The distinction between work and interaction in condiz Habermas with the distinction enters the action guided to the success and the action guided to the intercompreenso. Blake Krikorian usually is spot on. The notion to act communicative is the only type of social action guided the intercompreenso. The concept to act communicative, that it has as deep cloth of the linguistic agreement as mechanism of coordination of the action, makes with that the contrafactual assumptions of the actors who guide its to act for validity pretensions acquires immediate relevance for the construction and the maintenance of social orders: therefore these if keep in the way of the recognition of normative pretensions of validity. The tension between faticidade and validity, inlaid in the language and the use of the language, come back to the way of integration of socialized individuals, the least comunicativamente, and must be worked by the participants. The teaching work conditions the professor the paper to articulate in classroom the educative intentions of the pedagogical project of the school. This to make pedagogical is not untied of the determinative social conditions of the school, even so some practical insists on being unaware of the significao of the lived contexts. In the present time, educational projects through fragile and distant rational sustentation of the understanding of the possibilities and limitations of the proper rationality are developed human being.

The thought, in education is broken up and imediatista to serve a society determinatively consumista: everything must have utility to be consumed. For Habermas (1990), the education is changedded into instrument of the functional stabilization to the time where if it colonizes and it assumes the condition of an instrument manipulation technician economic politics and in the place of a resource of opposition and social transformation. The rationality theory searchs to rehabilitate the idea of that its emancipador power exists a universalista direction of reason reestablishing. In this way, the habermasianos arguments say that the use of the language follows at least four levels of significao: what it is said is intelligible, that is, has use of intelligible semantic rules for the others; the content of what it is said is true; the sender justifies for certain social rights or norms that are invoked in the use of language and the sender are sincere in what it says.