德国批判理论（或法兰克福学派Schule）是最好的公认为其丰富的排练的关键社区科学审查，可以追溯到20世纪30年代。除此之外，随后的关键理论家的创造补充了传统在社区科学中的注意，同时阐述了一个通常被称为“话语伦理”的规范理论的特殊观点。这个称谓来源于这样一个事实，批判理论家，特别是哈贝马斯（1990年，1993年）寻求在语言和话语理论的基础上收回被认为普遍有效的规范。为了补充他的话语伦理学理论，哈贝马斯在他的言语和话语理论（1984）的基础上，另外阐述了规范和政府的规范性理论（1996）。哈贝马斯的这些作品为歧视三个不同的规范王国的规范性理论提供了一种方式（在每一个不同的规范性的查询是在这里的问题和不同的义务）。在这些不同的规范性王国的基础上，我们将阐述利益相关者理论的批判理论方式。首先，我们要求提供这些不同的规范性领域的报告。为了做到这些，我们填写早期检查交往契约的信念，以及它如何为规范理论提供基础。随后，我们将审查三种不同形式的有用理由（即实用，伦理和道德）。这将使地方制定规范（即合法性，伦理和道德）的三个王国的基础。最后，我们将指出一个批判理论的方法到其竞争对手之上的规范理论的成果增益。
规范理论中最坦率的问题之一是我们是否（以及如何）能够提供我们的规范性判断的理性报告。在我们自己的后形而上学期间，这个问题已经对那些希望支持相信普遍有效的规范性原则和义务的人造成重大的挫折。这种挫折的似乎无法解决的问题已经导致无数，在有用的伦理的地球上，离开元伦理探究，无论哪一个只是预先假设规范的原则或争夺他们在一个低于基础的水平。批判理论的质量之一是，它不懈地面对这种基于规范性原则的元伦理挫折，并能够提供不依赖于有力的形而上学或本体论预设的基础论证。
澳洲新南威尔士大学论文代写：批判理论
German Critical Theory (or the Frankfurter Schule) is best recognized for its affluent rehearse of critical communal science scrutiny that extends back to the 1930s. Extra presently, the subsequent creation of critical theorists has complemented the tradition’s attention in the communal sciences alongside the elaboration of a exceptional outlook on normative theory that is usually denoted to as “discourse ethics.” This appellation derives from the fact that critical theorists, most particularly Habermas (1990, 1993), have pursued to recoup the believed of universally valid norms on the basis of a theory of speech and discourse. In supplement to his theory of discourse ethics, Habermas has additionally elaborated a normative theory of regulation and government (1996) on the basis of his theory of speech and discourse (1984). These works of Habermas furnish for an way to normative theory that discriminates three disparate normative kingdoms (in every single of that disparate normative inquiries are problematized and disparate obligations in here). It is on the basis of these disparate normative kingdoms that we will elaborate a critical theory way to stakeholder theory. First, though, we demand to furnish an report of these disparate normative realms. To do these we fill early examine the believed of communicative deed and how it provides the basis for an way to normative theory. Subsequent we will scrutinize three disparate forms of useful reason (viz., the pragmatic, ethical and moral). This wills locale the basis for the elaboration of the three kingdoms of normatively (viz., legitimacy, ethics and morality). Finally, we will indicate a little of the finished gains of a critical theory ways to normative theory above its rivals .
One of the most frank inquiries in normative theory is whether (and how) we can furnish a rational report of our normative judgments. In our own post metaphysical period this question has come to pose weighty setbacks for those who should desire to prop the believed of universally valid normative principles and obligations. The seeming intractability of this setback has lead countless, exceptionally in the earth of useful ethics, to leave meta-ethical inquiry and whichever merely presuppose normative principles or squabble for them at a less than foundational level. One of the qualities of critical theory is that it undeviatingly confronts this meta-ethical setback of basing normative principles and is able to furnish a foundational argument that does not rely on forceful metaphysical or ontological presuppositions.
如果你在悉尼读书遇到学术问题需要帮助可以联系我们精湛的 悉尼论文代写服务