This essay takes the 30th anniversary of Ingeborg Maus’ best-known book, ‘Zur Aufklärung der Demokratietheorie’ (‘On the Enlightenment of Democratic Theory’), as an occasion to examine the program of her critical theory in an independent research study. In the first chapter, the characteristic features of this program are presented, with Horkheimer’s and Adorno’s ‘Dialectic of Enlightenment’ as the point of reference. The second chapter then shows that Maus’ program of an enlightenment of democratic theory is characterized by a (...) specific Rousseauism, which is to be seen as the ‘undialectical’ basic structure of her critical theory. The last two chapters are devoted to the concrete object on which Maus carries out her program: Immanuel Kant’s philosophy of state and the current reception of this philosophy. While the third chapter, looking at Kant’s late ‘Staatsrecht’ in the ‘Metaphysics of Morals’, demonstrates the power of Maus’s program in the field of Kant scholarship, the last chapter argues that her approach reaches its limits on this very object, Kant’s late ‘Staatsrecht’ of 1797. Because of her in crucial respects ‘undialectical’ epistemological interest, Maus is unable to recognize Kant’s thoroughly dialectically organized philosophy of state in the 1797-text. This negative insight opens up the possibility of modifying Maus’s program of a critical theory. (shrink)

Horkheimer/Adornos im kalifornischen Exil verfasste Dialektik der Aufklärung untersucht das Scheitern menschlicher Befreiung und die Errichtung neuer Herrschaftsformen. Obgleich ein Schlüsseltext der philosophischen Zeitdiagnose, gab es bislang keinen Kommentar zu ihr. Der hier vorgelegte kooperative Kommentar geht der Dialektik der Aufklärung in zwei Durchgängen nach. Ein erster Durchgang kommentiert die einzelnen Abschnitte des Buches; ein zweiter Durchgang verfolgt Koordinaten seines theoretischen Horizonts. Abschließend gelangt die Wirkungsgeschichte des Textes zur Darstellung. Ein Gravitationstext der kritischen Theorie unserer Zeit (...) findet damit erstmals eine kommentierende Auslegung. (shrink)

Metaphysics is, as Adorno once notes, the nuisance of philosophy. On the one hand, metaphysics is the reasons of philosophy's existence; on the other hand, it is nearly impossible to characterise metaphysics precisely. This tension is reflected with reference to the contemporary political and cultural situation in Adorno's "Meditations on Metaphysics", the last part of his opus magnum *Negative Dialectics*. The essays in this volume are devoted to different facets of Adorno's examination of metaphysics. They do, however, not only concern (...) themselves with Adorno's metaphysical reflections in a narrow sense, but also extend to other themes Adorno relates to metaphysics: critique of concepts, history, truth, and materialism. Thereby, they render a hardly investigated topic of the *Negative Dialectics* accessible. -/- Contributors: Emil Angehrn, Dirk Braunstein, Peggy H. Breitenstein, Gunnar Hindrichs, Axel Hutter, Philip Hogh, Christian Iber, Julia Jopp, Guido Kreis, Ansgar Martins, Brian O'Connor, Mario Schärli, Marc Nicolas Sommer, Tilo Wesche. (shrink)

Noch während des Zweiten Weltkriegs in den Vereinigten Staaten entstanden, 1947 als Buch erschienen, mit der Neuausgabe von 1969 endgültig zum einflussreichsten Werk der ”Frankfurter Schule“ geworden: eine Sonderausgabe zum hundertsten Geburtstag Theodor W. Adornos am 11. September 2003.

