This bachelor’s thesis examines the ideas behind the phenomenon art exhibitions in public libraries. My interest is to see if and how the art exhibitions can support the libraries in being a public sphere in Jürgen Habermas’ sense, open for all citizens and their opinions. My study therefore has two purposes. The first is to find out which arguments and ideas that are used to motivate the activity. The second purpose is to see if and how the arguments and ideas can be related to Habermas’ theories about the public sphere. The study is based on qualitative interviews with four librarians who are responsible for the art exhibitions in four libraries, located in three Swedish municipalities; Borås, Kinna and Malmö. The concepts by Jürgen Habermas are used to make sense of the information I got from the interviews. The results show that art exhibitions in the public libraries are seen as having a democratic, pedagogical and informational function. It can be seen as supporting the public libraries role as public sphere by creating meetings and room for the citizens to express themselves. But the function of the exhibitions differs between the four libraries because the art exhibition activity depends on the values of one single person. / Uppsatsnivå: C

<p>Syfte: Att undersöka om man avseende på ett debatt- och ett granskande program verkligen kan påstå att vi idag har en sådan representativ offentlighet som Habermas talar om (se Val av Teori). </p><p>Det vill säga, att se hur den samhälleliga eliten presenterar sig själv och sin makt offentligt idag, </p><p>i ett debatt- och ett granskande program. </p><p>Frågeställning: Hur kan man konkret se att politiker och företagsledare med hjälp av en språklig och visuell retorik presenterar sig själva och sin makt i ett debattprogram och ett granskande program idag? Och vilka likheter/olikheter kan man då urskilja i den politiska självpresentationen mellan dessa program?</p><p>Val av Teori: Jürgen Habermas teori om återkomsten av den representativa offentligheten som handlar om att den moderna samhällseliten har återutvecklat en modern form av representation, som går ut på att presentera och representera sin makt inför folket och inte för folket.</p><p>Val av Empiri: Debattprogrammet ”Argument” på SVT 1 och SVT 24. </p><p>Det granskande programmet ”Uppdrag granskning” på SVT 1, SVT 24 och SVT Opinion.</p><p>Val av Metod: Den retoriska analysen, med ett semiotiskt förhållningssätt som vetenskapsteoretisk utgångspunkt. (Semiotiken är i sin tur dock förankrad i hermeneutiken.) </p><p>Slutsats: Att politiker och företagsledare i ett debattprogram och ett granskande program presenterar sig själva och sin makt genom att tillämpa olika utstuderade tekniker som innefattar såväl den språkliga som visuella retoriken. På det språkliga planet kan dessa tekniker bland annat bestå i att använda upprepningar och betoningar, och att helt enkelt vara så vältalig som möjligt. På det visuella planet kan de dels handla om att framhäva sig själv med sitt utseende, dels om att understödja den språkliga retoriken med sitt kroppspråk. </p><p>Svaret på den andra frågan är att det inte finns några direkta likheter eller olikheter i den politiska självpresentationen mellan ett debattprogram och ett granskande program, då självpresentationen är personbunden. Däremot kan man finna tydliga likheter och olikheter mellan självpresentationens förutsättningar i dessa program.</p><p>Nyckelord: Argument, Uppdrag granskning, debattprogram, granskande program, </p><p>Jürgen Habermas, den offentliga sfären, representation, refeodalisering.</p>

<p>Abstract</p><p>Title Blogging.se – a study on the swedish blogosphere from a Habermasian public sphere-perspective (Bloggning.se – en studie av den svenska bloggsfären utifrån Habermas offentlighetsteori)</p><p>Author Anders Larsson</p><p>Aim To see whether or not weblogs (blogs) could be said to rejuvenate the public sphere, as it was first described and later re-evaluated by Jürgen Habermas.</p><p>Method A quantitative analysis of 733 randomly selected swedish weblogs has been done. This analysis set out to see what different categories of bloggers (difference in f.e. gender and age) wrote about, and whether or not these subject categories could be said to play a part in constituting and/or rejuvenating a public sphere.</p><p>Main results The main results of the quantitative study was that even though most blogs write about ‘private’ subjects, the most popular blogs, i.e. those who received the most comments or trackbacks, where the ones concerning society-centered subjects. Also, a significant effect of gender was discovered regarding what type of subject one tends to blog about. Women in general wrote about private matters, whereas men tended to write about society-centered subjects. This essay argues that the most important feature of the blogosphere is not that posts are written on society-centered subjects, subjects that might be considered “more important”. Instead, the focus should be on the fact that bloggers do produce media texts themselves, instead of being a passive recipient. The essay takes into account three key features of the public sphere, as described by Habermas:</p><p>inclusivity, the disregard of social status and that any issue can be raised for rational debate. It is found that although the blogosphere is not without its problems, one could very well argue that it better meets these key features than the original concept of the public sphere.</p><p>Length 55 pages</p><p>Course Media and communication studies D</p><p>Period Fall semester 2006</p><p>Tutor Lowe Hedman</p><p>Keywords Weblog, Blog, Jürgen Habermas, Quantitative method, Public sphere</p>

