چکیده:
The subject of this article is the analysis and explanation of the theory of communicative citizenship in Habermas's political philosophy. In this article, while briefly examining and reviewing the theories of citizenship (pre-modern, modern, and post-modern), Habermas's theory of citizenship is investigated. For the analysis of Habermasian citizenship, which, given the nature of Habermas's political philosophy, is a complex and intertwined theoretical network of sociology and socio-political philosophies, ethics, and law, three key connecting and mediating categories within this theoretical network are used: 1) Inter-subjective communicative rationality, 2) Discourse ethics, 3) Communicative action. These key categories, in addition to being the core of Habermas's sociology and socio-political, ethical, and legal philosophies, are also involved in Habermasian citizenship. The main goal of the article is to analyze the relationship between the three key categories and Habermasian citizenship. This relationship is explored through a text-based hermeneutic approach (Ricoeur) and revelation-disclosure (Heidegger) and critical (Habermas).
خلاصه ماشینی:
These explicitly contain 3 key categories that are useful to pay attention to for the main discussion of this article: 1) Equal and universal enjoyment of rights, duties, obligations, responsibilities, and socio-political-ethical commitments of members of the political community; 2) A sense of belonging, membership, and inclusive social identity for serious participation in political society; 3) Fair benefit from privileges, advantages, and resources of society regardless of ethnic, racial, class, economic, cultural, and religious affiliations.
Especially where Habermas, by criticizing the existing state of citizenship in the context of the liberal democratic system of modern society and also the public sphere and civil society formed in the West, formulates his normative political strategies in the field of ideal citizenship through the application of discourse ethics 1 and intersubjective rationality 2 and communicative action 1 in the form of a “dialogical, interactive, communicative, understanding, consensual” citizenship, the manifestation of which is discursive citizenship 2 .
In seeking a theoretical solution to escape this paradoxical and tragic situation of citizenship, Habermas’s philosophy turns to its own specific normative project, which is: “Democracy, rights, and politics based on ethics, rationality, and communicative action in the form of a reflective, critical, participatory, consensual democracy.
Institutional guarantee of the structural realization of rationality, ethics, rights, and communicative politics (deliberative, reflective, participatory, and critical democracy) In light of these five principles, the supplementary explanations that Habermas presented in detail in Postnational Constellation (1998) can be analyzed and explained as the principles of Habermas’s communicative theory of citizenship.
(
, 
, 
)
