Castells Contemporary Society
Essay Preview: Castells Contemporary Society
Report this essay
According to Castells contemporary society needs to be understood as a society that is no longer unified by a national identity but has become a society with a diverse set of more localized identities, while for Habermas the national identity of the autonomous citizen is being supplemented by the emergence of a cosmopolitan identity. Spell out these two analyses. What do you think of these two analyses?
Habermas and Beck offer a difference in opinion of cosmopolitan. Beck introduces cosmopolitan in a sociological version, where as Habermas offers a philosophical version of cosmopolitanism, in which he calls cosmopolitanization. In this essay I am going to spell out the difference between both cosmopolitan identities.
Habermas says our identity takes place within a concrete Life World also known as the way of life. Life World forms a limit and a possibility to human life certain things are viable, and up for grabs. Things we do such as drive a car, play piano – trying to spell it out to an interested learner can be hard – teaching others to play piano when Im not an expert is a form of life.
Coordinating our actions with others we dont think about all the actual things we do walking down the sidewalk is not something we really think about or companies moving to other countries for lower tax rates or wages. Complicated set of practices a life world, a shared set of practices where we share a national identity. A Nation States national identity is slowly decreasing power greater globalization, greater information technology, and greater cultural assimilation. Sharing all of these takes the power from the state itself.
Habermas and Castells both believe the nation state is declining in power therefore national identity is likely to decline in importance the citizen connection to the national identity will decline also. An identity is ground into a shared set of practices. Habermas is a philosopher and goes on to say a cosmopolitan citizen, is an extension of ethnicity: an extension of an Italian American citizen, an Irish American citizen, an African American citizen.
In the Cosmopolitan way of life Kant endorsed a cosmopolitan identity. Mr. Held says a world citizen is connected to a cosmopolitan identity. A world citizen allows participation in government at a global level, “Social justice government” and worldwide political institution for court system and court justices. Habermas says we dont share a concrete way of life with everyone. As a world citizen, there is no life world, “they would not be able to generate self adhesion.” What is missing in the world citizen and cosmopolitan identity. Not connected to a daily life any practical ideals. This is what happens in our economic world.
Becks Chapter we arent reading: Risk Society, It discusses individualization and a Risk to Interdependence. All