Edited by Hans-Christoph Schmidt am Busch & Christopher Zurn. This volume collects original, cutting-edge essays on the philosophy of recognition by international scholars eminent in the field. By considering the topic of recognition as addressed by both classical and contemporary authors, the volume explores the connections between historical and contemporary recognition research and makes substantive contributions to the further development of contemporary theories of recognition.

Andrew Arato. Seyla Benhabib. Hauke Brunkhorst. Cornelius Castoriadis. Jean Cohen. Helmut Dubiel. Klaus Eder. Gunter Frankenberg. Hans-Georg Gadamer. Axel Honneth. Johann Baptist Metz. Gertrud Nunner-Winkler. Claus Offe.".

Lecture given at Technische Universitèat Braunschweig.

This paper compares the democratic theories of Pierre Rosanvallon and Axel Honneth. The aim is to show how their work could form the basis of a ‘reconstructivist’ approach in political philosophy that rehabilitates the insights of 19th-century thinkers such as Guizot and Hegel concerning the benefits of combining political philosophy with history and sociology. Whereas the dominant procedural approaches in political philosophy tend to disconnect normative theory from the actual study of society and its history, Rosanvallon and Honneth (...) argue that in order to understand the problems that face our democratic societies today we need a closer connection between theory and practice. Both have therefore developed a method that consists of historically reconstructing developments in modern society in order to identify certain pathologies. The paper compares the different diagnosis that Rosanvallon and Honneth give of the central pathology that faces democracy today, which in Rosanvallon’s reconstruction is related to the problem of representation and in Honneth’s account to the problem of recognition. (shrink)

Innerhalb der Kritischen Theorie der Frankfurter Schule hatten anerkennungsbezogene Überlegungen lange Zeit eine randständige Existenz. Geprägt wurde die Arbeit der Schule zunächst durch marxistische Theoreme und später durch Theorien der sozialen Evolution, die vor allem auf Fragen der kommunikativen Rationalisierung und der systemischen Steuerung bezogen waren. Umso bemerkenswerter ist es, dass sowohl Max Horkheimer als auch Jürgen Habermas weitreichende anerkennungsbezogene Überlegungen entwickelt haben. Diese Überlegungen werden in den ersten beiden Hauptteilen der vorliegenden Untersuchung erörtert. Im Anschluss daran wird die von (...) Axel Honneth vorgenommene Neuausrichtung der Kritischen Theorie, mit der „Anerkennung“ zu dem zentralen Konzept der Frankfurter Schule wird, rekonstruiert und in ihren Folgen diskutiert. (shrink)

The Institute for Social Research, or Frankfurt School, is an interdisciplinary research center associated with the University of Frankfurt in Germany and responsible for the founding and various trajectories of Critical Theory in the contemporary humanities and social sciences. Three generations of critical theorists have emerged from the Institute. The first generation was most prominently represented in the twentieth century by Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Walter Benjamin, Leo Löwenthal, and also for some time Erich Fromm. The so-called (...) ‘second generation’ of the Institute is centrally represented by Jürgen Habermas, whose work has functioned as the focal point of a wide range of critical theorists. The third generation of the Frankfurt School is represented by Axel Honneth who emerged as a new center, with different strands or readings of who else belongs to the third generation, some in Germany, some internationally, and some more in sociology and social and political theory than philosophy. (shrink)

Theorien der "Anerkennung" zeichnen sich durch eine außergewöhnliche Leistungsstärke aus. In den letzten Jahren haben sie die Forschung auf den Gebieten der Moralphilosophie, der Politischen Philosophie und der Sozialphilosophie, aber auch auf denen der Psychologie und der Sozialwissenschaften sowohl thematisch als auch methodisch sehr stark bereichert. Viele dieser Theorien versuchen zudem, Überlegungen, die von klassischen Autoren wie Fichte oder Hegel entwickelt wurden, für die aktuelle Diskussion systematisch fruchtbar zu machen. Dieser Konstellation trägt der vorliegende Band Rechnung. Durch eine Verzahnung von (...) systematischen und philosophiegeschichtlichen Überlegungen leistet er einen wesentlichen Beitrag zur Lösung und Weiterentwicklung aktueller anerkennungstheoretischer Probleme und Fragestellungen sowie zu einer Neuinterpretation klassischer philosophischer Texte. Aufgrund seines thematischen Zuschnitts ist das Buch nicht nur für Philosophen, sondern auch für Sozialwissenschaftler von großem Interesse. Mit Beiträgen von: J. Bernstein, D. Brudney, J.-Ph. Déranty, N. Fraser, A. Honneth, H. Ikäheimo, A. Laitinen, F. Neuhouser, T. Pinkard, M. Quante, E. Renault, H.-C. Schmidt am Busch, L. Siep, A. Wildt und Ch. F. Zurn. (shrink)

