Last Habermas Translation: Dialectic of Secularization

So it turns out that, although I’m lazy and didn’t manage to finish translating Habermas’ “Dialektik der Säkulisierung,” other people have been much more industrious — you can now find full translation of the essay here (minus the introduction, which I’ve translated here).  After quickly skimming and comparing my translation against the one available from SignandSight, I think mine isn’t bad at all — I just need to be fleißiger.

Background Commitments: Style & Content

I’ve been mulling over an aborted exchange that almost took place between me and Sinthome over at Larval Subjects, concerning the role examples (ought to) play in philosophical writing and thinking. As one can guess, the larger context of the exchange involves the role ’style’ plays in thinking and communication. After a bit more mulling, I’ve decided to post a few thoughts on it. Rather than discussing Sinthome’s position, however, I want to take as my object Brian Leiter’s review of Christopher Janaway’s latest book on Nietzsche (Beyond Selflessness: Reading Nietzsche’s Genealogy). I’m hoping this attempt at indirect discussion (and an immanent critique) might facilitate things, since Leiter’s remarks seem to be in line with Sinthome’s on the issue of Style (i.e. style and content are in a sense separable).

Anyway, Leiter’s critique of Janaway’s book seems to be grounded by two “metaphilosophical” claims, which strikes me as problematic. And what I would like to do, in what follows, is identify these claims, and figure out what presuppositions are in play. I’ll be quoting from Leiter at length.

---

Meme: Passion Quilt

It’s about time I did something about those memes, which have come my way. I’ll Start with the one Shahar has kindly passed over to me. Here are the parameters:

Post a picture or make/take/create your own that captures what YOU are most passionate for students to learn about.

Give your picture a short title.

Title your blog post “Meme: Passion Quilt.”

Link back to this blog entry.

Include links to 5 (or more) educator

So here’s the image, which I have entitled, rather boringly, Thinking:

So, why the Rodin? Why thinking? Because it seems that the most important aspect of philosophy, its greatest potential, its ‘emancipatory possibilities,’ have very little to do with a given subject being discussed, or a particular ‘method’ or approach. Rather, it seems to me that the ability to independently think through something, which is the core of philosophical thinking, makes philosophy valuable. Philosophy, at least as I’ve come to understand it, is productive precisely when it doesn’t fall back on a codified manner of thinking, when it doesn’t rely entirely on a series of pre-given, uninterrogated techniques, or when it doesn’t simply try to convince us to change our minds on some given point. Philosophy is productive when those engaged in it think. Above anything else, that’s what I try to get across to my students.

I’ve decided not to pass the meme along, since most of the folks I’m acquainted with have already responded to it.

Back From Bavaria

So, although I hadn’t bothered to mention it, my Mother has been visiting us here in Germany. She loves it here (it’s quite cute to hear her say ‘Dankeschön,’ with her muted Northern Irish accent), and my Girlfriend and I have been showing her around Freiburg. We just got back from Bavaria, where we spent a few days in Munich, and made a couple of day trips out to places like Füssen — which is incredible. Anyway, this explains the silence here. I’ll be responding to the Memes that have been sent my way by Shahar and N Pepperell when I have a few moments. So don’t think I’m shirking my memetic duties.

I’ve also finished — finally, and after much despair — a paper on Hegel! It’s not my best work, to be sure, but at least it’s done. I’m considering posting it, although I’m still hesitant. So, let me finish with a few photos from our trip.

Habermas Translation: Dialectic of Secularization (pt 3)

I’ve been slow to continue the Habermas translation of late for two reasons: I’m generally lazy, and I’ve been trying my best to finish a paper on Hegel (which is nearly done). For anyone who’s been waiting for the next installment, you have my apologies.

Before going to the text, however, I would like to enlist folks’ help: if anyone has any idea how to translate the German word, “regelungsbedürftig,” I would love to hear it, as it has me totally stumped. I’m also a little hesitant about how I’ve translated Einwanderungsgesellschaft. I’m sure these terms are part of the technical vocabulary of Political Science or Sociology, and so I’m less than confident in my attempts to capture them in English.

As usual, the original essay is here, my translation of Part 1 is here, and here is Part 2

Anyway, here goes the next subsection of Habermas’ essay:

Habermas Translation: Dialectic of Secularization (pt. 2)

Here is the second installment of my attempt to translate Habermas (first part here; Original German here). I’m trying to translate the piece one section at a time (which Habermas has generously broken down into an average of 4 or 5 paragraphs each), since I don’t have a huge amount of time available for longer portions. I hope no one minds.

This section remains mostly factual, but he is now beginning to set the stage for his argument to come. As usual, if anyone notes something funny in my translation, please let me know (there’s one sentence which totally eludes my efforts to translate literally; if anyone can find a better solution, I would be very grateful).

UPDATE: A second look at the troublesome sentence just mentioned made me realize that it wasn’t tricky at all — I was just ‘complexifying’ it for no good reason.  I’ve now fixed it.

Habermas Translation: The Dialectic of Secularization (pt 1)

Since there seems to be some interest in a translation of this essay by Habermas, I’ve decided to go ahead and translate the first section. For the record, I don’t consider myself anywhere near fluent in German, so read with caution. And perhaps folks who do read German could compare what’s below the fold with the original. any mistakes folks find will be learning experiences for me. Past this, I’ve inserted paragraph numbers for ease of discussion and comparison.