Talk:Instrumental and value rationality
![]() | Philosophy: Social and political / Continental / Contemporary Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is this the same concept as strategic rationality? If so, a redirect should be created.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:30, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
The claim that "instrumental" rationality is covered under Natural Philosophy is not backed up. The word never appears there. Metaphysicalnaturalist (talk) 16:47, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Origins in Critical theory
The concept doesn't start as late as with Habermas. It originates with Max Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, and was specifically adapted for Critical Theory by Theodor W. Adorno in the 1947 Dialectic of Enlightenment. --79.193.40.12 (talk) 18:21, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Should not be a 'dual article'
If I read correctly, the second section is about rationality concerning measuring instruments in science. It's find to have a mention and a link, but there's apparently already another article called instrumentation that covers it. "Instrumental rationality" viewed from philosophy, sociology, anthropology, etc., is already the substantial focus of the article and should be the formal focus as well. I hope to expand the substance also. Pax, groupuscule (talk) 09:33, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
reference to instrumentalism
Sometime it would be useful to lay out the similarities and differences between these two. But at least readers should know that two bodies of scholars share a similar name.TBR-qed (talk) 21:45, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
propose rewriting to contrast with value rationality
I am planning to revise this article as I did for Instrumental action, by contrasting what Weber called Zweckrationalitat with what he called Wertrationalitat. I welcome comments on both projects.TBR-qed (talk) 01:04, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
removing warning
I am removing the warning about citations, since my rewriting will provide them.TBR-qed (talk) 12:46, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
new title and content
I have renamed this page to reflect the addition of value content to instrumental content. I welcome commentary.TBR-qed (talk) 16:52, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
respond to guidelines
I have read the guidelines on tone, lead, and layout, and do not find any specific suggestions to improve what exists. I would welcome such specific suggestions.TBR-qed (talk) 21:30, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
removing tone/style warning
I find this appeal to an unidentified and unjustified criterion of proper style without merit.TBR-qed (talk) 20:06, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
This article seems ill-conceived
As an academic philosopher, I'm not sure what's going on in this article. Is it about a concept in Weber's and Adorno's work? If so, then that should be made clear in the lead. In that case, this isn't the place to go to discuss the instrumental rationality/reasoning about ends distinction as it applies to other philosophers (Rawls, Nozick, etc.). Alternatively, one might think that it's about the instrumental/final value distinction in general, not just as it appears in a few author's work. In that case, the article should cover a much wider range of sources, since Weber's and Adorno's views are pretty marginal for the field as it presently stands.64.64.117.139 (talk) 17:41, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- Start-Class Philosophy articles
- Low-importance Philosophy articles
- Start-Class social and political philosophy articles
- Low-importance social and political philosophy articles
- Social and political philosophy task force articles
- Start-Class Continental philosophy articles
- Low-importance Continental philosophy articles
- Continental philosophy task force articles
- Start-Class Contemporary philosophy articles
- Low-importance Contemporary philosophy articles
- Contemporary philosophy task force articles