Syfte: Att undersöka om man avseende på ett debatt- och ett granskande program verkligen kan påstå att vi idag har en sådan representativ offentlighet som Habermas talar om (se Val av Teori). Det vill säga, att se hur den samhälleliga eliten presenterar sig själv och sin makt offentligt idag, i ett debatt- och ett granskande program. Frågeställning: Hur kan man konkret se att politiker och företagsledare med hjälp av en språklig och visuell retorik presenterar sig själva och sin makt i ett debattprogram och ett granskande program idag? Och vilka likheter/olikheter kan man då urskilja i den politiska självpresentationen mellan dessa program? Val av Teori: Jürgen Habermas teori om återkomsten av den representativa offentligheten som handlar om att den moderna samhällseliten har återutvecklat en modern form av representation, som går ut på att presentera och representera sin makt inför folket och inte för folket. Val av Empiri: Debattprogrammet ”Argument” på SVT 1 och SVT 24. Det granskande programmet ”Uppdrag granskning” på SVT 1, SVT 24 och SVT Opinion. Val av Metod: Den retoriska analysen, med ett semiotiskt förhållningssätt som vetenskapsteoretisk utgångspunkt. (Semiotiken är i sin tur dock förankrad i hermeneutiken.) Slutsats: Att politiker och företagsledare i ett debattprogram och ett granskande program presenterar sig själva och sin makt genom att tillämpa olika utstuderade tekniker som innefattar såväl den språkliga som visuella retoriken. På det språkliga planet kan dessa tekniker bland annat bestå i att använda upprepningar och betoningar, och att helt enkelt vara så vältalig som möjligt. På det visuella planet kan de dels handla om att framhäva sig själv med sitt utseende, dels om att understödja den språkliga retoriken med sitt kroppspråk. Svaret på den andra frågan är att det inte finns några direkta likheter eller olikheter i den politiska självpresentationen mellan ett debattprogram och ett granskande program, då självpresentationen är personbunden. Däremot kan man finna tydliga likheter och olikheter mellan självpresentationens förutsättningar i dessa program. Nyckelord: Argument, Uppdrag granskning, debattprogram, granskande program, Jürgen Habermas, den offentliga sfären, representation, refeodalisering.

Abstract Title Blogging.se – a study on the swedish blogosphere from a Habermasian public sphere-perspective (Bloggning.se – en studie av den svenska bloggsfären utifrån Habermas offentlighetsteori) Author Anders Larsson Aim To see whether or not weblogs (blogs) could be said to rejuvenate the public sphere, as it was first described and later re-evaluated by Jürgen Habermas. Method A quantitative analysis of 733 randomly selected swedish weblogs has been done. This analysis set out to see what different categories of bloggers (difference in f.e. gender and age) wrote about, and whether or not these subject categories could be said to play a part in constituting and/or rejuvenating a public sphere. Main results The main results of the quantitative study was that even though most blogs write about ‘private’ subjects, the most popular blogs, i.e. those who received the most comments or trackbacks, where the ones concerning society-centered subjects. Also, a significant effect of gender was discovered regarding what type of subject one tends to blog about. Women in general wrote about private matters, whereas men tended to write about society-centered subjects. This essay argues that the most important feature of the blogosphere is not that posts are written on society-centered subjects, subjects that might be considered “more important”. Instead, the focus should be on the fact that bloggers do produce media texts themselves, instead of being a passive recipient. The essay takes into account three key features of the public sphere, as described by Habermas: inclusivity, the disregard of social status and that any issue can be raised for rational debate. It is found that although the blogosphere is not without its problems, one could very well argue that it better meets these key features than the original concept of the public sphere. Length 55 pages Course Media and communication studies D Period Fall semester 2006 Tutor Lowe Hedman Keywords Weblog, Blog, Jürgen Habermas, Quantitative method, Public sphere

