Abstract
Communication can mean many different things. As far as Communicative Action is concerned, here we distinguish between Communication Attempts, Successful Communicative Action (successful Communication Attempts) and Understood but Unsuccessful Communicative Action, as well as whether the respective actions already have a regular (conventional or even linguistic) meaning. What are the respective rationality presuppositions? This is resolved for all the above concepts of Communicative Action. As is the case for all actions, Communicative Actions also require us to differentiate between various rationality types: action rationality, the reasons behind an action, and situation-relative personal rationality.References
HABERMAS, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (Frankfurt/ M., Suhrkamp).
LEWIS, D. (1969). Convention. A Philosophical Study (Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press). MEGGLE, G. (1991). Kommunikation und Reflexivität. In: B. Kienzle (Hg.), Dimensionen des Selbst (Frankfurt/M., Suhrkamp), pp. 375- 404.
————. (1993). Kommunikation, Bedeutung und Implikatur. Eine Skizze. In: Georg Meggle (Hg.): Handlung, Kommunikation, Bedeutung (Frankfurt/M., Suhrkamp), pp. 483-507.
————. (1996). Kommunikation und Verstehen. In: SprachphilosophiePhilosophy of Language – La philosophie du langage, edited by Marcelo Dascal, Dietfried Gerhardus, Kuno Lorenz, Georg Meggle, 2nd vol. (Berlin/New York, de Gruyter), pp. 1346-1358.
————. (1997). Grundbegriffe der Kommunikation. (Berlin/New York, de Gruyter), 1972, 19972.
————. (2002). Common Belief and Common Knowledge. In: Sintonen, M., Ylikoski, P., Miller, K. (eds.), Realism in Action (Dordrecht, Kluwer), pp. 244-251.
VON WRIGHT, G.H. (1971). Explanation and Understanding. (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press).
WEBER, M. (1921). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. (Tübingen).