Suchergebnisse

In "Zur Verfassung Europas" formuliert Jürgen Habermas die These, in der EU teilten sich die Gemeinschaft der Unionsbürgerinnen und die Staatsbürgergemeinschaften der Mitgliedsstaaten die konstituierende Gewalt. Zu diesem Konzept eines doppelten Verfassunggebers gelangt Habermas nach eigener Aussage mittels einer rationalen Rekonstruktion der Entstehungsgeschichte der europäischen Verfassung. Diese Erläuterung ist jedoch alles andere als erhellend, da umstritten ist, was unter einer rationalen Rekonstruktion zu verstehen ist. Dieser Artikel unterzieht den Forschungsstand zu rationaler Rekonstruktion einer kritischen Diskussion, entwickelt von dort ausgehend eine neue Lesart der Habermasschen Methode und präsentiert auf dieser Grundlage eine Erläuterung und Beurteilung der Idee eines europäischen "pouvoir constituant mixte".

Faced in his essay to Constitution of Europe (DASS) Jurgen Habermas us with the following idea: consider legitimacy to the European Union is based on theory, a double Constituent subject. Within the supranational Community, the entirety of European citizens and the peoples of the Member States shall communicate to the position of the carrier of constituting power. This theoretical construction is obtained after Habermas' statement from 'the perspective of a rational reconstructed constitutional process'. This element of Habermas's essay is the same for two relevant current research fields. On the one hand there is a substantial contribution to the normative discussion of who owns in supranational contexts the right to perform constituent acts. Secondly, it provides those with a new challenge, as part of a methodological debate so concerned, as Habermas' notion of rational reconstruction is to be understood and has the potential reconstruction as a method of political theory. Adapted from the source document.

Current political theory applies the concept of reconstruction almost exclusively to methods of critique. Given this focus it is often overlooked that the concept of reconstruction also has important methodological implications regarding the empirical analysis of politics. This imbalance particularly applies to how Jurgen Habermas' discourse theory of democracy has been perceived in political theory. The aim of the article is two-fold. Firstly, it offers an interpretation of discourse theory as a contribution to a "reconstructive sociology of democracy" that goes beyond the mere purpose of critique. Secondly, it seeks to illustrate the added value of Habermas' method of rational reconstruction to the empirical analysis of politics. Adapted from the source document.

As a hermeneutic discipline, the law sees today challenged by exact science disciplines that apply both within the scientific discourse as well as in the general public as a model. Results of scientific work, which are strongly coined by value judgments, is suspected of methodological inadequacy expose. This applies to the law especially if they explicitly sees itself as a science rather than wisdom teachings ('jurisprudence'), as ars boni et aequi. In the general opinion now those scientific disciplines radiate very bright, answer what empirical or theoretical questions with mathematical precision, while the flight often lifts the owl of Minerva in media darkness. Adapted from the source document.