The Purpose of Theory: Why Critical Constructivism Should “Talk” and Postphenomenology Should “Do”

Onderzoeksoutput: Article

3 Citaten (Scopus)

Samenvatting

This paper zooms in on a recent development in the discussion between postphenomenology and critical constructivism: the attempt at working out a political philosophy in the framework of postphenomenology, specifically Peter-Paul Verbeek's. Verbeek contrasts mediation theory to critical theory, arguing that critical theorists only "talk"; they don't "do." While the latter reproach postphenomenology/mediation theory for its lack of politics, Verbeek actually poses that "real" politics cannot be done by critical theorists-indeed exactly because of their not doing, that is, doing in the sense of helping to design and develop good real-world technological solutions. But this brings up pertinent questions, about whether a theory should "do" something, what that means, and whether calls for "doing" do not carry their own presuppositions with them that, if not made explicit, will bias the theory and its "use" toward certain directions. These issues are explored by way of among others an excursion into Rortyan pragmatism. Eventually, I conclude, it is perfectly acceptable that critical constructivism should "talk" and postphenomenology "do"-as long as we keep the meanings of those terms sufficiently clear.

Originele taal-2English
Pagina's (van-tot)114-137
Aantal pagina's24
TijdschriftTechné: Research in Philosophy and Technology
Volume24
Nummer van het tijdschrift1-2
DOI's
StatusPublished - 1 jan 2020

Vingerafdruk

Duik in de onderzoeksthema's van 'The Purpose of Theory: Why Critical Constructivism Should “Talk” and Postphenomenology Should “Do”'. Samen vormen ze een unieke vingerafdruk.

Citeer dit