Abstract
We examine the argument put forward by Ojelanki Nygwenyama andKalle Lyytinen that Juergen Habermas's theory of communicativeaction is relevant for the analysis and design of groupwaresystems. We suggest that CSCW champions of Habermas oftenoverlook the fact that his theory can be criticised in itsown right, and go on to outline its contestable character inan appraisal of his understanding of the ‘ideal speech situation’.We then move to Nygwenyama and Lyytinen's implementation ofHabermas's schema and argue that their categories of analysisare both arbitrarily constructed and applied. In conclusion,we question the extent to which grand, holistic, synthesisingsociological theories offer a way forward for designers andpoint to the difficulties of practically applying Nygwenyamaand Lyytinen's categories of analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cooke, M. (1994): Language and Reason: A Study of Habermas' Pragmatics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Garfinkel, H. (1997): Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Newy, G. (1997): London Review of Books, 8th May.
Phillips, D.Z. (1996): Introducing Philosophy: The Challenge of Scepticism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Sacks, H. E.A. Schegloff and G. Jefferson (1974): A Simplest Systematics for the Organisation of Turn-Taking for Conversation. Language, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 696–735.
Suchman, L. (1994): Do Categories Have Politics?: The Language/Action Perspective Reconsidered. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Vol. 2.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sharrock, W., Button, G. On the Relevance of Habermas‘ Theory of Communicative Action for CSCW. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 6, 369–389 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008644224566
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008644224566