Este trabalho examina a evolução da condição humana à luz das teorias de reconhecimento social de Axel Honneth e da ética da responsabilidade de Hans Jonas. Honneth explora como a identidade e a autonomia do indivíduo são moldadas pelo reconhecimento social e pelas relações interativas na sociedade moderna. Jonas, por sua vez, destaca a necessidade de uma ética da responsabilidade diante dos avanços tecnológicos, que devem levar em consideração as consequências futuras das ações humanas. A transição do (...) Homo Sapiens para o Homo Faber simboliza a transformação do ser humano de um ser predominantemente racional e social para um agente produtivo e tecnológico. O diálogo entre Honneth e Jonas revela como a capacidade de transformar o mundo exige não apenas um reconhecimento social contínuo, mas também uma consideração ética profunda sobre o impacto dessas transformações no futuro. O texto argumenta que a intersecção das teorias de ambos oferece uma visão abrangente da nova condição humana, ressaltando a necessidade de integrar a responsabilidade ética e o reconhecimento social na era da tecnologia e da produção. (shrink)

El presente artículo analiza la crítica de Axel Honneth a la distinción habermasiana entre sistema y mundo de la vida como una ficción teórica que acarrea un déficit explicativo de la dinámica social y una rebaja del propio enfoque comunicativo del autor. Se vincula esta crítica con la que han realizado otros teóricos y se valora su pertinencia a la luz de la réplica que el propio Habermas brindó. A partir de allí, se intenta mostrar cómo este distanciamiento de (...) Honneth habilita una nueva forma –aunque no explorada por el autor- de conceptualizar el carácter y rol de la sociedad civil.This article provides an analysis of Honneth’s objection to Habermas’s distinction between System and Lebenswelt. Honneth postulates it’s a theorical fiction that leads to misunderstand social dynamics and weakens his communicative perspective. Honneth’s objection is linked to other critical reviews of the distinction, and I conclude its relevance, also considering Habermas’s reply. From there, I try to show how Honneth objection opens a new way to think about civil society. (shrink)

This article argues that the political significance Hans-Georg Gadamer's attributes to friendship not only resists the criticism of Gadamer (and Heidegger) leveled by Axel Honneth but, moreover, that Gadamer's approach to friendship sheds light on a certain intimacy we experience in our opening onto the political sphere.

En el presente trabajo abordo la interpretación que Axel Honneth realiza, en su libro Crítica del poder, de la propuesta de Michel Foucault. Honneth señala, a modo de crítica, la existencia de una contradicción entre lo que denomina la teoría del poder de Foucault y sus estudios históricos –en particular, los reunidos en Vigilar y Castigar–. Uno de mis objetivos es explicar esta contradicción y, a partir de ella, proponer una lectura alternativa. En contraposición a Honneth, para (...) quien las instituciones disciplinarias que analiza Foucault terminarían desplazando la acción y la lucha social, intento mostrar –y este es el aporte que busco realizar en el trabajo a partir de una reconstrucción conceptual– que las disciplinas y por añadidura las instituciones disciplinarias deben considerarse tácticas que nunca alcanzan del todo su objetivo. Son tácticas que no logran bloquear, de manera definitiva, las expresiones de resistencia y conflictividad. Esta lectura alternativa que aquí propongo permitiría, en principio, ensayar al menos dos puntos de contacto entre Foucault y la teoría crítica que aún no han sido elucidados. (shrink)

Axel Honneth and Hans Joas claim that Helmuth Plessner’s philosophical anthropology is problematically ‘solipsistic’ insofar as it fails to appreciate the ways in which human persons or selves are brought into being and given their characteristic powers of reflection and action by social processes. Here I review the main argument of Plessner’s Die Stufen des Organischen und der Mensch: Einleitung in die philosophische Anthropologie with this criticism in mind, giving special attention to Plessner’s accounts of organic being, personhood, (...) language, sociality, and historicity in that text. I argue that Honneth and Joas’s criticisms understate the extent to which Plessner takes sociality to be a constitutive condition of human forms of life within the structure he calls ‘ex-centric positionality’. This reading of Plessner also provides resources for answering a more common criticism of his philosophical anthropology – namely, that it is problematically ‘essentialist’, paying insufficient heed t.. (shrink)

