@misc{DemmerlingKruegerHabermas2016,
  author    = {Demmerling, Christoph and Kr{\"u}ger, Hans-Peter and Habermas, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Communicative Reason Juergen Habermas, interviewed by Christoph Demmerling and Hans-Peter Krueger},
  series = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\~A}¼r Philosophie : Zweimonatsschrift der internationalen philosophischen Forschung},
  volume    = {64},
  journal   = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\~A}¼r Philosophie : Zweimonatsschrift der internationalen philosophischen Forschung},
  publisher = {De Gruyter},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {0012-1045},
  doi       = {10.1515/dzph-2016-0061},
  pages     = {806 -- 827},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Jurgen Habermas explicates the concept of communicative reason. He explains the key assumptions of the philosophy of language and social theory associated with this concept. Also discussed is the category of life-world and the role of the body-mind difference for the consciousness of exclusivity in our access to subjective experience. as well as the role of emotions and perceptions in the context of a theory of communicative action. The question of the redemption of the various validity claims as they are associated with the performance of speech acts is related to processes of social learning and to the role of negative experiences. Finally the interview deals with the relationship between religion and reason and the importance of religion in modern, post-secular societies. Questions about the philosophical culture of our present times are discussed at the end of the conversation.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{Krueger2016,
  author    = {Kr{\"u}ger, Hans-Peter},
  title     = {Critical Anthropology? To the Relationship between Philosophical Anthropology and Critical Theory},
  series = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\~A}¼r Philosophie : Zweimonatsschrift der internationalen philosophischen Forschung},
  volume    = {64},
  journal   = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\~A}¼r Philosophie : Zweimonatsschrift der internationalen philosophischen Forschung},
  publisher = {De Gruyter},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {0012-1045},
  doi       = {10.1515/dzph-2016-0041},
  pages     = {553 -- 580},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {This article compares Max Horkheimer's and Theodor W. Adorno's foundation of the Frankfurt Critical Theory with Helmuth Plessner's foundation of Philosophical Anthropology. While Horkheimer's and Plessner's paradigms are mutually incompatible, Adorno's „negative dialectics" and Plessner's „negative anthropology" (G. Gamm) can be seen as complementing one another. J{\"u}rgen Habermas at one point sketched a complementary relationship between his own publicly communicative theory of modern society and Plessner's philosophy of nature and human expressivity, and though he then came to doubt this, he later reaffirmed it. Faced with the „life power" in „high capitalism" (Plessner), the ambitions for a public democracy in a pluralistic society have to be broadened from an argumentative focus (Habermas) to include the human condition and the expressive modes of our experience as essentially embodied persons. The article discusses some possible aspects of this complementarity under the title of a „critical anthropology" (H. Schn{\"a}delbach).},
  language  = {de}
}
@incollection{Krueger2016,
  author    = {Kr{\"u}ger, Hans-Peter},
  title     = {Grenzen aus Sicht der Philosophischen Anthropologie Helmuth Plessners},
  series = {Grenzen im Fokus der Wissenschaften},
  booktitle = {Grenzen im Fokus der Wissenschaften},
  publisher = {Trafo},
  address   = {Berlin},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {101 -- 120},
  year      = {2016},
  language  = {de}
}
@misc{KruegerDemmerlingHabermas2016,
  author    = {Kr{\"u}ger, Hans-Peter and Demmerling, Christoph and Habermas, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Kommunikative Vernunft},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Philosophische Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Philosophische Reihe},
  number    = {125},
  issn      = {1866-8380},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-397848},
  pages     = {22},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {J{\"u}rgen Habermas explicates the concept of communicative reason. He explains the key assumptions of the philosophy of language and social theory associated with this concept. Also discussed is the category of life-world and the role of the body-mind difference for the consciousness of exclusivity in our access to subjective experience. as well as the role of emotions and perceptions in the context of a theory of communicative action. The question of the redemption of the various validity claims as they are associated with the performance of speech acts is related to processes of social learning and to the role of negative experiences. Finally the interview deals with the relationship between religion and reason and the importance of religion in modern, post-secular societies. Questions about the philosophical culture of our present times are discussed at the end of the conversation.},
  language  = {de}
}
@misc{Krueger2016,
  author    = {Kr{\"u}ger, Hans-Peter},
  title     = {Kritische Anthropologie?},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Philosophische Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Philosophische Reihe},
  number    = {127},
  issn      = {1866-8380},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-398024},
  pages     = {28},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {This article compares Max Horkheimer's and Theodor W. Adorno's foundation of the Frankfurt Critical Theory with Helmuth Plessner's foundation of Philosophical Anthropology. While Horkheimer's and Plessner's paradigms are mutually incompatible, Adorno's „negative dialectics" and Plessner's „negative anthropology" (G. Gamm) can be seen as complementing one another. J{\"u}rgen Habermas at one point sketched a complementary relationship between his own publicly communicative theory of modern society and Plessner's philosophy of nature and human expressivity, and though he then came to doubt this, he later reaffirmed it. Faced with the „life power" in „high capitalism" (Plessner), the ambitions for a public democracy in a pluralistic society have to be broadened from an argumentative focus (Habermas) to include the human condition and the expressive modes of our experience as essentially embodied persons. The article discusses some possible aspects of this complementarity under the title of a „critical anthropology" (H. Schn{\"a}delbach)},
  language  = {de}
}