Sociological theory of Habermas - applied to organization of socio-technical systems

From Dialogic Design Science
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Habermas distinguished between two modes of action, work and interaction, which correspond to enduring interests of the human species.

work Μodes of action based on the rational choice of efficient means, i.e., instrumental and strategic action forms.
Work enables people to achieve goals and bring about material well-being through social labour. Its success depends upon achieving technical mastery over the environment of action.
The importance of work leads us to have a technical interest in the prediction and control of natural and social systems.
interaction Forms of communicative action in which actors coordinate their behaviors based on consensual norms.
Interaction enables human beings to secure and expand the possibilities for intersubjective understanding among those involved in social systems. The importance of interaction leads us to have a practical interest in the progress of mutual understanding. Disagreement between different groups threatens the reproduction of the socio-cultural form of life. It also makes it hard to control natural and social processes.

Habermas's distinction appropriates the classical Aristotelian contrast between τέχνη and πράξης for critical social theory. The result is a distinctively Habermasian critique of science and technology as ideology:

  • By reducing practical questions about the good life to technical problems for experts, contemporary elites eliminate the need for public, democratic discussion of values, thereby depoliticizing the population.
  • The legitimate human interest in technical control of nature thus functions as an ideology —a screen that masks the value-laden character of government decision-making in the service of the capitalist status quo.

Unlike Herbert Marcuse, who regarded that interest as specific to capitalist society, Habermas affirmed the technical control of nature as a genuinely universal species-interest.

power The exercise of power in the social process can prevent open and free discussion necessary for the success of the interaction.
Human beings have an emancipatory interest in freeing themselves from constraints imposed by power relations. It is through a process of genuine participatory democracy that they can learn to control their own destiny.

Important Points

  1. Organizations are at the heart of the sociocultural life of humans.
  2. Organizations are the primary centers of social labour, social interaction and the exercise of power
  3. Thus, we all have a technical, a practical, and an emancipatory interest in their functioning

Thus, we can conclude that systems inquiry (i.e., methods) into the functioning of organizations requires a minimum of three dimensions:

  1. Methods that allow us to explore the technical aspects of how goals are pursued in changing environments
  2. Methods that allow us to explore and consider the interactions between the participants
  3. Methods that consider power and domination issues

References

Retrieved from "https://www.dialogicdesignscience.info/w/index.php?title=Sociological_theory_of_Habermas_-_applied_to_organization_of_socio-technical_systems&oldid=568"