O presente artigo pretende discutir a transformação, proposta por Hegel, da noção kantiana de liberdade como autonomia no paradigma do reconhecimento recíproco. Na primeira seção, vou retomar alguns pontos da Fundamentação que vêm sendo interpretados como conduzindo a paradoxos na concepção de autonomia (1). Em seguida, pretendo recordar esquematicamente a interpretação proposta por Loparic acerca do ‘fato da razão’, procurando especificar aí uma solução semântica para o problema da normatividade embasada na autonomia (2). Na terceira seção, a intenção é fazer (...) uma comparação entre a interpretação semântica do sentimento de respeito com as heterodoxas propostas, desenvolvidas recentemente por Honneth e Brandom, de uma interpretação intersubjetivista dessa noção, tentando avaliar a partir disso que tipo de dificuldade uma concepção pragmática de normatividade teria de resolver (3). Em seguida, o objetivo é expor, de maneira bastante esquemática, o modo como Fichte articula a transformação do conceito de respeito em termos da noção, formulada por ele, de reconhecimento recíproco (4). Finalmente, nas partes conclusivas, pretendo reconstruir a interpretação, proposta por Brandom, para a transformação do modelo de normatividade baseado na autonomia naquele baseado no reconhecimento, ponderando aí motivos tanto epistêmicos quanto práticos de radicalização pragmática da semântica kantiana (5). Palavras-chave: G.W.F Hegel; I. Kant; J. G. Fichte; Reconhecimento; Autonomia. From Semantics to Pragmatics: Kant, Hegel and the Debate surrounding Normativity Abstract: This article aims to discuss the transformation, proposed by Hegel, of the Kantian notion of freedom as autonomy into the paradigm of reciprocal recognition. In the first section, I will return to some points of the Groundwork that have been interpreted as leading to paradoxes in the conception of autonomy (1). Next, I intend to schematically recall the interpretation proposed by Loparic about the 'fact of reason', seeking to specify the semantic solution to the problem of normativity based on autonomy (2). In the third section, the intention is to make a comparison between the semantic interpretation of the feeling of respect with the heterodox proposals, recently developed by Honneth and Brandom, of an intersubjectivist interpretation of this notion, trying to evaluate from this what type of difficulty a pragmatic conception of normativity would have to resolve (3). In the following section, the aim is to present, in a rather schematic manner, the way in which Fichte articulates the transformation of the concept of respect in terms of the notion, formulated by him, of reciprocal recognition (4). Finally, in the concluding parts, I intend to reconstruct the interpretation, proposed by Brandom, for the transformation of the model of normativity based on autonomy into that articulated in terms of recognition, considering both epistemic and practical reasons for the pragmatic radicalization of Kantian semantics (5). Keywords: G.W.F Hegel; I. Kant; J. G. Fichte; Recognition; Autonomy. De la semántica a la pragmática: Kant, Hegel y el debate sobre la normatividade Resumen: Este artículo pretende discutir la transformación, propuesta por Hegel, de la noción kantiana de libertad como autonomía en el paradigma del reconocimiento recíproco. En la primera sección, revisaré algunos puntos de la Fundación que se han interpretado como conducentes a paradojas en la concepción de autonomía (1). A continuación, pretendo recordar esquemáticamente la interpretación propuesta por Loparic sobre el “hecho de la razón”, buscando especificar allí una solución semántica al problema de la normatividad basada en la autonomía (2). En el tercer apartado, se pretende hacer una comparación entre la interpretación semántica del sentimiento de respeto con las propuestas heterodoxas, recientemente desarrolladas por Honneth y Brandom, de una interpretación intersubjetivista de esta noción, tratando de evaluar a partir de ésta qué tipo de dificultad una concepción pragmática de la normatividad tendría que resolver (3). En la siguiente parte, el objetivo es exponer, de manera muy esquemática, la manera en que Fichte articula la transformación del concepto de respeto en términos de la noción, formulada por él, de reconocimiento recíproco (4). Finalmente, en las partes finales, pretendo reconstruir la interpretación propuesta por Brandom para la transformación del modelo de normatividad basado en la autonomía en uno basado en el reconocimiento, considerando razones tanto epistémicas como prácticas para la radicalización pragmática de la semántica kantiana (5). Palabras clave: G.W.F Hegel; I. Kant; JG Fichte; Reconocimiento; Autonomía. Data de registro: 19/08/2024 Data de aceite: 25/09/2024. (shrink)

