Experience and emancipatory knowledge

Schon (1983) looked to experience to establish ways of dealing with a new case. It is in another way that subjective experience seems important to Habermas' discussion. His theory can prompt us to see reflection on our experiences as a means to perspective transformation: that is, a change to our consciousness. The concept of emancipatory knowledge, developed by Habermas, is a powerful one. It enables us to reflect on how our own history and biography influence and shape the way we see ourselves and our professional identities, for example, our social and professional roles, our expectations, the expectations which others have of us, and so on. It becomes a question of how to construct our professional identities.

Pixabay / CC0 1.0

The idea of universal pragmatic functions in communication developed by Habermas encourages us to think about the notion that participation in dialogue allows us to reinterpret and re-perceive situations. However, as Habermas argues, to do so we must overcome distorted communications that arise from systems of ideological dominations/discourses. If distortions are analysed, they can be reduced, and objectivity can then be reached.

Habermas' method in communicative action allows us to look at dialogue and to challenge whether what is being said:

• is true;
• is socially or morally appropriate (what norms are being expressed);
• truthfully reflects the speaker's feelings and motives;
• is clear and can be understood.

In this, however, we are not striving to claim some objective truth but to recognize the role of the subjective in communication and in the generation of ideas. However, there are some significant questions that have been raised about the ideas put forward by Habermas in his discussion of communicative action.

Stryker (2000) mentions criticisms of Habermas that are relevant: notably that the theory of communicative action fails to take account of how argument and discourse are shaped over time and are culturally bound. It is, therefore, difficult to argue convincingly that there is, in actuality, an agreed set of universal language characteristics even within one culture. Habermas has tried to address criticisms of his theory, but Stryker argues that he has not been successful in overcoming his critics' objections.