ENTRE LA DELIBERACIÓN Y EL EQUILIBRIO MEDIOAMBIENTAL
No Thumbnail Available
Date
Authors
Advisors
Evaluators
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Industrial de Santander
Abstract
Description
RESUMEN Vale la pena volver a dirigir la mirada, comparativamente, sobre las propuestas acerca de supuestas “prácticas políticas justas” y los discursos ambientalistas: ese es el marco de reflexión de este artículo. El lector encontrará una reflexión sobre algunos de los alcances y los límites prácticos de la Racionalidad Comunicativa planteada por Jürgen Habermas, desde una puesta en contraste dialógica con las propuestas prácticas y epistemológicas de tres filósofos y ambientalistas contemporáneos: Hans Jonas, Giuliano Pontara y Enrique Leff. Estos últimos autores hacen reflexiones éticas desde sus propios marcos epistemológicos y presentan propuestas que pretenden ser aplicadas en la práctica. Sin embargo, la confrontación dialógica entre cada una de estas propuestas con la de Habermas, muestra sus alcances y sus dificultades epistemológicas y prácticas. Considerando la polémica que surge cuando muchos consideran la propuesta habermasiana como utópica y, por lo tanto, con un marco de aplicabilidad muy limitado, el problema del calentamiento global resulta ser un punto de referencia legítimo para “poner a prueba” la propuesta ética derivada de la Racionalidad Comunicativa. Palabras clave: racionalidad comunicativa, utilitarismo, responsabilidad ontológica, racionalidad ambiental, ética.
ABSTRACT It is worthwhile to look back, comparatively, on the proposals for so-called “fair political practices” and environmental discourses: that is the framework of discussion in this article. The reader will find a reflection on some practical extent and limits of communicative rationality raised by Jürgen Habermas, comparing dialogically with practical proposals and epistemological three contemporary philosophers and environmentalists: Hans Jonas, Giuliano Pontara and Enrique Leff. This three do ethical reflections from their own epistemological frameworks and present proposals that are intended to be applied in practice. However, the dialogic confrontation between each of these proposals with Habermas, show its scope and its epistemological and practical difficulties. Considering the controversy arises when many consider the proposal habermasian as utopian and, therefore, with a very limited context of applicability, the problem of global warming proves to be a legitimate reference “point for testing” the proposed ethic derived from Communicative Rationality. Key words: communicative rationality, utilitarianism, ontological responsibility, environmental rationality, ethics.
ABSTRACT It is worthwhile to look back, comparatively, on the proposals for so-called “fair political practices” and environmental discourses: that is the framework of discussion in this article. The reader will find a reflection on some practical extent and limits of communicative rationality raised by Jürgen Habermas, comparing dialogically with practical proposals and epistemological three contemporary philosophers and environmentalists: Hans Jonas, Giuliano Pontara and Enrique Leff. This three do ethical reflections from their own epistemological frameworks and present proposals that are intended to be applied in practice. However, the dialogic confrontation between each of these proposals with Habermas, show its scope and its epistemological and practical difficulties. Considering the controversy arises when many consider the proposal habermasian as utopian and, therefore, with a very limited context of applicability, the problem of global warming proves to be a legitimate reference “point for testing” the proposed ethic derived from Communicative Rationality. Key words: communicative rationality, utilitarianism, ontological responsibility, environmental rationality, ethics.