The problem of triple contingency in Habermas

From a certain perspective, Habermas's theory of communicative action is a response, in extension of Mead, Schutz, and Parsons, to the risk of dissens ion posed by double contingency. Starting from double contingency, both The Theory of Communicative Action and Between Facts and Norms are essentially an elaboration of a solution to this problem in terms of a more fully deve loped theory of communication than had been available to his predecessors. Given the intense concentration and the immense expenditure of energy on th e working out of the coordinating accomplishments and structures required b y the complex solution envisaged by him, it is unsurprising that Habermas o verlooks the next most important problems intermittently raised by the theo ry of communicative action, namely, the problem of "triple contingency," th at is, the contingency that the public brings into the social process. This has far-reaching implications for Habermas's place in the sociological tra dition and for the relation of the younger generation to him. Because of hi s continued search for a solution to a problem posed in the classical phase of sociology and his concomitant failure to develop the new problem that h e himself raised in the course of so doing, he can be classified with Parso ns as being a neoclassical sociologist. He nevertheless bequeaths a serious problem to contemporary sociology.