摘要：According to Foucault’s understanding quite specific but the everyday context makes it possible that language, life and work define the essence of modern man, and in consequences in terms of such understood ontology also the “science of man”. Habermas would, however, completely concentrating himself on the communicative potential of language understand the anthropology of everyday life quite different from Foucault’s poststructuralist critique of metaphysics and traditional notions of causality, identity, subject and truth. We would like to open the Foucault/Habermas debate in order to examine the relation between practice of everyday life and language. We claim that the relationship nature of language, epistemology and sociopolitical everyday life is fundamental when it comes to the thesis that in the political sense human exists as a linguistic being. We will try to determine that thesis with few points of Habermas’ rationalization of society and communication for which we offer three critical places: (a) poststructuralist and postmodern, (b) feminist, and (c) perspective of mediology.
