9 / 15
DISCUSSION
259
a specific system of action has significant impact upon the normative
system. The idea that the technology in itself is neither good nor bad,
that it has significant impact upon the normative system; and that it
is the use of technology which makes it positive or negative, is very
simplistic. Technology, to some extent, dictates its own useY The
practical significance of technology is becoming more pronounced with
the invasion of technology into the domains of the human body and
soul. Examples of this recent development can be found in research in
the areas of genetic engineering and artificial intelligence. Even the
traditional distinction between a neutral invention and a partisan
innovation is becoming obsolete by the logic and form of contemporary
research and technology.
My major criticism of Habermas' theory of practical rationality,
however, is related to his naive isolation of practical issues from
instrumental ones. Basically, for Habermas there exists no profession-
alism at the level of practical questions, and consequently rational ends
are defined through the consensus of the people in a situation of free
debate and communication. Unfortunately, reality is not that simple.
(1) Any political choice among alternative policy issues presupposes
assumptions about the concrete and factual consequences of these
policies. If political choice is restricted to empty rhetoric concerning
abstract words -- like "equality", "freedom", and "justice" -- Habermas'
model of rational politics might be realizable. Probably tyrants and
dictators would also vote for justice, liberty, and freedom. But if
political choice and practical decision deal with alternative institutional
arrangements and concrete policy issues, and expression of preference
or vote for or against alternative policies requires factual data con-
cerning the social, economic, cultural, and political consequences of
various policies. Therefore, even if the analytical autonomy of ends
from means is accepted, the knowledge of statements of fact remains
directly relevant and necessary for rational practical choice. Long ago,
Max Weber recognized the significance of the social sciences for
political choice.34
But if rational practical choice presupposes sociological knowledge,
then the Habermasian definition of practical rationality cannot be
accepted. There are at least two reasons for this: First, sociological,
economic, and political knowledge is not shared by the masses. Second,