Pragmatic communicative action theory

Communicative action (CA) theory need not displace the critical insights of social scientists, geographers, and other urban scholars about the processes of social, economic, and political change that shape urban settlements . CA analysis believe we settle differences in research findings and interpretations by studying the consequences these differences produce instead of claiming philosophical trump. In the first part of this article, I Summarize and critique the argument that CA theory is unrealistic explaining (if how CA analysis care more about relevant consequences than causal certainty In the second part of the article, taking some conceptual advice from social theorist Jurgen Habermas, I show how CA analysis can combine structural and intentional concepts to revise and integrate the apparent antagonism between comprehensiveness and compromise For planning practice. I conclude that a pragmatic CA provides a useful and critical theory For planning practice that remains open to future challenge and debate.