Our reply to Fabian Freyenhagen’s article “Was ist orthodoxe Kritische Theorie?” (DZPhil 65.3 [2017], 456-469) raises the question whether his proposal that Critical Theory only “be adequately and appropriately critical” without a program of justification spares the search for any general criteria. Answering negatively we conversely want to recall, particularly with regard to Horkheimers’s and Adornos’s Dialectic of Enlightment as well as Habermas‘s concept of an emancipatory interest, that such a criterion as a normative foundation of critique is (...) crucial not only for systematical purposes, but also recognised as necessary in this respect by Adorno, who Freyenhagen wants to play off against programs of justification. Critical Theory needs to be clear in this respect. Against this background we are questioning Freyenhagen‘s recourse to an “interest in abolishing social injustice” as the “only criterion for Critical Theory.” Because Freyenhagen ignores the fact that Critical Theory has been understood by its representatives in a twofold manner – as a theoretical program of justification for one and secondly as a cultural diagnosis – his plea for an orthodox Critical Theory is endangered by decisionism. (shrink)

English summary: The idea of a negative dialectics encapsulates the critical theory of Theodor W. Adorno in its entirety. In a critical engagement with Hegel's philosophy, Adorno develops a dialectic that is no longer tied to the idealistic concept of a speculative identity of subject and object, yet nevertheless aims at a concept of the absolute. So far neither the scope nor the argumentative consistency of this model of dialectics has been taken into account. Marc Nicolas Sommer reconstructs (...) negative dialectics through its engagement with Hegelian dialectics and defends its central claim: that negative dialectics liberates dialectics from its idealistic shackles and in doing so develops a viable concept of the absolute after Auschwitz. German description: Die kritische Theorie Theodor W. Adornos findet ihre vollstandige Artikulation im Konzept einer negativen Dialektik. In kritischer Auseinandersetzung mit der hegelschen Philosophie entwickelt Adorno die Idee einer Dialektik, die nicht mehr an das idealistische Konzept einer spekulativen Identitat von Subjekt und Objekt gebunden ist, deren gedankliche Bewegung dennoch auf einen Begriff des Absoluten ausgerichtet ist. Konzeptueller Anspruch, begrifflicher Umfang und argumentative Konsistenz dieses zweiten grossen Modells dialektischen Denkens sind bis heute nicht geklart.Marc Nicolas Sommer rekonstruiert negative Dialektik aus der Auseinandersetzung mit Hegel und verteidigt ihren Anspruch, den eigentlichen Gehalt der hegelschen Dialektik von seinen idealistischen Schlacken befreit zu haben und aus dieser Denkbewegung einen nach Auschwitz tragfahigen Begriff des Absoluten zu entwickeln. (shrink)

The writings of the Frankfurt school, in particular of Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, and Jurgen Habermas, caught the imagination of the radical movements of the 1960s and 1970s and became a key element in the Marxism of the New Left. Partly due to their rise to prominence during the political turmoil of the 1960s, the work of these critical theorists has been the subject of continuing controversy in both political and academic circles. However, their ideas are frequently misunderstood. In this (...) major work, now available from Polity Press, David Held presents a much-needed introduction to, and evaluation of, critical theory. Some of the major themes he considers are critical theory's relation to Marx's critique of political economy, Freudian psychoanalysis, aesthetics and the philosophy of history. There is also an extended discussion of critical theory's substantive contribution to the analysis of capitalism, culture, the family, the individual, as well as its contribution to epistemology and methodology. (shrink)

Habermas’ critical theory is partly an attempt to identify the limitations of critique and emancipation as espoused in the first generation critical theory of Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno. In their attempt to develop an interdisciplinary, reflexive, emancipatory and dialectical reason that is critical towards accepted realities, Horkheimer and Adorno in their monumental work The Dialectic of Enlightenment pictured a world trapped in instrumental rationality. Taking and revolutionizing traditional critical theory, Habermas argues that reason entails both (...) emancipator as well as instrumental possibilities. Through an exposition of Habermas’ critique of Horkheimer and Adorno in his discourse of modernity, this article argues that although Habermas successfully identifies the equation of the rational with the instrumental and offers an emancipator model in return; still he ends up not paying sufficient attention to aesthetic truth. (shrink)

Historical convergence and personal relationships -- Critical reason with an emancipatory goal -- Anthropological differences among Tillich, Adorno, and Horkeimer -- Metaphysics and norms in critical social theory -- Religion and critical theory -- Appendix: Translation of Adorno's Entwurf contra Paulum.

