Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Philosophy and Politics - Critical Explorations ((PPCE,volume 9))

  • 93 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter aims to present the second structuring element of practical life: autonomy, understood in terms of reciprocal recognition. I presented this way of conceiving autonomy in my book Elements of a Critical Theory of Justice. I have developed this conception of autonomy in continuity with the works of Habermas, Apel and Honneth. Reciprocal recognition autonomy is conceptualized from the perspective of intersubjectivity, which assumes vulnerability and progressiveness in its acquisition, since in this process, the conditions that enable autonomous action can be affected by external or internal circumstances. This kind of autonomy emphasizes the processes of justification in which interpersonal or intrapersonal reasons are given for choosing a course of action. As with practical rationality and imagination, this kind of autonomy is also specifiable in different practical contexts in which there will be different requirements and justifying logics for its exercise.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The process of decentring autonomy is reconstructed very clearly by Wellmer (1991a) and Honneth (2007).

  2. 2.

    The insight of reciprocal recognition autonomy can be reconstructed in Brandom’s explanation of the ‘attitude-dependence of normative statuses’ in Kant and Hegel (Brandon 2009: 67–72).

  3. 3.

    This idea is present in what Agustín Reyes (2019), following the work of Andy Clark and Joel Anderson, calls ‘scaffolding autonomy’.

  4. 4.

    Feminist theories of relational autonomy have played a leading role in highlighting this point (Mackenzie and Stoljar 2000; Meyers 2004).

  5. 5.

    The internal relationship between intersubjectivity, vulnerability and autonomy has been specially developed by Joel Anderson (2016).

  6. 6.

    This relation can be seen in Korsgaard’s argumentation, in which ethical autonomy, which in her case is equivalent to the conceptions of practical identity, leads to moral autonomy (1996: 120–1).

References

  • Anderson, Joel. 2016. Vulnerability, Autonomy Gaps and Social Exclusion. In Vulnerability, Autonomy and Applied Ethics, ed. Christine Straehle, 49–68. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Joel, and Axel Honneth. 2005. Autonomy, Vulnerability, Recognition and Justice. In Autonomy and the Challenges to Liberalism, ed. John Christman and Joel Anderson, 127–149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Apel, Karl-Otto. 1996. The A Priori of Communication Community and the Foundation of Ethics: The Problem of a Rational Foundation of Ethics in the Scientific Age. In Selected Essays. Volume 1. Ethics and the Theory of Rationality, 1–67. Trans. E. Mendieta. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandom, Robert. 2009. Reason in philosophy: Animating ideas. Cambridge, MA/London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cortina, Adela. 1987. Karl-Otto Apel. Verdad y responsabilidad. In Teoría de la verdad y ética del discurso, ed. Karl-Otto Apel, 9–33. Barcelona: Paidós.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwall, Stephen. 2006. The Second-Person Standpoint: Morality, Respect, and Accountability. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin, Ronald. 2000. What Is Equality? Part II: Equality of Resources. In Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality, 65–119. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster, Jon. 1999. Alchemies of the Mind: Rationality and the Emotions. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forst, Rainer. 2002. Contexts of justice: Political Philosophy beyond Liberalism and Communitarianism. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen. 1990a. Discursive Ethics: Notes on a Program of Philosophical Justification. In Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Trans. C. Lenhardt and S.W. Nicholsen, 43–115. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1990b. Morality and Ethical Life: Does Hegel’s Critique of Kant Apply to Discourse Ethics? In Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, 195–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1998. What is Universal Pragmatics. In On the Pragmatics of Communication, 21–103. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honneth, Axel. 1995. The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Decentered Autonomy: The Subject After the Fall. In Disrespect: The Normative Foundations of Critical Theory. Trans. J. Farrell, 181–194. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Freedom’s Right: The Social Foundations of Democratic Life. Trans. J. Ganahl. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, Immanuel. 2011. Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. Trans. M. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg, Lawrence. 1984. Essays on Moral Development, Volume II. The Philosophy of Moral Development: The Nature and Validity of Moral Stages. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korsgaard, Christine. 1996. The Sources of Normativity. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Catriona, and Natalie Stoljar, eds. 2000. Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency and the Social Self. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead, George H. 1972. Mind, Self & Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyers, Diana T. 1989. Self, Society and Personal Choice. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004. Being yourself. Essays on identity, action and social life. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Modzelewski, Helena. 2017. Emociones, educación y democracia: una proyección de la teoría de las emociones de Martha Nussbaum. México: Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas-UNAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, State and Utopia. Oxford/Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, Martha. 2001. Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence of Emotions. New York/Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, Onora. 2000. Bounds of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, Gustavo. 2013. Elements of a Critical Theory of Justice. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, Jean. 1965. The Moral Judgment of the Child. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1993. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. In Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, ed. Erin Kelly. Cambridge, MA/London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raz, Joseph. 1986. The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reyes, Agustín. 2019. El análisis ético de las políticas públicas y la autonomía relacional andamiada. In Ética aplicada. Perspectivas desde Latinoamérica, ed. Mauricio Correa and Juny Montoya. Bogotá: Ediciones Uniandes (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Scanlon, Thomas M. 1986. The Significance of Choice. In The Tanner Lectures of Human Values, ed. Sterling M. McMurrin, vol. 7, 149–216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, Robert. 2007. True to Our Feelings. What Our Emotions Are Really Telling Us. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, Francis. 2005. Groups and Capabilities. Journal of Human Development 6 (2): 185–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, Peter F. 1962. Freedom and Resentment. In Proceedings of the British Academy, Volume 48: 1962, ed. Gary Watson, 1–25. Oxford University Press: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, Charles. 1985. What is Human Agency? In Philosophical Papers: Human Agency and Language, vol. 1, 15–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wellmer, Albrecht. 1991a. The Dialectic of Modernism and Postmodernism: The Critique of Reason since Adorno. In The Persistence of Modernity: Essays on Aesthetics, Ethics and Postmodernism. Trans. D. Midgley, 33–74. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1991b. Ethics and Dialogue: Elements of Moral Judgment in Kant and Discourse Ethics. In The Persistence of Modernity: Essays on Aesthetics, Ethics and Postmodernism, 88–170.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Pereira, G. (2019). Autonomy. In: Imposed Rationality and Besieged Imagination. Philosophy and Politics - Critical Explorations, vol 9. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26520-5_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics