近十年來，有關哈伯瑪斯公共領域理論的討論方興未艾。同時政治社會實踐的發展也使得這個理論面臨考驗。本文 辨視了三種相關的挑戰與創見，它們分別是來自女性主 義、羅逖的實用主義、以及文化研究。女性主義集中批判了哈伯瑪斯對參與公共領域的男性道德預設；羅逖描繪了公/私領域的分割如何在不需要共識之餘、仍能透過知識份子對社群團結作出貢獻；文化研究借助於它擅長的閱聽人分析，論証公共領域概念必須容納更多私人領域的視野。這三種論述雖然千差萬別，但卻共同地指出公共領域概念修正的必要方向：即更謹慎地反省公/私二分，並且加重私領域這一端的平衡力量。

　　　　　Following the publishing of Habermas's classical Public Sphere book, the past decade has witnessed a rising discussion about this concept. Academic discourses, compounded by 'real' socio-politico practices, have burdened this discussion with fatal challenges. Three of them are critically reviewed in this article. They are from some authors of feminism, neo-pragmatism of Rorty, and cultural studies. Feminist's criticism has centered on the 'gender blindness' of Habermas's account of the public sphere. Rorty casts a light on the contribution of intellectuals to societal solidarity in the public sphere without pursuing the 'Consensus'. Media and Cultural studies argues for an emphasis on private domains which impinge on the mapping of the public sphere for ordinary people. While differing with each other in many respects, these three camps point to a significant direction of revisiting the public sphere concept, namely, to recast the dichotomy of public/private spheres and balance the 'impracticability' of Habermas original account against the private sphere.