Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

system, community (lifeworld) and the role of "outsider"

Expand Messages
  • Tommy Beavitt
    Hello all, It s been all quiet on this list for some time, so I hope you won t mind me using it to air a thought that I woke up with this morning. I d be
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 14, 2009
      Hello all,

      It's been all quiet on this list for some time, so I hope you won't
      mind me using it to air a thought that I woke up with this morning.
      I'd be really interested in a Habermasian perspective.

      It seems to me that when, as individuals, we find ourselves in the
      role of "outsider" relative to some entity, we tend to regard that
      entity much as Habermas regards System. Indeed, it may seem that the
      dehumanising aspect of System forces us all to take the role of
      "outsider" from time to time. How else could we retain our
      individuality and our sense of possessing free will? We'd otherwise
      feel like mere cogs, performing some role, only to be replaced by
      another cog when our utility has been exceeded.

      But as "outsider" we may gain a perspective on System that allows us
      to treat it with some objectivity and also to preserve our (illusion
      of) independence with respect to it. We may, as Habermas has done,
      treat it critically and find fault with various parts of its workings
      — we may even find fault with System as a whole.

      Habermas' thought appears to require a second entity, which he calls
      Lifeworld, in order to maintain the consistency of the individual
      ("outsider") in his/her attitude with respect to System. Others may
      use the term "Community" to denote that with respect to which an
      individual's identity is defined. In the "alternative" movement, the
      concept of Community plays a central role in the definition of
      attitudes with respect to System. I'd suggest a similar role is played
      by the idea of consensus, e.g. peer-review, etc. in the academic
      community.

      But the role of "outsider" can be played equally with respect to
      Community (or Lifeworld) as it can with respect to System. Indeed, I'd
      argue that there is no Community, no Lifeworld but there are
      communities and life-worlds — just as there is no System, only
      systems. It is only possible to argue this position as an outsider,
      since it is through the act of stepping outside any particular
      community/lifeworld/system that one can convince oneself (if nobody
      else) that these entities exist in the plural and not in a totalising
      singular form.

      Is this a valid perspective, or does one automatically invalidate
      one's perspective by assuming the role of outsider? Has Habermasian
      thought covered the idea of the "outsider" (as defined, for example,
      by Camus)?

      Any thoughts?

      Regards

      Tommy
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.