O artigo propõe uma aproximação entre dois campos de pesquisa distintos, mas com notórias afinidades eletivas: o campo da arqueologia e o da estética filosófica. Pretende-se saber de que modo, no interior do pensamento dialético de Adorno, articulam-se os conceitos de pré-história e proto-história, tendo como fio condutor a temática da arte rupestre e a sua contrapartida moderna, isto é, a reprodutibilidade técnica. Tal aproximação tem como ponto de partida um instigante parágrafo da obra póstuma de Adorno, “Ästhetische Theorie”, presente (...) na subseção assim classificada por Rolf Tiedmann como "Moderne Kunst und Industrielle Produktion", no qual Adorno afirma que há uma convergência entre a arte rupestre e a câmera fotográfica, que se daria na objetivação, isto é, na ação de separar o ato subjetivo do objeto que é visto. A partir desta constatação, a contribuição maior deste artigo estaria em identificar uma espécie de proto-história da reprodutibilidade técnica no mundo pré-histórico. Deste modo, numa perspectiva radicalmente dialética pode-se dizer que o progresso virtual e tecnológico sentido nas últimas décadas não representa algo qualitativamente novo na história humana, sendo apenas um desdobramento de uma tendência já contida na pré-história, algo que nos leva a crer que não conseguimos ainda superar o estado de imanência mítica denunciado amplamente por Adorno e Horkheimer na “Dialektik der Aufklärung. Para demonstrar isto o presente artigo almeja reconstruir as principais linhas de força da "Dialética do Esclarecimento", centrando na categoria de mito. Após, pretende apresentar a relação entre pré-história e proto-história no contexto do pensamento adorniano, especialmente nas obras e nos ensaios do período intermediário de sua bibliografia, tais como “Minima Moralia” e “Prismen”. Por último, deseja apresentar algumas reflexões de Adorno sobre a arte rupestre e a reprodutibilidade técnica presentes na Teoria Estética. (shrink)

In der gegenwärtigen Debatte um Kritik und spezifischer um verschiedene Begründungsformen der kritischen Theorie spielt die kritische Theorie der Anerkennung, wie sie von Axel Honneth über die letzten 25 Jahre entwickelt worden ist, eine zentrale Rolle. Diese Theorie soll im vorliegenden Beitrag vorgestellt werden. Um den Aufbau und die Funktionsweise dieser Theorie richtig zu verstehen, ist es unabdingbar, sich zunächst zu vergegenwärtigen, wie sich Honneth in der Tradition der kritischen Gesellschaftstheorie positioniert, also innerhalb jenes Theorieprojekts, das seine Wurzeln bei Hegel (...) und Marx findet und durch Horkheimer in den 1930er Jahren Programm geworden ist. Nach der Lesart, die ich vertreten möchte, entwickelt Honneth seine Anerkennungstheorie vor dem Hintergrund eines wahrgenommenen Scheiterns der ersten und zweiten Generation der Frankfurter Schule an der methodischen Anforderung einer immanenten Kritik, die für das Projekt einer kritischen Gesellschaftstheorie definierend ist. Beides – die methodische Anforderung einer immanenten Kritik, wie sie Honneth begreift, und das Scheitern, das Honneth bei Horkheimer, Adorno und Habermas wahrnimmt – wird Gegenstand des ersten Teils (1) dieses Beitrags sein. „Anerkennung“ wird von Honneth als der Begriff eingeführt, mit dem das Kernproblem einer kritischen Gesellschaftstheorie gelöst werden soll. Mit dem Begriff der Anerkennung soll es nämlich, wie wir im zweiten Teil (2) eingehender nachvollziehen werden, möglich sein, Zugang zu konkreten Ansprüchen auf Befreiung zu finden, die von der Gesellschaft geschaffen und zugleich verletzt werden. In einer Diskussion ideologischer Anerkennung werde ich zuletzt (3) mögliche Grenzen der kritischen Theorie der Anerkennung Honneths aufzeigen, die sich unmittelbar aus dem Erbe der Frankfurter Schule, wie Honneth es begreift, ergeben. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie Jahrgang: 65 Heft: 3 Seiten: 456-469.

