Discourse, Desire, and Fantasy in Jurgen Habermas' Critical Theory

S  P

Edited by Robert Bernasconi University of Memphis

A R S S  P R B, General Editor

F   L  S  T G GĪTĀ R Hermeneutics and Discipline in the German Kevin C. Klement Reception of Indian Thought, 1778–1831 Bradley L. Herling T   P  P W H’ C  E Daniel Patrick Nolan A Reading of the Wesenslogik Franco Cirulli U  M Byeong-uk Yi T, S  E   P  W T, K A B S,  M H Observation Selection Effects Graham Mayeda Nick Bostrom W’ N T B S   G Martin Klebes Platonic and Pythagorean Themes in Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment L  H  T W. Mihaela C. Fistioc A’ NOTES TO LITERATURE Ulrich Plass M  K’ C P D   M  Reflections on Mathematical Practice S Lisa Shabel Mary Efrosini Gregory

R O  M L T R  W  C Dagfinn Føllesdal The Political Philosophy of Mary Wollstonecraft E L Natalie Fuehrer Taylor Ethics, Justice, and the Human beyond Being Elisabeth Louise Thomas T G “M” Garden Theory and Philosophy in the Time of T C  C Kant A Study in Analytic Phenomenology Michael G. Lee Wolfgang Huemer T I W D   B The Turn to Language in German Philosophy, Corporeality in the Philosophy of T.W. Adorno 1759–1801 Lisa Yun Lee Katie Terezakis

A  A M D, D,  F  Ontology and Aesthetics in Deleuze and J H’ C T Guattari Kenneth G. MacKendrick Stephen Zepke D, D,  F  J H’ C T

Kenneth G. MacKendrick

Routledge New York & London Routledge Routledge Taylor & Francis Group Taylor & Francis Group 270 Madison Avenue 2 Park Square New York, NY 10016 Milton Park, Abingdon Oxon OX14 4RN

© 2008 by Kenneth G. MacKendrick Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2008. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.”

International Standard Book Number‑13: 978‑0‑415‑95617‑8 (Hardcover)

No part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or utilized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the publishers.

Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

Library of Congress Cataloging‑in‑Publication Data

MacKendrick, Kenneth G. Discourse, desire, and fantasy in Jürgen Habermas’ critical theory / by Kenneth G. MacKendrick. p. cm. ‑‑ (Studies in philosophy) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0‑415‑95617‑X 1. Habermas, Jürgen. 2. Critical theory. I. Title.

B3258.H324M28 2007 193‑‑dc22 2007015227

Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at http://www.taylorandfrancis.com and the Routledge Web site at http://www.routledge.com

ISBN 0-203-93386-9 Master e-book ISBN

T&F_LOC_G_Master.indd 1 6/18/07 3:27:36 PM This book is dedicated to Andrea Brown, for saying the things that no one else was thinking.

Contents

Acknowledgments ix

Introduction 1

Chapter One The Project of Critical Theory: An Introduction to the Thought of Horkheimer, Adorno, and Marcuse 11

Chapter Two Knowledge, Interests, Nature: Jürgen Habermas’ Early Writings 41

Chapter Three Critical Theory and Hermeneutics 77

Chapter Four Of Reason and Revelation: Toward a Post-Hermeneutic Critical Theory 117

Chapter Five The Struggle for Recognition: Jürgen Habermas, Axel Honneth, and Jessica Benjamin 147

Chapter Six Critique of Communicative Reason 175

Notes 181

vii viii Contents

Bibliography 215

Index 237 Acknowledgments

Funding for my education and research was made possible by the following sources: Catherine and Louis K. MacKendrick, Andrea Brown, Bank of Mon- treal, University of Toronto, Wilfrid Laurier University, University of Manitoba, University of Toronto Open Doctoral Fellowship(s), Joint Initiative in German and European Studies Fellowship, and Ontario Graduate Scholarship. This manuscript is a revised version of my Ph.D. thesis submitted to the Centre for the Study of Religion, University of Toronto (2005). It would not exist without Marsha Hewitt, who introduced me to the work of the Frankfurt School and Habermas (as well as Emma Goldman) and persistently encouraged thoughtful critique throughout the entire process. I owe much to Graeme Nicholson for introducing me to Hegel (and Kropotkin), Jim DiCenso, who was always available when I had questions about Lacan, and Lambert Zuidervaart and Marc Lalonde for their valuable feedback. I owe a tremendous debt to professors from the University of Windsor and the University of Toronto whose ideas and teachings have made a mem- orable impact on my current studies and interests. Thanks to Bruce Alton, George Crowell, Roger Hutchinson, Pamela Milne, Maureen Muldoon, and Katharine Parr. Numerous friends and colleagues have also contributed greatly to my thoughts as they have been expressed here, especially Johannes Wolfart, Christopher Brittain, Darlene Juschka, Bill Arnal, Nicole Goulet, Stella Gaon, and Gary Davis. I would like to single out Johannes and Chris for special mention. Chris has been an inspiring collaborator since we were students in Toronto and introduced me to fiddleheads in Halifax. Johannes provided bicycles when my partner and I first arrived in Winnipeg, and thus introduced us to the city in a most amiable way. Thanks to all of my colleagues in the Department of Religion at the University of Manitoba for interfering with my research. Without such inter- ferences, nothing would get done. A special thank you to Dawne McCance

ix x Acknowledgments for such a warm welcome to the Department, to the numerous students, undergraduate and graduate, who have enriched my teaching experiences, and to the administrative assistants who have helped keep me on track. My parents have been a constant source of support and inspiration. I don’t remember when my bedtime was as a child, but there was always time for reading. This has made all the difference. I also thank my brother Andrew, whose proficient wit and madness has never ceased to enthuse, and Danielle—Vegas baby, Vegas! Andrea has been with me from the beginning of my studies. It is to her that I extend my deepest thanks, for being present through the duress and difficulties of the entire process, and for seeing the things that I did not and sharing them with me. Finally, thanks to the workers of the Toronto Transit Commission and Winnipeg Transit for public transportation quick enough to safely arrive on time and slow enough for me to get my reading done. Introduction

