Abstract
The problem of communication seems to be considered in our culture along two main opposing lines: on the one hand, as a development which can endanger the individual and collective capacity to control social complexity; on the other hand, as a model for a new kind of rationality. The possibility of applying such different interpretations is perhaps revelatory of the ambivalence of communication as such. Through a critique of Habermas's theory of communicative rationality, the author shows that the inherent limitations and negative aspects of any form of discourse can never be overcome. It is necessary instead to reach a delicate balance between absolutization, which gives to communication forms their determinate character, and relativization, which recognizes that life experience is ever more complex than any symbolic expression of it can be.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.