The path taken by German philosophy in the twentieth century is one of the most exciting and controversial in the history of human thought, by turns radical and conservative and secular and religious. In this outstanding introduction, German Philosophy in the Twentieth Century: Dilthey to Honneth--the third and final volume in his trilogy, Julian Young examines the work of eight German philosophers and theologians of the period. He shows how they engaged with profound existential questions about individual and collective (...) lives, criticised the increasing rationalisation and mechanisation characteristic of modernity, and committed themselves to varying forms of liberalism, socialism and democracy. Young introduces and assesses the thought of the following figures: Wilhelm Dilthey, the encroachment of the natural sciences upon the study of humanity and his distinction between 'explanation' and 'understanding'; Karl Jaspers, existentialism, the challenge of nihilism and the turn to theology; Edith Stein, our understanding of other people and the philosophy of empathy from a phenomenological standpoint; Paul Tillich, philosophical theology and the 'theonomous' life; Martin Buber, Recovering the 'I-Thou' relationship in the face of modernity and religious socialism; Hans Jonas, responsibility, selfhood and threats to humanity in the twentieth century; Erich Fromm, the 'art of loving' as a bulwark against totalitarianism and the replacement of capitalism by communitarian socialism; Axel Honneth, contemporary Hegelianism and the ethics and politics of recognition. Lucidly and engagingly written, German Philosophy in the Twentieth Century: Dilthey to Honneth is essential reading for students of German philosophy, phenomenology and theology and will also be of interest to students in related fields such as literature, political theory and sociology. (shrink)

Este artículo vuelve sobre el clásico y complejo concepto de alienación y se propone contribuir a elaborarlo para la filosofía social actual. La idea es ir articulando las propuestas sobre la alienación que han elaborado Rahel Jaeggi y Axel Honneth, desarrolladas a partir de un filósofo presuntamente ajeno a la teoría crítica, a saber, Martín Heidegger, e irnos desligando de estos autores a medida que vamos perfilando el concepto. Pretendemos ofrecer un análisis estructural del concepto que permita identificar ciertos (...) rasgos básicos que después sirvan para elaborar un diagnóstico de las patologías sociales en el mundo contemporáneo. (shrink)

Resumen: En este trabajo voy a intentar una crítica inmanente del “monismo moral” de Axel Honneth desde el punto de vista de la lectura categorial del capital reconstruida por Moishe Postone. Críticos de Honneth como Nancy Fraser han señalado que los mercados modernos no podrían reconstruirse exhaustivamente en términos morales. Recuperando la crítica inmanente de la sociedad capitalista de Postone, sostendré que puede reconstruirse el cómo los mercados capitalistas presuponen principios normativos, cuya realización no distorsionada obturan sistemáticamente. La (...) lógica del capital, por lo tanto, permite construir un cuestionamiento de la neutralización sistemática de las pretensiones morales en el capitalismo y su dinámica social.: In this essay I will attempt an immanent criticism of Axel Honneth´s “moral monism” from the standpoint of Moishe Postone´s categorial reading of capital. Honneth´s critics such us Nancy Fraser have pointed out that modern markets cannot be fully reconstructed in moral terms. On the basis of Postone´s immanent critique of capitalism, I will claim that it is possible to reconstruct how capitalist markets presuppose moral principles, but systematically distort their realization. Postones theory may ground a critique of the neutralization of moral consideration in the capitalist form of society. This categorial reading may, thus, alloud for a questioning of the systemic neutralization of moral concerns under capitalism. (shrink)

Continental Philosophy of Science provides an expert guide to the major twentieth-century French and German philosophical thinking on science. A comprehensive introduction by the editor provides a unified interpretative survey of continental work on philosophy of science. Interpretative essays are complemented by key primary-source selections. Includes previously untranslated texts by Bergson, Bachelard, and Canguilhem and new translations of texts by Hegel and Cassirer. Contributors include Terry Pinkard, Jean Gayon, Richard Tieszen, Michael Friedman, Joseph Rouse, Mary Tiles, Hans-Jöerg Rheinberger, Linda (...) Alcoff, Todd May, Axel Honneth, and Penelope Deutscher. (shrink)

This book is available either individually, or as part of the specially-priced Arguments of the Philosphers Collection.

