Also in his main work, The Theory of Communicative Action, Habermas (1984a, 1987) draws a distinction between strategic action (as for example in labour) and communicative action. For Habermas (1984a, 85), teleological action (that he also terms purposive-rational action, see page 285) means that an ‘actor attains an end or brings about the occurrence of a desired state by choosing means that have promise of being successful in the given situation and applying them in a suitable manner’. Strategic action is teleological action in a social situation, instrumental action teleological action in a non-social situation (1984a, 85).
6.4.2. Teleological Action and Communicative Action
Habermas strictly separates teleological action and its steering media of money and power from communicative action and language:
Finally the concept of communicative action refers to the interaction of at least two subjects capable of speech and action who establish interpersonal relations [whether by verbal or by extraverbal means]. The actors seek to reach an understanding about the action situation and their plans of action in order to coordinate their actions by way of agreement. The central concept of interpretation refers in the first instance to negotiating definitions of the situation which admit of consensus. As we shall see, language is given a prominent place in this model (Habermas 1984a, 86).
I shall speak of communicative action whenever the actions of the agents involved are coordinated not through egocentric calculations of success but through acts of reaching understanding. In communicative action participants are not primarily oriented to their own individual successes; they pursue their individual goals under the condition that they can harmonize their plans of action on the basis of common situation definitions (Habermas 1984a, 285–286).
Linguistic communication is for Habermas inherently non-dominative, oriented on understanding and reaching a good society. He essentialises linguistic communication as naturally pure, fair, good, etc.:
186
Critical Theory of Communication