Inter-Civilizational Dialogue: Habermas' Theory As A Philosophical Basis For Understanding Global Peace
Dialog Antar-Peradaban: Teori Habermas Sebagai Dasar Filosofis Untuk Memahami Perdamaian Global
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22303/pir.10.1.2025.26-36Keywords:
Communicative rationality, Discursive ethics, Inter-civilizational dialogueAbstract
This paper explores the relevance of Jürgen Habermas' theory of communicative rationality and discursive ethics as a philosophical framework for understanding and resolving inter-civilizational conflicts. Using a critical-hermeneutic approach, the study analyzes the concept of communicative rationality, which emphasizes the importance of equal dialogue, and discursive ethics, which demands inclusivity in decisionmaking processes. Case studies on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, climate change through the UNFCCC, and the Alliance of Civilizations initiative demonstrate how Habermas' theory can be implemented to create
inclusive and solution-oriented dialogue. The main findings reveal that power imbalances and cultural biases often hinder the creation of a genuine global public sphere. However, applying Habermas' theory can address these challenges through community-based deliberative mechanisms, cross-cultural education, and digital technologies. The paper recommends strengthening international institutions, utilizing social media as a deliberative space, and developing education rooted in local cultures. Thus, Habermas' theory proves to be relevant as both a philosophical and practical foundation for building global peace.
Nevertheless, its successful implementation requires adaptation to contemporary challenges, such as disinformation and the dominance of powerful actors in international relations.
References
[1] Al-Krenawi, A., & Graham, J. (2023). Cross-cultural education for peace and dialogue. New York:
Routledge.
[2] Barak, O., & Blecher, N. (2022). Mediating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: The role of local narratives.
Jerusalem: Peace Research Institute.
[3] Benhabib, S. (2004). The rights of others: Aliens, residents, and citizens. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
[4] Bohman, J., & Rehg, W. (2007). Jürgen Habermas. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Last modified July
1, 2007. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/habermas/.
[5] Dryzek, J. S. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
[6] Eide, E., Kunelius, R., & Phillips, A. (Eds.). (2021). Journalism and the globalization of the public sphere.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
[7] Falkner, S. (2021). The Paris Agreement and the new logic of global climate politics. International Affairs,
97(3), 623–640.
[8] Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action, Volume 1: Reason and the rationalization of
society. Boston: Beacon Press.
[9] Habermas, J. (1990). Moral consciousness and communicative action. Cambridge: MIT Press.
[10] Huntington, S. P. (1993). The clash of civilizations? Foreign Affairs, 72(3), 22–49.
[11] Rajamani, L., & Peel, J. (2023). The Paris Agreement at work: Negotiating climate justice. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
[12] Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
[13] United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC). (2023). Annual report 2023. New York: UNAOC.
[14] United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). (2023). Global trends: Forced displacement in
2023. Geneva: UNHCR.
[15] United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process (UNSCO). (2023). Annual report
2023. New York: UNSCO.