This chapter contains sections titled: Why Heidegger Reads Nietzsche How Heidegger Reads Nietzsche What Heidegger Learns Conclusion.

This chapter contains sections titled: Proceeding According to Rules Rules and Regularities The Uses of Rules Three Questions a bout Rules Rules and Interpretations Rules and Intentions Contested Rules Further reading.

Social theory has undergone dramatic changes over the past fifteen years. The aim of this book is to provide a comprehensive survey of those changes and an authoritative statement on current trends of development in social thought. The contents of the book range in a systematic way across the major traditions of social theory prominent today. Among the topics covered are the relationships between modern social theory and the 'classics' of the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; the connections between social (...) theory and mathematical social science; and the logical status of generalizations in the social sciences. Traditions of thought discussed include: behaviourism; symbolic interactionism; Parsonian theory; analytical theory; structuralism and post-structuralism; ethnomethodology; structuration theory; world systems theory; Marxism and critical theory. The highly distinguished group of contributors comprises Jeffrey Alexander, Ira Cohen, Anthony Giddens, John Heritage, George Homans, Axel Honneth, Hans Joas, Ralph Milipand, R. Munch, Jonathan H. Turner, Immanuel Wallerstein, and Thomas Wilson. (shrink)

_Debates in Nineteenth-Century European Philosophy _offers an engaging and in-depth introduction to the philosophical questions raised by this rich and far reaching period in the history of philosophy. Throughout thirty chapters, the volume surveys the intellectual contributions of European philosophy in the nineteenth century, but it also engages the on-going debates about how these contributions can and should be understood. As such, the volume provides both an overview of nineteenth-century European philosophy and an introduction to contemporary scholarship in this field. (...) __KEY DEBATES IN EUROPEAN NINETEENTH-CENTURY PHILOSOPHY__ Kristin Gjesdal Contributors Editor's Introduction I. Kantian Presuppositions 1. The Reception of the _Critique of Pure Reason_ in German Idealism by Rolf-Peter Horstmann 2. The Reception of the _Critique of Pure Reason_ in German Idealism: A Response to Rolf-Peter Horstmann by Paul Guyer II. Fichte 3. Fichte's Original Insight by Dieter Henrich 4. Fichte's Original Insight: Dieter Henrich's Pioneering Piece Half A Century Later by Günter Zöller III. Romanticism 5. Philosophical Foundations of Early Romanticism by Manfred Frank 6. Response to Manfred Frank, "Philosophical Foundations of Early Romanticism" by Michael N. Forster IV. Hegel 7. From Desire to Recognition: Hegel's Account of Human Sociality by Axel Honneth 8. On Honneth's Interpretation of Hegel's "Phenomenology of Self-Consciousness" by Robert B. Pippin V. Schelling 9. The Nature of Subjectivity: The Critical and Systematic Function of Schelling's Philosophy of Nature by Dieter Sturma 10. Nature as Unconditioned? The Critical and Systematic Function of Schelling's Early Works by Dalia Nassar VI. Schopenhauer 11. The Real Essence of Human Beings: Schopenhauer and the Unconscious Will by Christopher Janaway 12. Emancipation from the Will by David E. Wellbery VII. Comte 13. Auguste Comte and Modern Epistemology by Johan Heilbron 14. Why Was Comte an Epistemologist? by Robert C. Scharff VIII. Mill 15. Mill: The Principle of Liberty by John Rawls 16. John Rawls on Mill's Principle of Liberty by John Skorupski IX. Darwin 17. Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection and its Moral Purpose by Robert J. Richards 18. Response to Richards by Gabriel Finkelstein X. Kierkegaard 19. Kierkegaard's _On Authority and Revelation _ by Stanley Cavell 20. A Nice Arrangement of Epigrams: Stanley Cavell on Søren Kierkegaard by Stephen Mulhall XI. Marx 21. Marx's Metacritique of Hegel: Synthesis Through Social Labor by Jürgen Habermas 22. Epistemology and Self-Reflection in the Young Marx by Espen Hammer XII. Dilthey 23. Wilhelm Dilthey after 150 Years by Hans-Georg Gadamer 24. Gadamer on Dilthey by Frederick C. Beiser XIII. Nietzsche 25. Nietzsche's Minimalist Moral Psychology by Bernard Williams 26. Naturalism, Minimalism, and the Scope of Nietzsche's Philosophical Psychology by Paul Katsafanas XIV. Freud 27. Bad Faith and Falsehood by Jean-Paul Sartre 28. Freud by Sebastian Gardner XV. Twentieth-Century Developments 29. Analytic and Conversational Philosophy by Richard Rorty 30. Not Knowing What the Right Hand is Doing: Rorty's "Ambidextrous" Analytic Redescription of Nineteenth-Century Hegelian Philosophy by Paul Redding References for Republished Texts Accompanying Original Works. (shrink)

