communicative, it risks becoming increasingly strategic with agents

asking questions such as: How can I make as much money on this
student with the fewest possible resources? How can I maximize my
chances of getting a decent degree with as little effort as possible?
The relationship between student and professor is less and less one
of transmitting knowledge and socializing the student into the world
of knowledge and critical thinking and citizenship.
Another example – this time from Habermas – is welfare state
provisions. These clearly often have an egalitarian thrust to them,
and we can say that they have an emancipatory effect on those who
enjoy them insofar as it makes them able to do things they would not
otherwise have been able to do. For instance, if I fall ill, I am not necessarily
forced out of work and forced to give up my house and live
on skid row, because the state will provide health care, sick leave
and so on. However, welfare state provisions also lead to legal regulation
of lifeworld matters that were previously, and perhaps better,
regulated through communicative action. The danger is that these
provisions lead to what Habermas (ibid., 357) calls juridification
(Verrechtlichung), which he defines as ‘the tendency toward an
increase in formal (or positive, written) law that can be observed in
modern society’. ‘From the start’, he writes,
[t]he ambivalence of guaranteeing freedom and taking it away has
attached to the policies of the welfare state. . . . The negative effects
of this . . . result from the form of