The following is the transcript of a lecture taken in shorthand by Hans-Georg Backhaus. The transcript was originally published as an appendix in Hans-Georg Backhaus, Dialektik der Wertform. Untersuchungen zur marxschen Ökonomiekritik, a complete translation of which is forthcoming in the Historical Materialism book series.

Dialectic of Enlightenment is undoubtedly the most influential publication of the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory. Written during the Second World War and circulated privately, it appeared in a printed edition in Amsterdam in 1947. "What we had set out to do," the authors write in the Preface, "was nothing less than to explain why humanity, instead of entering a truly human state, is sinking into a new kind of barbarism." Yet the work goes far beyond a mere critique (...) of contemporary events. Historically remote developments, indeed, the birth of Western history and of subjectivity itself out of the struggle against natural forces, as represented in myths, are connected in a wide arch to the most threatening experiences of the present. The book consists in five chapters, at first glance unconnected, together with a number of shorter notes. The various analyses concern such phenomena as the detachment of science from practical life, formalized morality, the manipulative nature of entertainment culture, and a paranoid behavioral structure, expressed in aggressive anti-Semitism, that marks the limits of enlightenment. The authors perceive a common element in these phenomena, the tendency toward self-destruction of the guiding criteria inherent in enlightenment thought from the beginning. Using historical analyses to elucidate the present, they show, against the background of a prehistory of subjectivity, why the National Socialist terror was not an aberration of modern history but was rooted deeply in the fundamental characteristics of Western civilization. Adorno and Horkheimer see the self-destruction of Western reason as grounded in a historical and fateful dialectic between the domination of external nature and society. They trace enlightenment, which split these spheres apart, back to its mythical roots. Enlightenment and myth, therefore, are not irreconcilable opposites, but dialectically mediated qualities of both real and intellectual life. "Myth is already enlightenment, and enlightenment reverts to mythology." This paradox is the fundamental thesis of the book. This new translation, based on the text in the complete edition of the works of Max Horkheimer, contains textual variants, commentary upon them, and an editorial discussion of the position of this work in the development of Critical Theory. (shrink)

"Max Horkheimer (1895-1973) was a leading figure in The Frankfurt School, a renowned body of philosophers and social theorists, including Adorno and Marcuse, who examined critically the changes in and development of capitalist society. Much of what has become known as the New Left can be traced back to Horkheimer, his social philosophy and his analysis of contemporary culture." "First published in 1947 Eclipse of Reason is the most lucid and fundamental statement of the Critical Theory put forward by (...) the Frankfurt School, surveying and demonstrating the gradual ascendancy of Reason in Western philosophy, its eventual total application to all spheres of life, and what he considers its present reified domination. It acts as a companion to the classic work that Horkheimer wrote with Theodor Adorno, Dialectic of Enlightenment."--BOOK JACKET. (shrink)

Historically, blatantly untrue and defamatory conspiracy theories had disastrous consequences for those who were portrayed in them as evil-doers. At the same time, conspiratorial agreements at the expense of the common good between powerful groups in society do exist and have occasionally been uncovered. Against this background, the article describes different ways in which critical theory has looked at conspiracies. First, an attempt is made to show that Max Horkheimer's notes on `rackets' are an ambitious but flawed attempt to (...) theorize conspiracy. It is argued that Horkheimer's theory is imbued by the very conspiracy thinking that he proposed to criticize. Second, the author suggests recovering Franz Neumann's concept of `political alienation' as a more appropriate starting point to think critically about the ethical and epistemological questions raised by conspiracy theories. (shrink)

