A CRITIQUE OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE SUBJECT: TOWARDS RELATIONAL INDIVIDUALISM

Abstract

The bifurcation between holism and individualism is essential to understand the contemporary debate in political theory. In this article I argued that both traditional and modern societies have elements of holism and individualism. I also argued that individualism is not radically opposed to holism because it is impossible to imagine a human society without authority, tradition, and taboos. Moreover, the pre-theoretical norms and values of holist societies have rational foundation within a certain context. Thus, it is possible to imagine an individualist society which is grounded in a holist social ontology. I argued that collectivist and tribal societies are not totally opposed to individual liberty since one of the morally relevant advantages of rationality is to foster cordial relations with others. I argued that Habermas’s intersubjective communicative scheme is appropriate to account for the pre-theoretical norms and values of holist societies