Realists and supporters of ‘democratic underlabouring’ have recently challenged the traditional separation between political theory and practice. Although both attack Jürgen Habermas for being an idealist whose philosophy is too removed from politics, I argue that this interpretation is inaccurate. While Habermas’s social and political theory is indeed oriented to truth and understanding, he has sought realize his communicative conception of democracy by increasing the quality of political debate as a public intellectual. Building on his approach, I argue that giving the theorist a direct role in public policy undermines theory as an enterprise oriented towards truth while overlooking the contingency, participatory nature and complicated internal logics of social and political practice. My basic thesis is that Habermas’s understanding of the relationship between theory and practice overcomes these difficulties by providing an account of theory that is independent but simultaneously also allows philosophers to participate in politics as public intellectuals.
AdornoT. W. (1963). Eingriffe: Neun kritische Modelle. Edition Suhrkamp.
2.
AdornoT. W. (1981). Negative dialectics. Continuum.
3.
AdornoT. W. (1984). The essay as form. New German Critique, 32, 151–171.
4.
ArendtH. (2000). Wahrheit und Politik. In LutzU. (Ed.), Zwischen Vergangenheit und Zukunft. Übungen im politischen Denken I. Piper Verlag.
5.
BaderinA. (2016). Political theory and public opinion: Against democratic restraint. Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 15(3), 209–233.
6.
BiebricherT. (2011). The practices of theorists: Habermas and Foucault as public intellectuals. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 37(6), 709–734.
7.
BourdieuP.SapiroG.McHaleB. (1991). Fourth lecture. Universal corporatism: The role of intellectuals in the modern world. Poetics Today, 12(4), 655–669.
8.
ChambersS. (2017). Balancing epistemic quality and equal participation in a system approach to deliberative democracy. Social Epistemology, 31(3), 266–276.
9.
ClaassenR. (2011). Making capability lists: Philosophy versus democracy. Political Studies, 59(3), 491–508.
10.
CzingonC.DiefenbachA.KempfV. (2020). Moral universalism at a time of political regression: A conversation with Jürgen Habermas about the present and his life’s work. Theory, Culture & Society, 37, 11–36.
11.
DahmsH. F. (1997). Theory in Weberian Marxism: Patterns of critical social theory in Lukacs and Habermas. Sociological Theory, 15(3), 181–214.
12.
DemirovićA. (1999). Der nonkonformistische Intellektuelle: Die Entwicklung der kritischen Theorie zur Frankfurter Schule. Suhrkamp Verlag.
13.
Durand-GasselinJ. (2018). The work of Jürgen Habermas. In Durand-GasselinJ. (Ed.), Philosophical introductions: Five approaches to communicative reason(pp. 1–59). Polity.
14.
FoucaultM. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. Pantheon.
FreyenhagenF. (2014). Adorno’s politics: Theory and Praxis in Germany’s 1960s. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 40(9), 867–893.
17.
GeussR. (1981). The idea of a critical theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt school. Cambridge University Press.
18.
GeussR. (2008). Philosophy and real politics. Princeton University Press.
19.
GeussR. (2010). Politics and the imagination. Princeton University Press.
20.
GeussR (2019). The last nineteenth century German philosopher: Habermas at 90. Verso Books Blog, 19 August.
21.
GeyerC (2008). Sein Niveau entzündet. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 25 Juni.
22.
HabermasJ (2018). Philosophical introductions: Five approaches to communicative reason. Polity.
23.
HabermasJ. (1970). Über den Begriff der politischen Beteiligung. In Arbeit, Erkenntnis, Fortschritt: Aufsätze, 1954-1970 (pp. 258–303). Verlag de Munter.
24.
HabermasJ. (1971). Towards a rational society: Student protest, science, and politics. Heinemann Educational Books Limited.
25.
HabermasJ. (1974). Theory and practice. Beacon Press.
26.
HabermasJ. (1984/1987). The theory of communicative action. Beacon Press, Vol. I & II.
27.
HabermasJ. (1989a). Heinrich Heine and the role of the intellectual in Germany. In Nicholsen, S.W. (Ed.), The new conservatism: Cultural criticism and the historians’ debate (pp. 71–99). MIT Press.
28.
HabermasJ. (1989b). The Structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT Press.
29.
HabermasJ. (1992a). Autonomy and solidarity: Interviews. Verso.
30.
HabermasJ. (1992b). Further reflections on the public sphere. In CalhounC. J. (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 421–461). MIT Press.
31.
HabermasJ. (1994). The past as future: Vergangenheit als Zukunft. University of Nebraska Press.
32.
HabermasJ. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. MIT Press.
33.
