I argue that Johanna Meehan’s call to examine the extralinguistic psychic, affective and biological dimensions of gender identity is extremely important both for feminist theory in particular and for contemporary Continental philosophy in general. However, I suspect that such an examination might necessitate more than a mere expansion or reconstruction of Habermas’ views; on the contrary, I suggest that Meehan’s line of argument might lead instead toward a radical deconstruction of Habermasian critical theory.
Benhabib, S. (1995) ‘The Debate over Women and Moral Theory Revisited’, in J. Meehan (ed.) Feminists Read Habermas: Gendering the Subject of Discourse. New York: Routledge.
2.
Fraser, N. (1989) ‘What’s Critical about Critical Theory? The Case of Habermas and Gender’, in N. Fraser, Unruly Practices: Power, Discourse and Gender in Contemporary Social Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
3.
Locke, J. (1959) An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Vol. One. New York: Dover Press.
4.
Meehan, J. (1995a) ‘Autonomy, Recognition, and Respect: Habermas, Benjamin, and Honneth’, in J. Meehan (ed.) Feminists Read Habermas: Gendering the Subject of Discourse. New York: Routledge.
5.
Meehan, J. (1995b) ‘Introduction’, in J. Meehan (ed.) Feminists Read Habermas: Gendering the Subject of Discourse. New York: Routledge.
6.
Meehan, J. (2000) ‘Habermas and Feminism’, Philosophy and Social Criticism26 (3): 39-52.