These essays reveal another side of Horkheimer, focusing on his remarkable contributions to critical theory in the 1930s. Max Horkheimer is well known as the director of the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research and as a sometime collaborator with Theodor Adorno, especially on their classic Dialectic of Enlightenment. These essays reveal another side of Horkheimer, focusing on his remarkable contributions to critical theory in the 1930s. Included are Horkheimer's inaugural address as director of the Institute, in which he (...) outlines the interdisciplinary research program that would dominate the initial phase of the Frankfurt School, his first full monograph, and a number of other pieces published in the 1930s. The essays, most of which have not appeared in English before, are surprisingly relevant to current post-philosophy debates, notably "On the Problem of Truth," with its focus on pragmatism, and "The Rationalism Debate in Current Philosophy," a sustained critique of the post-Cartesian philosophy of consciousness. Horkheimer's 1933 critique of Kantian ethics, "Materialism and Morality," is of particular interest given the current reaction to the neo-Kantian aspect of Habermas's work. There are also essays relevant to the current foundations debate within Continental philosophy, and the rationality/relativism question is sustained throughout the volume. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 2, Page 184-208, February 2022. Being critical does not come easy, not even within Critical Theory. In this article I respond to criticism of my book from 2019, Capitalism, Alienation and Critique, arguing that contemporary Critical Theory has something to learn from the founding fathers. Firstly, for Adorno immanent critique has metaphysical implications beyond Honneth’s critique of bourgeois society as inconsistent in terms of its professed ideals. Secondly, immanent critique is (...) not the same as ideology critique, and when it comes to Horkheimer and Habermas, they conducted the latter rather than the former. Thirdly, even though today nature must be our concern, answers are to be found in politics and metaphysics rather than science. Finally, critique of neoliberalism should be conducted as critique of political economy, that is, ideology critique, rather than sociological descriptions of the empirical details of globalized capitalism. Denaturalizing economics is a condition for economic democracy. (shrink)

Critical Theory and Philosophy illuminates one of the most complex and influential philosophical movements of this century. After tracking Critical Theory to its source in the works of Kant, Hegel, Marx, and Weber, David Ingram examines the four major figures of the Frankfurt School: Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse, and Jurgen Habermas. The logical structure of this text guides both novice and veteran students through specific social and political concerns toward a gradual understanding of the philosophy of (...) critical evaluation. Includes chapters on: · The Philosophical Roots of Critical Theory · Freud and the Problem of Ideology · Weber and the Dialectic of Enlightenment · Marcuse and the New Politics of Liberation · Horkheimer and Habermas on Critical Methodology · Contemporary Trends in Social Philosophy. (shrink)

The work focuses on the concept of education (Bildung) according to a particular reading: critical education. The topic is narrowed down to the social- and educational-philosophical perspective of the early Frankfurt School around philosophers and intellectuals such as Horkheimer and Adorno, in order to deal with a focus that has so far received too little attention in research: the central position of a critical concept of education that seeks to be oriented towards truth, humanity and differentiation as a (...) basis for an education for maturity and autonomy. In this context, the antinomic nature of the idea of education is crucial for the idea of a negated half-education and the turn from a negative dialectic to a pragmatic dialectic of education. (shrink)

Theodor Adorno (1903-1969) was a cultural philosopher, sociologist, literary critic, and historian of music who, along with Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse, and Erich Fromm, founded the Frankfurt School. Against Epistemology is one of his most important works.

Critical Theory is usually associated with an intellectual tradition which emerged from the work of a group of social philosophers who coalesced around the Institute for Social Research, established in Frankfurt in 1923. This tradition is now considered to have two major branches: the first related to the work of Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse, Erich Fromm, Leo Lowenthal, and Walter Benjamin, while the second pertains to the expansion of this original work which has been proffered by Jürgen (...) Habermas, Claus Offe, Niklas Luhmann, Karl-Otto Apel, and others. It should be immediately noted that Critical Theory does not form a unity, for it does mean different things to both its early and current adherents. Without overstating the case, however, the common theme which unites these theorists is a dislike for the types of determinism which saw socialism arising automatically from either appropriate social conditions or at the behest of elite party members. In each case the belief was inadvertently advanced that people do not make their own history. In line with the work of Lukács and Korsch, these critical theorists wanted to develop a more vital Marxist theory, one which understands human praxis to be at the center of social development and, thus, human liberation. (shrink)

