply what should or should not be done such as "commands, prohibitions, promises, and requests" (246). Avowals deal with expressions such as "feelings, wishes, and intentions" (246). The use of these speech acts prove the ability to communicate. The fifth level is validity claims. Validity claims correspond directly to the different speech acts described above. Constatives have a validity claim of truth, regulatives have the validity claim of appropriateness, and avowals have the validity claim of sincerity. (247). Habermas continues with describing what he feels id the ideal speech situation, which must abide to a structure without hierarchy, power only in the argument itself, and equality of all involved. With the levels he has described, this "perfect" situation seems impossible. It would be difficult for humans to put aside the very things that Habermas claims make them human. Beacuse of this, and the fact that there is rarely, if ever, this kind of communication - it is moved to discourse. "The move to discourse involves only two of the three kinds of speech acts and their validity claims: constatives and regulatives" (249). Habermas ends by describing various forms of discourse and the validity claims that they use.
I find it interesting how rhetoric has been intertwined with philosophy, and now with Habermas, psychology as well. He used Freud and his beleives in some of the point he made. I also found it interesting that aspects of Toulimins ideas were apparent in one of Habermas's discourse theories because it included the need for claim, warrant, backing, and etc. I think it was important that Habermas made the distinction that the ideal speech situation is unreasonable, and rarely acheived. It was imperative to his discussion on discourse.