HabermasJ. (2004). Why Europe needs a constitution. In EriksenE. O.FossumJ. E.MenéndezA. J. (Eds.), Developing a constitution for Europe (pp. 17–32). Routledge.
34.
HabermasJ. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16(4), 411–426.
35.
HabermasJ. (2009). Europe: The faltering project. Polity Press.
36.
HohendahlP. (1994). Foreword. In HabermasJ. (Ed.), The past as future: Vergangenheit als Zukunft (pp. vii-xxvi).University of Nebraska Press.
37.
HohendahlP. (1997). The Scholar, the Intellectual, and the Essay: Weber, Lukács, Adorno, and Postwar Germany. The German Quarterly, 70(3), 217–232.
38.
HorkheimerM. (1972). Traditional and critical theory. In Critical theory: Selected essays. Continuum Publishing Company (pp. 188–243).
39.
HortonJ (2017). What might it mean for political theory to be more ‘realistic’?Philosophy, 45(2), 487–501.
JayM. (2019). Habermas and the light of reason: On late critical theory. Los Angeles Review of Books, 11 August.
42.
KantI. (1991). Kant’s political writings. Cambridge University Press.
43.
KratochwilF. V. (2007). Evidence, inference, and truth as problems of theory building in the social sciences. In LebowR. N.LichbackM. I. (Eds.), Theory and evidence in comparative politics and international relations (pp. 26–54). Palgrave MacMillan.
44.
LukácsG. (1972). History and class consciousness: Studies in Marxist dialectics. MIT Press.
45.
MarxK. (2000). Marx to Domela Nieuwenhuis in The Hague, London, February 22, 1881. Marxists.org.
46.
McKeanB. L. (2016). What makes a utopia inconvenient? On the advantages and disadvantages of a realist orientation to politics. American Political Science Review, 110(4), 876–888.
47.
Müller-DoohmS. (2005). Theodor W. Adorno and Jürgen Habermas – two ways of being a public intellectual: Sociological observations concerning the transformation of a social figure of modernity. European Journal of Social Theory, 8(3), 269–280.
48.
Müller-DoohmS. (2016). Habermas: A biography. Polity.
49.
PenskyM. (1995). Universalism and the situated critic. In WhiteS. K. (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Habermas (pp. 67–94). Cambridge University Press.
50.
PenskyM. (1999). Jürgen Habermas and the antinomies of the intellectual. In DewsP. (Ed.), Habermas: A critical reader (pp. 211–237). Blackwell Publishers.
51.
PenskyM. (2013). Historical and intellectual contexts. In FultnerB. (Ed.), Jürgen Habermas: Key concepts (pp. 13–32). Acumen Publishing.
52.
PhilpM. (2010). What is to be done? Political theory and political realism. European Journal of Political Theory, 9(4), 466–484.
53.
PöggelerO. (1985). Den Führer führen? Heidegger und kein Ende. Philosophische Rundschau, 32(1), 26–67.
54.
RichterG.AdornoT. W. (2002). Who’s Afraid of the Ivory tower? A conversation with Theodor W. Adorno. Monatshefte, 94(1), 10–23.
55.
RockmoreT. (1989). Habermas on historical materialism. Indiana University Press.
56.
RossiE. (2010). Reality and imagination in political theory and practice: On Raymond Geuss’s realism. European Journal of Political Theory, 9(4), 504–512.
57.
SchmidtzD. (2006). The Elements of justice. Cambridge University Press.
58.
SpecterM. G. (2010). Habermas: An intellectual biography. Cambridge University Press.
59.
SwiftA.WhiteS. (2008). Political theory, social science, and real politics. In LeopoldD.StearsM. (Eds.), Political theory: Methods and approaches (pp. 49–69). Oxford University Press.
60.
VerovšekP. J. (2012). Meeting principles and Lifeworlds Halfway: Habermas’s thought on the future of Europe. Political Studies, 60(2), 363–380.
61.
VerovšekP. J. (2014). Memory and the Euro-crisis of leadership: The effects of generational change in Germany and the EU. Constellations, 21(2), 239–248.
62.
VerovšekP. J. (2019a). A case of communicative learning: Rereading Habermas’s philosophical project through an Arendtian lens. Polity, 51(3), 597–627.
63.
VerovšekP. J. (2019b). Impure theorizing in an imperfect world: Politics, utopophobia and critical theory in Geuss’s realism. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 45(3), 265–283.
64.
WeberM. (1958). Science as a vocation. In GerthH. H.MillsC. W. (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 129–158). Oxford University Press.
65.
WhymanT. (2019). Happy birthday Habermas, your philosophy has failed us. The Outline, 30 July.
66.
WolffJ.de-ShalitA. (2007). Disadvantage. Oxford University Press.
