110 likes | 394 Vues
Explore the concept of the public sphere as defined by Jürgen Habermas, where private individuals convene to discuss and influence public opinion. This theory advocates for a space free from coercion, promoting open assembly and rational discourse, deemed essential for democracy. However, criticisms arise regarding its vagueness on membership, neglect of social inequities, and failure to address power dynamics and cultural practices. A case study on York University exemplifies these issues, questioning what constitutes the public sphere and the conditions of membership within it.
E N D
What is the public sphere? A place? An ideal? A theory/concept?
A place where “private persons come together to form a public.” Who is a person? What is a public?
Habermas’s theory of the public sphere: • Open to persons • Free of coercion • A place of free assembly and speech • An outlet for rational discussion and debate
Critique of Public Sphere • Is vague about membership • Does not account for social inequities (including race, class, gender, sexual orientation, physical ability) • Does not address power dynamics • Does not address cultural practices • It is an ideal rather than a theory of current material realities
Case Study: York University • Is York public or private? • What constitutes public sphere at York? • What are the conditions of membership? • How do we decide what or whom is public or private at York ? • What are the power dynamics ruling public conversations at York? • How public is public?