Amy Allen presents Adorno’s and Horkheimer’s Dialectic of Enlightenment as a productive movement between a commitment to the project of reason and a sensitivity to the effects on reason of power and domination. Agreeing with the thrust of her paper, my response considers two questions that Allen’s paper opens up. The first asks how individuals might seek emancipation through reason, knowing that their reason cannot transcend contexts of power. The second asks how best to practise critical theory, given that (...) its analyses and categories cannot rid themselves of contexts of domination. To the first, I answer that Allen’s account of creative individual effort needs to be supplemented by the cultivation of an accommodating and welcoming culture, marked by the sorts of civic attitudes that Derrida and Habermas bring to their maturing relationship. Regarding the second, I extend Allen’s hopes for a post-Habermasian phase of critical theory, indicating four resources in contemporary French philosophy for its further development. (shrink)

This article looks at Adorno’s negative dialectics by focusing on the concepts of negativity and utopia. Against later Critical Theory and social theories similarly oriented towards emancipation, which tend to discredit the concept of utopia in favor of an orientation towards pragmatic goals, I want to show that Adorno’s negative dialectics formulates a position that surpasses the antithesis of realism and utopia by presenting us with pragmatic goals while still retaining a strong concept of utopia.

La théorie critique qui s’incarne dans plusieurs démarches épistémologiques et politiques, n’est pas un pur produit de consommation académique ni un dogme qui oblige à l’unanimité, mais un « miroir brisé » reflétant nos mondes si éclatés et déformés. Sa mission d’émancipation des années 1930 est sa carte d’identité. Elle poursuit dans les mondes du « Sud » cette mission par des « conversations » sur l’oralité (Benjamin), la crédulité (Adorno/Horkheimer), les utopies des arts (Adorno/Marcuse), les reconnaissances (Honneth) et la (...) place des intellectuels (Adorno, Horkheimer). (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 2, Page 164-173, February 2022. The article entails a critical discussion of the book Capitalism, Alienation and Critique by Asger Sørensen. Like Sørensen’s book, it stresses the importance of the first generation of critical theory – especially Horkheimer and Adorno – although Sørensen is at the same time critized for neglecting the insights of Horkheimer and Adornos work from the mid-1940s and onwards. In arguing for the actuality of especially the late (...) Horkheimer, the article emphasizes the following topics: The problems of education and ‘Bildung’, The historical transformation of the critique of Capitalism after the Second World War and The drawbacks of classical humanism when it comes to grasping the current political and ecological crisis. (shrink)

Critical Theory constitutes one of the major intellectual traditions of the twentieth century, and is centrally important for philosophy, political theory, aesthetics and theory of art, the study of modern European literatures and music, the history of ideas, sociology, psychology, and cultural studies. In this volume an international team of distinguished contributors examines the major figures in Critical Theory, including Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, Benjamin, and Habermas, as well as lesser known but important thinkers such as Pollock and Neumann. (...) The volume surveys the shared philosophical concerns that have given impetus to Critical Theory throughout its history, while at the same time showing the diversity among its proponents that contributes so much to its richness as a philosophical school. The result is an illuminating overview of the entire history of Critical Theory in the twentieth century, an examination of its central conceptual concerns, and an in-depth discussion of its future prospects. (shrink)

Now in its second edition, this collection is an intelligent, accessible overview of the entire Critical Theory Tradition, written by one of the leading experts on the subject. Filled with original insights and valuable historical narratives, this work is a contribution that furthers the idea and spirit of critical theory as it weaves together a narrative from a series of examinations of the thoughts of many of the most important left Western intellectuals of the twentieth century. Covering the (...) work of major philosophical thinkers such as Benjamin, Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse and Habermas and revisiting the contributions of lesser-known figures such as Karl Korsch and Ernst Bloch, Bronner measures the writing of these theorists against each other, postmodernist philosophers and the critical tradition reaching back to Hegel, and then connects the history of critical theory with important historical events and develops in the twentieth century. Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists presents new insights useful to experienced scholars and offers clear summaries for students making this book an ideal introduction to the debates surrounding one of the most important intellectual traditions of the 20th Century. (shrink)

