Abstract

These reflections are devoted to a critical comparison of three distinct interpretations of Habermas’s theory of truth. The first, which is presented as the more adequate interpretation, takes Habermas’s theory as having a three-moment structure, whereas the two remaining interpretations are both based on his two-moment conception of “Janus-faced truth”. Whereas Steven Levine stresses the nonepistemic lifeworld pole of the two-sided concept and Alex Seemann the opposite epistemic discursive pole, the three-moment interpretation counters with a synthetic conception which emphasises the role of the context-transcendent universalistic concept of truth. This overarching interpretation is inspired by a cognitive perspective concerned with the full circle of the sociocultural embodiment and realisation of reason.