Critical pragmatism
From Geography
KolarAparna (Talk | contribs) |
KolarAparna (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Contextual understanding == | == Contextual understanding == | ||
| - | The term has been used by John Forester to label an analysis of planning that is both sensitive to issues of power and ethics (so, critical) and simultaneously allows for an assessment of issues involved in communicative planning. Forester applies [[ | + | The term has been used by John Forester to label an analysis of planning that is both sensitive to issues of power and ethics (so, critical) and simultaneously allows for an assessment of issues involved in communicative planning. Forester applies [[Jürgen Habermas |
| + | ]]'s critical theory of communicative action to issues of planning and administrative practices in his concept of critical [[pragmatism]] or critical communicative planning (Forester, 1993). | ||
He is particularly concerned about the power relations and positions of actors involved in the planning process. Drawing on Habermas's [[critical theory of communicative action]], critical pragmatism gives central significance to '''social critique''' instead of selfless behaviour (as might be implied of ideal speech-act) or consensus-orientated communicative planning. Critical pragmatism lays emphasis on questioning and shaping attention in order to reveal and counteract argumentation in which the speaker depends on holding the controlling position in power relations. Acknowledging that every actor in the planning process uses different types of power, it is then argued that the planner should play an active role in separating the factual and substantive meaning of arguments from the power-ridden connotations because of social positions of interlocuters (Sager,. | He is particularly concerned about the power relations and positions of actors involved in the planning process. Drawing on Habermas's [[critical theory of communicative action]], critical pragmatism gives central significance to '''social critique''' instead of selfless behaviour (as might be implied of ideal speech-act) or consensus-orientated communicative planning. Critical pragmatism lays emphasis on questioning and shaping attention in order to reveal and counteract argumentation in which the speaker depends on holding the controlling position in power relations. Acknowledging that every actor in the planning process uses different types of power, it is then argued that the planner should play an active role in separating the factual and substantive meaning of arguments from the power-ridden connotations because of social positions of interlocuters (Sager,. | ||
Revision as of 12:46, 11 October 2011
Contextual understanding
The term has been used by John Forester to label an analysis of planning that is both sensitive to issues of power and ethics (so, critical) and simultaneously allows for an assessment of issues involved in communicative planning. Forester applies [[Jürgen Habermas ]]'s critical theory of communicative action to issues of planning and administrative practices in his concept of critical pragmatism or critical communicative planning (Forester, 1993).
He is particularly concerned about the power relations and positions of actors involved in the planning process. Drawing on Habermas's critical theory of communicative action, critical pragmatism gives central significance to social critique instead of selfless behaviour (as might be implied of ideal speech-act) or consensus-orientated communicative planning. Critical pragmatism lays emphasis on questioning and shaping attention in order to reveal and counteract argumentation in which the speaker depends on holding the controlling position in power relations. Acknowledging that every actor in the planning process uses different types of power, it is then argued that the planner should play an active role in separating the factual and substantive meaning of arguments from the power-ridden connotations because of social positions of interlocuters (Sager,.
Critical prgamatism according to Forester is an analytic approach that allows us to examine planning practice and learn from it rather than providing recipes of best practice. It is aimed to encourage critical, pragmatic judgement in planning. (Forester, 1999)
References
- Forester, John. (1993). Critical Theory, Public policy and Planning practice: Toward a critical pragmatism. State University of New York, USA.
- Forester, John. (1999).The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. MIT. USA.
- Sager, Tore. (2006). The Logic of Critical Communicative Planning: Transaction cost alteration. Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Norway.
Contributors
- page created by Kolar Aparna--KolarAparna 10:36, 11 October 2011 (CEST)