Beginning with Jürgen Habermas's 1968 reflection on Nietzsche's criticisms of knowledge and science, the essays in this volume engage Nietzsche's challenge to the Frankfurt School tradition of critical theory as well as other social and political theories of modernity and postmodernity. Juxtaposing Habermas and Nietzsche for the sake of the "future" of critical theory, the essays in this collection draw variously on Marx and Weber as well as Horkheimer and Adorno, Benjamin, Foucault, and others. The distinguished authors in (...) this book argue that critical theory is best served by responding to challenges such as those associated with identity politics and globalization and including an authentic engagement with Nietzsche. This important volume features contributions by Babette E. Babich, Karin Bauer, Howard Caygill, Rebecca Comay, Fred Dallmayr, Josef Früchtl, Jürgen Habermas, Dominique Janicaud, Alexander Nehamas, David Owen, Max Pensky, Holger Schmid, Tracy B. Strong, James Swindal, and Bernhard Taureck. (shrink)

Philosophie im Sinne Adornos bedeutet, die Traditionslinien der Dialektik und der Kritik miteinander engzuführen. Diese Engführung erfolgte bislang vor allem gemäß der Vorgabe Hegels – mit dem Resultat, dass das Profil einer dezidiert negativen Dialektik durch Identitätsdenken überformt und in der Forschung als mangelhafte Kopie der positiv-spekulativen Dialektik gehandelt wurde. Dagegen schlägt diese Arbeit vor, dieses Profil von Kant her zu sichten: Indem die Grundzüge von Adornos Kantinterpretation erhellt werden, soll deren systematische Bedeutung für das adornosche „Antisystem“ (...) zur Geltung gelangen. Negative Dialektik, so die These, ist nur als grenzbegriffliche Reflexion auf den Erkenntnisanspruch der traditionellen Dialektik möglich. (shrink)

Are the arguments of the Frankfurt School still relevant? Modern Culture and Critical Theory investigates this question in the context of important issues in contemporary cultural politics: neoconservatism and new social movements, discontents with modernity and debates on postmodernism, the political hegemony of Ronald Reagan, and the cultural hegemony of structuralism and poststructuralism. Russell Berman thoughtfully explores the theories of Horkheimer, Adorno, Benjamin, Lyotard, and Foucault and their relevance to both historical and contemporary issues in literature, politics, and the (...) arts. (shrink)

I interpret Adorno's bold claim that all philosophy revolves around the ontological argument. On my reading, Adorno thereby expresses that all philosophy revolves around the question whether all of reality can be captured by thought. I then interpret the significance of this thesis for Adorno's *Negative Dialectics*. I argue that Adorno does not give up the ontological argument's claim—capturing reality in thought—but gives it a Marxist spin: whether reality can be captured in thought depends on its historical development, and is (...) therefore also up to humans and their actions. (shrink)

Die Studie schließt eine Lücke in der Forschung zur Kritischen Theorie. Anhand z.T. unveröffentlichter Materialien rekonstruiert sie zwei frühe Phasen der Entwicklung, die Max Horkheimers Denken nach 1920 in intensiver Auseinandersetzung mit historischen und zeitgenössischen philosophischen und wissenschaftlichen Positionen vollzogen hat. Im Zentrum seiner bis 1924 vertretenen 'transzendentalen Phänomenologie' steht die Wendung gegen ein mechanistisches Wissenschaftsverständnis. Ab 1925 überschreitet er mit seiner 'historisch-materialen Phänomenologie' die erkenntnistheoretische Position und begreift auch das erkennende Subjekt als Teil eines natürlichen, gesellschaftlichen und geschichtlichen Zusammenhangs. (...) Die Rekonstruktion dieser Entwicklung verdeutlicht die Originalität des von Horkheimer in den folgenden Jahren unternommenen Versuches, den zeitgenössischen 'bürgerlichen' und marxistischen Theorien ein eigenständiges Programm materialistischer Analyse und Kritik der Gesellschaft entgegenzusetzen. (shrink)

This paper traces some lines of influence between post-Kantianism and Critical Theory. In the first part of the paper, we discuss Fichte and Hegel; in the second, we discuss Horkheimer, Adorno, and Honneth.

