I easily and commonly regard my Habermasian pages as developmental—as if someone else had written them. This is good for critical humility in a commitment to lifelong learning.

But some developmental Habermasian work seems to remain valid. As I intend to frame all the Habermasian years as a singular project, I currently think that I have a durable short introduction to Habermas’ work:

October 2007
Habermas and “political world society”
a sympathetic critique of Habermas' recent sense of global society

I had a rather high-minded hope for the Yahoo! group, expressed by my non-moderating moderator role—which, by the way, ends by linking to 7 years of Habermas discussions prior to the Yahoo! group—but I deleted that moderator page from the group Webpage some time ago.

I began Habermasian posting over a decade ago, in an ongoing project that has made much developmental use of the discussion medium and focused that into the neo-Habermasian evolving project that will get fleshed out, after a period of specific conceptual adventuring with some recent philosophical and scientific work of others. (You’ll see that the latter part of the “evolving project” page becomes sympathetically critical of Habermas’ recent views on current events, relative to Europe and “the market of ideas.”

I seek to do something quite post-Habermasian—not anti-Habermasian, but taking Habermas’ 20^thC motivation and insightfulness as preliminary for going forward in 21^stC philosophy.

For example, the interdisciplinarity of The Theory of Communicative Action necessarily dwells with available work of its time, but its example is exemplary for doing social theory now in view of work unavailable to any philosophical theorist at that time, with respect to evolutionary anthropology, cognitive science, moral psychology, epistemology, geopolitical realities, and interdomainal discursive modeling that was impossible at the beginning of the 1980s. Meanwhile, Habermas’ development has remained attuned to his time and new resources, as Between Facts and Norms couldn’t have been written in the early 1980s (and he would not write a comprehensive theory of communicative action today essentially like the discursive round he did in 1981).