Abstract

This review of Martin Matuštík’s Jürgen Habermas: A Philosophical-Political Profile questions whether Matuštík’s description of theexistentialist dimensions of Habermas’s political theory is adequate to the internal differentiation of Habermas’s conception of a substantive ethical life. In doing so, it questions whether Habermas’ own theory adequately distinguishes between first-person singular and first-person plural ethical discourse. The review closes with a reflection on ethical self-reflection and the collective past, a theme that Matuštík’s book discusses under the theme of “anamnestic solidarity.”