hadi Ajili; mohsen solgi
Abstract
Lyotard, influenced by Wittgenstein and language games asserts the primacy of "diversity and difference" in But, society Habermas seek "consensus" and therefore domains an organic whole society and one that is looking at Structuralist view Saussure's language. Wittgenstein in "functional theory of meaning" ...
Read More
Lyotard, influenced by Wittgenstein and language games asserts the primacy of "diversity and difference" in But, society Habermas seek "consensus" and therefore domains an organic whole society and one that is looking at Structuralist view Saussure's language. Wittgenstein in "functional theory of meaning" interprets the language in which, speaking of "life forms or forms of the game" and "event locations" is present. Thus, he can no longer look from the perspective of holistic, rational and systematic in there. In contrast, Habermas Looks holistic, as Wittgenstein and Lyotard rejected language as well as rational and holistic look at the language of the cast. In this article,is it attempted to criticize to the radical view of Lyotard and his interpretation of language games and then to criticize Habermas, with adjustments in the views of these two philosophers, conflict the solve between them. In this way, the use of mediation CM-theory agonism- and philosopher Charles Taylor -idea multiculturalism-as two other Wittgensteinian or at least very impressed by her, are responsible for the reconciliation between the of views the Lyotard and Habermas. The main question is what the is between relation the is Wittgenstein and Anti-Wittgensteinian thought of language? The main claim is that is not ratio the accompanied.