Die vorliegende Arbeit wurde im Sommersemester 1996 vom Fachbereich Gesellschaftswissenschaften und Philosophie der Philipps-Universität Marburg als Dissertation angenommen. Obgleich sie mit vielen anderen das Schicksal teilt, Resultat - mehr oder weniger - einsamer Produktion in - mehr oder weniger - stillen Kämmerlein zu sein, wäre doch auch sie ohne die materielle, moralische und inhaltliche Unterstützung einer An zahl,beteiligter Dritter' niemals zustande gekommen. Zuvörderst gilt mein Dank Prof. Dr. Michael Th. Greven und Prof. Dr. Burkhard Tuschling, die durch ihren Einsatz dafür (...) Sorge getragen ha ben, daß durch Stipendien und Stellen die finanzielle Basis für die Arbeit gesichert werden konnte. Ihr durchgängiges Vertrauen, daß die Arbeit zu einem guten Abschluß gebracht würde, hat sich, wie ich hoffe, als gerecht fertigt erwiesen. Dem Max-Horkheimer-Archiv der Stadt-und Universi tätsbibliothek Frankfurt/M. sowie Herrn Dr. Gunzelin Schmid Noerr danke ich für die Möglichkeit, Max Horkheimers Nachlaß sichten und auswerten zu können. Dem Land Hessen und der Philipps-Universität Marburg bin ich für die Gewährung eines Promotions stipendiums zu be sonderem Dank verpflichtet. (shrink)

Following Max Horkheimer, I will first attempt to reconstruct an anthropology that essentially wants to be understood as critical social research. I will then pursue the question of humanism in critical theory. In doing so, I want to show that a reference to a normatively substantive humanism does actually exist in critical theory. On the other hand, I want to show that this humanism is anything but unambiguously and systematically formulated but has been reflected and articulated differently (...) by different representatives of critical theory. The two examples I will refer to here are Theodor W. Adorno and Erich Fromm. I will define Adorno’s humanism as ‘dialectical humanism’, whereas Fromm’s humanism could be described as ‘emphatic humanism’. My reading, however, attempts to interrogate the two positions as to their complementarity. Not ‘Adorno or Fromm’, but ‘Adorno and Fromm’ is the motto that guides me. Finally, I will relate this complementary reading of both approaches in such a way that the possibility of a ‘Critical Humanism’ can be derived from it, which above all also wants to be understood as a sociological research program. (shrink)

Der Beitrag untersucht den Zusammenhang von Kritizismus (qua Heterologie) und Kritischer Theorie (qua Dialektik) anhand der Konstellation Rickert-Adorno. Heterologie und Dialektik werden von der Forschung bislang als gegensätzliche Methodenkonzepte erachtet. Dagegen soll gezeigt werden, dass Adorno diesen Gegensatz gezielt infrage stellen und sich auf das heterologische Denkprinzip berufen muss, um die dialektische Tradition zu kritisieren. Die These lautet: Bei Adorno bildet Heterologie den Sinnhorizont der dialektischen Negation. Sonst wäre die negative Dialektik eine positive Dialektik – die (...) Kritische eine traditionelle Theorie geblieben. (shrink)

Was meinen wir, wenn wir soziale Konstellationen als »möglich« bezeichnen? Diese Frage wurde allzu oft nur randständig beleuchtet, obwohl »Möglichkeit« seit Aristoteles zum grundbegrifflichen Repertoire der praktischen Philosophie zählt. Umso unverständlicher wirkt die Zurückhaltung von Horkheimer und Adorno, den Begriff gesellschaftstheoretisch zu explizieren. Gösta Gantner zeigt, inwiefern die Vorstellungen des »Andersseinkönnens« und der »Potentialität« die Kritische Theorie nahezu unbemerkt dominieren. Als Schlüsselbegriff trägt »Möglichkeit« dazu bei, aktuelle Varianten kritischen Denkens in ihrem leitenden Erkenntnisinteresse und ihrer praktischen Ausrichtung zu schärfen: Im (...) Lichte der Kritik des Gegebenen geht es um das, was anders sein kann. (shrink)