JURGEN subjects in the act are based on the

 

JURGEN HABERMAS THEORY
OF COMMUNICATIVE ACTION

According to Jürgen Habermas, as a human action,
communication is the front plan at the very moment when it will form the
essence of human actions.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Communicative action theory is not addressed in language,
linguistic terms, semiotic, semantic, indicative scientific aspects.

 

The concept of communicative action is related to the
interaction of at least two persons with interpersonal affiliation, which is
the language and the ability to act.

Communicative actions arise in environments where it is possible
to express the opinions of all participants on equal terms.

 

In the model of communicative action, those who have the
ability to speak and act communicate rationally through language.  The subjects in the act are based on the
culture in which they claim their claims,

 

Communicative action takes place in a social context that
Habermas defines as the world of life. The world of life for Habermas is the
area in which the people who act in an effort to cope with situations are in
communicative action.

In the life world of Habermas, the daily life dimension
brought about by the knowledge, traditions and habits in the life of the life
and this means the social processes bringing the idea of ??unity between
individuals through this dimension. world is jointly integrated with the
concept of communicative action based on the interpretation process.

 

 

 

The communicative act occurs when the speaker’s intention
is understood in the process of communicating about certain contents.

 

Habermas takes Marxist thought as a starting point in a
more open and thought-provoking way, and points out that his purpose is not in
the overcoming of Marxist theory, but in his reconstruction.

Habermas criticizes the legitimization of public policy
decisions by means of representative democracies; instead they argue that they
should be produced as a result of a process based on public consultation.

Habermas takes this as a social issue, not as an
individual issue, but as a useful framework for public policy.

 

At the basis of Habermas’s communication action theory
lies the problem of communication reaching consensus of those who have the
ability to speak and act in communication. Habermas is not against rationality
but thinks it is an object of all kinds of rationality. Let’s continue with a
current example to better understand this theory.

 

 

The events of Gezi Park started in May 2013.  Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality of Taksim
Gezi Park to break down a part of the five trees from there to work to hear the
work in the of the small number of young people to protect the park with the
purpose of the collecting around the end of the event took place.

Eventually, things got more and more widespread.. The
government’s harsh reaction has caused the events to grow even more. Actions are
spread all over Turkey.

In the meantime, although the main purpose seems to be
nature lover, nature lover is just a mask. The main aim of the actions is a
protest against the attitude of the government.

I will interpret this according to Habermass’s theory of
communicative action.

 

Habermas refers to the theory of communicative action
that people themselves and other people of society are motivated by means of
socially coordinated activities or actions and that these actions are carried
out through communication.

These actions are made up of people with different
thoughts, beliefs, lifestyles and political beliefs.

 

These actions are communicative actions because these
people have interacted to fight against crisis. Habermas refers to the
interaction of people to fight against crisis as communicative action.

According to Habermas, communicative actions occur in
environments where all participants have the opportunity to express their views
on equal terms. The communicative act occurs when the speaker’s intention is
understood in the process of communicating in a certain context.

 

In these events, people expressed themselves equally.
Despite thought and other differences, these people meet under a pot.  So there is ideal speech.

 According to
Habermas, the emergence of a rational discourse depends on the emergence of
ideal speech. The ideal speech environment must have certain characteristics.  Habermas are called these features, speech
ethics.

These include generality, discourse, validity claim,
autonomy, ideal role taking, consensus, power neutrality and transparency.

 

In the model of communicative action, people with speech
and action pass rational communication through language.  Language here is not just sounds or symbols.

 People who do
these actions have rationalized communication for a purpose. These people have
acted for common purposes that are obviously rational potential.

These people tried to reach a consensus with the
government through their comments and comments.  But what the government has done the prevented
this communication for a long time.  Because
this attitude of power and the inequalities between the two sides have
prevented a healthy communication.

 

According to Habermas, the strategic action of the
government is to make the government accept the alternative which serves for
its own purposes rather than reaching common purpose and communicating.

This problem should be tackled in a deliberative democracy,
because when people think that they allow enough  deliberations to give their decisions, they
tend to see their decisions as legitimate and increase their acceptance.

 

In this way, communication would be established and a
common framework would be drawn. According to Habermas, whatever the argument
is, there is a frame common to both, beyond the point of view.