出版社：Universidad del País Vasco / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea
摘要：In his Essay concerning Human Understanding (1690),Locke defined the “law of opinion” as “approbation or dislike, praise or blame which, by a secret and tacit consent, establishes itself in the several societies, tribes and clubs of men in the world”. In his study of 1962 (Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit), Habermas specifically excludes the “law of opinion” from the public sphere, contrasting it with the proper defi nition of public opinion. This paper will firstly identify the sources and characteristics of Lockean opinion, and will try to understand the reasons behind the rejection of the latter by Habermas. Secondly, in light of this obliterated category of public opinion, a tentative analysis of various aspects of the historiographical reviews of the Habermasian paradigm is presented together with possible alternatives focused in the recovery of concepts used by authors from the time of the conventionally admitted birth of the public sphere. Such contextual concepts refer to a non-discursive dimension of the public sphere linked to the observation of social bonds.
其他摘要：In his Essay concerning Human Understanding (1690),Locke defined the “law of opinion” as “approbation or dislike, praise or blame which, by a secret and tacit consent, establishes itself in the several societies, tribes and clubs of men in the world”. In his study of 1962 (Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit), Habermas specifically excludes the “law of opinion” from the public sphere, contrasting it with the proper defi nition of public opinion. This paper will firstly identify the sources and characteristics of Lockean opinion, and will try to understand the reasons behind the rejection of the latter by Habermas. Secondly, in light of this obliterated category of public opinion, a tentative analysis of various aspects of the historiographical reviews of the Habermasian paradigm is presented together with possible alternatives focused in the recovery of concepts used by authors from the time of the conventionally admitted birth of the public sphere. Such contextual concepts refer to a non-discursive dimension of the public sphere linked to the observation of social bonds.
