The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The struggle for recognition: the moral grammar of social conflicts
Abstract
Using the young Hegel's "struggle for recognition" as a basis, Honneth (political philosophy, Free University of Berlin) has written a remarkable book. In it, he develops the foundations for a social theory with normative content. Moving fluently between Continental and Anglo-American intellectual traditions, Honneth draws on the work of Jürgen Habermas (Theory and Practice, CH, Jun'74), Charles Taylor (The Ethics of Authenticity, 1992), and G.H. Mead (Mind, Self, and Society from the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist, 1934). The struggle for recognition, Honneth argues, takes three forms: love, formal rights, and "solidarity." Part of the power of Honneth's analysis lies in showing that social relations of symmetrical esteem between autonomous individuals are a prerequisite for social solidarity; i.e., felt concern for what is individual and particular about others. To esteem others, then, entails viewing them in the light of values that acknowledge their abilities and traits as significant for shared action. Honneth does not so much steer between as integrate the demand for both "thick" Aristotelian theories of ethics and "thin" Kantian theories. Honneth's book is accessible to--and deserving of--a wide readership. Recommended for upper-division undergraduates and above and the general reader.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Toward a General Theory of Strategic Action Fields
Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2011) · Sociological Theory · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9558.2010.01385.x · Cited by 1,367
Walker, G., & Day, R. (2012) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.01.044 · Cited by 632
A problem-based approach to democratic theory
WARREN, M. E. (2017) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055416000605 · Cited by 478
Fragmented sovereignty: Land reform and dispossession in Laos
Lund, C. (2011) · Journal of Peasant Studies · doi:10.1080/03066150.2011.607709 · Cited by 276
Grounding Recognition: A Rejoinder to Critical Questions
Honneth, A. (2002) · Inquiry · doi:10.1080/002017402320947577 · Cited by 262
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 1996-03-01
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 07
- Pages
- 33-3840-33-3840
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W2565800594
- Cited by
- 2,146
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The struggle for recognition: the moral grammar of social conflicts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.33-3840
- The paper
- The struggle for recognition: the moral grammar of social conflicts. (1996). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.33-3840
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.