Brandom, Wittgenstein and intersubjectivity

The introductory part of the article deals with general features of Brandom’s social pragmatic position. The central part considers Brandom’s interpretation of Kripke’s conception of social character of rules, as well as Habermas’ critique of Brandom’s conception of I-thou and I-we types of...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Sládeček Michal
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, Belgrade 2013-01-01
Series:Filozofija i Društvo
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0353-5738/2013/0353-57381304245S.pdf
id doaj-71e450210f2c428f8b008551688a4c86
record_format Article
spelling doaj-71e450210f2c428f8b008551688a4c862020-11-24T23:36:39ZdeuInstitute for Philosophy and Social Theory, BelgradeFilozofija i Društvo0353-57382013-01-0124424526710.2298/FID1304245S0353-57381304245SBrandom, Wittgenstein and intersubjectivitySládeček Michal0Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, BelgradeThe introductory part of the article deals with general features of Brandom’s social pragmatic position. The central part considers Brandom’s interpretation of Kripke’s conception of social character of rules, as well as Habermas’ critique of Brandom’s conception of I-thou and I-we types of intersubjectivity. In the final part the author is surveying Brandom’s interpretation of Wittgenstein’s understanding of intersubjectivity, as well as of norms and rules in general. According to the author, Brandom treats intersubjectivity as immediate communication, while neglecting the role of socially and historically shared norms. Also, Brandom rejected justification of rules by past application, and, by emphasizing the key role of inferential and practical consequences of accepted rules, he considered pragmatic attitudes and commitments as oriented towards future validation of meaning and rules. The author also claims that, from Wittgensteinian perspective, communication and intersubjectivity involve more a profound re-adjustment of interlocutors’ perspectives rather than doxatic interchange of perspectives, as Brandom suggested. [Projekat Ministarstva nauke Republike Srbije, br. 43007: Ethics and Environmental Politics: Institutions, Techniques and Norms in the Challenge of Changing the Natural Environment]http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0353-5738/2013/0353-57381304245S.pdfBrandomHabermasIntersubjectivityKripkeLanguageNormativityRulesWittgenstein
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sládeček Michal
spellingShingle Sládeček Michal
Brandom, Wittgenstein and intersubjectivity
Filozofija i Društvo
Brandom
Habermas
Intersubjectivity
Kripke
Language
Normativity
Rules
Wittgenstein
author_facet Sládeček Michal
author_sort Sládeček Michal
title Brandom, Wittgenstein and intersubjectivity
title_short Brandom, Wittgenstein and intersubjectivity
title_full Brandom, Wittgenstein and intersubjectivity
title_fullStr Brandom, Wittgenstein and intersubjectivity
title_full_unstemmed Brandom, Wittgenstein and intersubjectivity
title_sort brandom, wittgenstein and intersubjectivity
publisher Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, Belgrade
series Filozofija i Društvo
issn 0353-5738
publishDate 2013-01-01
description The introductory part of the article deals with general features of Brandom’s social pragmatic position. The central part considers Brandom’s interpretation of Kripke’s conception of social character of rules, as well as Habermas’ critique of Brandom’s conception of I-thou and I-we types of intersubjectivity. In the final part the author is surveying Brandom’s interpretation of Wittgenstein’s understanding of intersubjectivity, as well as of norms and rules in general. According to the author, Brandom treats intersubjectivity as immediate communication, while neglecting the role of socially and historically shared norms. Also, Brandom rejected justification of rules by past application, and, by emphasizing the key role of inferential and practical consequences of accepted rules, he considered pragmatic attitudes and commitments as oriented towards future validation of meaning and rules. The author also claims that, from Wittgensteinian perspective, communication and intersubjectivity involve more a profound re-adjustment of interlocutors’ perspectives rather than doxatic interchange of perspectives, as Brandom suggested. [Projekat Ministarstva nauke Republike Srbije, br. 43007: Ethics and Environmental Politics: Institutions, Techniques and Norms in the Challenge of Changing the Natural Environment]
topic Brandom
Habermas
Intersubjectivity
Kripke
Language
Normativity
Rules
Wittgenstein
url http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0353-5738/2013/0353-57381304245S.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT sladecekmichal brandomwittgensteinandintersubjectivity
_version_ 1725522160142778368