During the last 50 years, western European societies have been successful in creating economic growth, a functioning democracy and uniting these with social welfare. At the same time, environmental problems have become a major political challenge. Although some measures have been taken to introduce environmental protection, there continue to be serious problems. These can be related to democratic priorities and public information in the sense that they may, amongst other things, be a result of misinformed democratic publics. Jürgen Habermas's work is important for our understanding of how environmental problems can be managed better than today if, contrary to the ecoauthoritarian ideas, we consider that the solution to these problems calls for more democracy and better democratic forms. One can argue that his theory of communicative action makes it difficult to ignore him in debates about today's environmental problems. There are, nevertheless, three difficulties associated with developing a model based on Habermas's theory. Critics argue that, firstly, his theory has theoretical weaknesses; secondly, it is formulated in a way which makes empirical analysis impossible; and, thirdly, it cannot explain the rise of environmental protests and environmental movements, even if Habermas has this ambition. In the thesis, it is considered that environmental problems are political-cultural questions. Accordingly, a political cultural theory is constructed to interprete Habermas's ideas and assess the arguments of his critics. This theory consists of assumptions about notions and types of language-use used in co-ordinating collective action. It is built on the following variables: view of knowledge, view of social values and nature, and view of language-use. It is argued that Habermas's ideas can be defended, if one elaborates a political subculture that is biocentric (nature-centred), as a complement to anthropocentrism (a human-centred view of nature). Thus, his theory of communicative action can be used to develop a cultural model for empirical studies of environmental policy processes. The model consists of three cultural ideal types: anthropocentric material; anthropocentric immaterial; and biocentric immaterial. Obstacles to social learning and public participation, such as forms and styles of reasoning and the exclusion of citizens, are brought into focus. Finally, the model functions as a criticism of a neo-liberal view of environmental problems. Such a view lacks concepts for understanding how individuals consciously can co-ordinate their ideas and individual actions into a collective action. / digitalisering@umu

Det övergripande syftet med undersökningen ”Internet och det öppna samhällets drivkrafter” är att i första hand påvisa, förklara och förstå olika samband mellan språklig kommunikation och demokratiska processer. Ett särskilt fokus läggs på studier av internet som kommunikationsmedium. En central frågeställning kretsar också kring vad som möjliggör och har möjliggjort väl fungerande demokratiska processer genom historien och i nutid. Den hypotes som läggs fram är att det i grunden är kommunikation mellan människor genom mänskliga språk som möjliggör demokratiska processer.

How does the international system move from an anarchic system driven by power to a global community driven by the needs/wants of the community at large? Jürgen Habermas utilizes the tenets of his Communicative Action Theory to underline the importance of communicatively based repertoire in the international system between and among states and non-state actors and the citizens themselves. How does arguing and reasoning among states and international institutions bring together legitimization and order? My research aims to analyze the movement of the international system from anarchy towards a global civil society. In doing so, I will examine Communicative Action Theory in International Relations, in particular the development of legitimization processes in international politics, the role of state sovereignty and its effect on the legitimization process of non-state actors. I argue that underdeveloped legitimization processes at the international level consist of fragile consensus building mechanisms that explain why disagreement can and often does lead to violence. However, I also contend that the international system is moving toward a more developed global civil society.

The theory of restorative justice has always lagged behind practice. As such, gaps in theory have existed over time and continue to exist today, particularly in terms of explaining “the magic” that occurs within the encounter process. By exploring the theories of Jürgen Habermas, it is suggested that new frameworks can be developed that can help theorists think about, and explain the experiences and outcomes central to restorative processes. This paper focuses on Habermas’ theory of universal pragmatics and communicative action as a means to better understand the mechanisms within the encounter process, and the conditions necessary, to give rise to common understanding, agreement, learning and strengthened relationships. It then examines Habermas’ concept of the lifeworld and the interplay with communicative action to shed light on restorative justice’s potential for community building through norm clarification, victim and offender reintegration and increased individual capacity.

What does emancipation mean today? In political theory, the idea of emancipation has typically been understood as a process of rationalization involving the promotion of human rights or the historical overcoming of capitalism. However, in contemporary social criticism the earlier antagonism between liberalism and Marxism has largely been replaced by the conflict between Enlightenment thinking and Enlightenment critique. The tension between Enlightenment philosophy and Enlightenment skepticism can be taken as emblematic of the two main tendencies within contemporary critical thought. However, a similar ambivalence can be found in the classical critical theory of the so-called Frankfurt School. Given that we have to distinguish between two types of critical theoretical thought, is it even possible to answer the question about emancipation in an unambiguous way? The overall aim of this study is to examine the meaning of emancipation in contemporary critical thought. More specifically, the principal aim is to demonstrate that Jürgen Habermas’s critical theory can be understood as an attempt to overcome the opposition between the early and the late Frankfurt School in order subsequently to evaluate this attempt and thereby judge whether Habermas’s approach can serve as a key for combining the concepts of emancipation corresponding to these two types of critique. My main objection to Habermas’s reformulation of critical theory is that it is characterized by a lack of emancipatory potential and a lack of critical force. In trying to pave the way for an alternative approach, my strategy for accommodating the tensions between the two models of critical theory is to show that emancipation can be viewed as a process involving three disparate yet interconnected stages: an initial break in the continuity of history; a collective political struggle in order to realize the utopian vision thereby opened up; and, a possible understanding among the participants in a discourse.