Since the emergence of neo-evolutionism in the 1960s, various critiques of the theory of social or socio-cultural evolution have been forwarded, including notably those of Immanuel Wallerstein, Alain Touraine and Anthony Giddens who decisively reject the idea of evolution. Within this context, Jürgen Habermas's theory of socio-cultural evolution has also become a specific object of critique, the best known in the English-speaking world being, perhaps, Michael Schmid's critique. While the latter is ultimately based on neo-Darwinistic assumptions which allow a non-Marxist (...) alternative to be pitted against Habermas's position, a significant immanent critique has been taking shape during the late 1970s and 1980s the contours of which are at present starting to become visible, despite the fact that as yet it is nowhere developed and presented in a systematic manner. I have in mind here the work of younger authors belonging to the circle around Habermas, such as Johann Arnason, Axel Honneth, Hans Joas, Günter Frankenberg, Ulrich Rödel, and Klaus Eder, who have not only developed a critique of Habermas but are also engaged in developing an alternative to him within the framework of critical theory. (shrink)

This paper seeks to unveil and investigate the close bond existing between the critical project developed by Axel Honneth and Hans Joas in Social Action and Human Nature (1980) and John Dewey’s naturalistic humanism and social criticism. I will contend that these authors develop an original and compelling approach to the critique of the social world, which relies on a naturalistic redefinition of human beings with intersubjective premises. By reconsidering human beings in their continuity and discontinuity with nature, (...) they attempt to identify the specific quality of human action with respect to animal behavior and to employ this category as a criterion for the critique of the social world. On the other hand, the paper will underline how Dewey significantly contributes to the outlining of a contemporary critical project with naturalistic premises. Indeed, his naturalistic humanism provides a systematic metaphysics of human experience to ground social criticism, wherein the underdeveloped elements of Social Action and Human Nature’s analysis of human action are better explained and justified from a theoretical point of view. (shrink)

This article critically re-reads György Márkus’s seminal Marxism and Anthropology in light of its recent reissue with an introduction by Hans Joas and Axel Honneth. Joas and Honneth problematically identify the normative source of Márkus’s position as an a-historical and extra-natural account of the human. In fact, when the human essence is thought as natural while also historical, developing new powers and needs through changing strategies of socially organized work, Marx’s materialist conception of history can be used (...) to generate a critique of social organizations, relations, and structures that constrain rather than promote such development. Such constraint on developing powers can be read as ‘alienation’ from the human essence. Márkus’s work develops this reading of Marx in a textually sensitive way, but his analysis of alienation in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 focuses on the individual when such analysis could in fact be profitably extended to apply to groups and the species as whole. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

English summary: The investigations in this book are on the problem of the relationship between politics and the economy as objects of the political theory and the economic theory. Both theories are part of the Herrschaftswissen as defined by Max Scheler. They are based on a general theory of action. This theory as well as the political and the economic theory which is developed from the theory of action is understood as a system of categories which contains the laws of (...) the fields concerned. Central categories are the categories of power and domination. The political and economic theory are conceived of as the basis of rational action in politics and in the economy. German description: Welche Beziehungen bestehen zwischen Politik und Wirtschaft als Gegenstanden der politischen und der okonomischen Theorie? Hans Albert widmet sich in seinen Untersuchungen dieser Frage. Er bestimmt sowohl die Politik als auch die Wirtschaft als Teile des Herrschaftswissens im Sinne Max Schelers. Sie werden aus einer allgemeinen Theorie des menschlichen Handelns entwickelt, die anthropologisch begrundet wird. Diese wird ebenso wie die aus ihr hervorgehenden Theorien der Politik und der Wirtschaft in ein System von Kategorien gebracht, welche die Gesetzlichkeiten der betreffenden Bereiche enthalten. Zentrale Kategorien sind die der Macht und der Herrschaft. Die politische und die okonomische Theorie werden als Grundlage rationalen Handelns in beiden Bereichen aufgefasst. (shrink)