To adopt a quote from the Preface of Seyla Benhabib’s first book, Critique, Norm, and Utopian: A Study of the Foundations of Critical Theory, my doctoral studies began “with a question and a suspicion.” My question, like that of Benhabib’s, concerns the plausibility of Jürgen Habermas’s effort to base the normative foundations of critical theory upon a moral theory of discourse. And again, like Benhabib, my suspicion concerns the possibility of developing an alternative normative foundation for critical theory. Unlike her careful analysis, which concludes “this suspicion has proved untenable,” I think my research suggests a viable alternative.1 In the following study I argue that a psychoanalytically informed rethinking of Habermas’s earlier work may assist in overcoming some of the stumbling stones and deadlocks of his later work. As a corollary, my re-visioning of Habermas’s early work may also be productive as a means of keeping alive the creative and provocative critical intuitions of the early Frankfurt School theorists. My argument begins by tracing some key concepts in the writings of the Frankfurt School alongside Habermas’s earlier writings as a means of sug- gesting missed opportunities. If there is a guiding phrase for my research it is Adorno’s aphorism “the preponderance of the object,” a phrase I take to include moments of neglect and forgetting. As is well known, the principal architects of critical theory, particularly Horkheimer, Adorno, and Marcuse, each in their own way argue that the recollection of the past includes the pathos and recognition of missed opportunities, moments in history where the achievement of a more genuinely humane world, the reasonable conditions of life, could have emerged but did not. The sentiment is appropriate because this is precisely what my argument aims to show. I am recuperating and reflecting upon a missed opportunity located in the contradictions and crevices of Habermas’s earlier writings. I am convinced that Habermas’s writings in the 70s, which begin the trend away from the critical spirit of the

1 2 Discourse, Desire, and Fantasy in Jürgen Habermas’ Critical Theory

Frankfurt School, and his later writings through the 80s and 90s, paradig- matically represented by Between Facts and Norms, have veered into the realm of what could be called conformist critical theory.2 In many instances Haber- mas’s mature writings read more like an apology for existing forms of liberal democratic regimes than a critical account of their pathologies, a tendency in critical theory detected by Nancy Fraser when she entitled one of her articles, “What’s Critical about Critical Theory?”3 Certainly Habermas remains one of the most articulate critics of modernity, but in my view his critique of modern thought is not tenacious enough, exerting tendencies that are unwit- tingly accommodating to existing forms of social and political pathology coupled with a theoretical apparatus too easily absorbed into philosophical and political apologetics. Interestingly enough, it is often through his political interventions that Habermas expresses the deepest sympathy with the Frankfurt School theorists.4 When I began my research on Habermas during my M.A. at the Uni- versity of Toronto, I had naïvely hoped to provide a sustained critique of is work relying primarily on Adorno’s Negative Dialectics.5 This rapidly showed itself to be implausible, or at least this kind of critique could only proceed in a limited way. I remain influenced by Adorno and have tried to develop and build upon many of his key concepts without abandoning Habermas’s progressive and theoretically innovative insights. What initially concerned me about Habermas’s thought was an apparent conceptual insensitivity to the ambiguities and contradictions of reason, a concern emerging from les- sons I have learned from psychoanalysis. In the most general way I think social interaction is more complicated that Habermas’s theory of communicative action permits. Language is inundated with more than stock defi- nitions, irreducible validity claims, and ubiquitous idealizing assumptions. There are forces operating on and through language that entwine its use with dreams, desires, and fantasies. These affective elements operating on language are not necessarily regressive, they are constitutive elements of thought and speech. These affective elements must be accounted for when trying to articulate a theory of communicative rationality that is not hope- lessly hypostatized. To phrase it bluntly: an analysis of reason in language that gives priority to the pragmatic dimensions of language, focusing on universalizing notions about how language works, will minimize or neglect the equally important questions of how language, as a product of the imaginary, comes to be constituted and constitutive of the subject and of intersubjective relations in idiosyncratic and particular ways. To explain these entwinements a psychoanalytically informed understanding of communication in relation to desire and the imagination is required. My findings Introduction 3

here serve simply as a prolegomenon to what I hope to be a more sustained rethinking of Habermas’s critical theory. Overall, it is my view that more attention needs to be given to subject-object or subject-image relations in the midst of intersubjective relations, both between subjects and internal to the subject; thus my keen interest in Jessica Benjamin’s dialectical emphasis on the intersubjective and the intrasubjective. When I began my research, setting out to investigate problems in Habermas’s communicative theory through the work of Adorno, I increasingly gravitated to the often audacious writings of Marcuse. I thought that Marcuse’s understanding of Eros was promising, but I eventually found it too clumsy and under-theorized to express the complexities of the relation between desire and fantasy that I sought to understand more carefully; like- wise, the nebulous concept of “emphatic rationality” often associated with the Frankfurt School was too amorphous to be of much use. It was not until I encountered the writings of Cornelius Castoriadis, largely through Habermas’s critique of The Imaginary Institution of Society, that a new path of inquiry was opened for me.6 Around the same time I became intrigued by Axel Honneth’s critique of Habermas in The Critique of Power: Reflec- tive Stages in a Critical Social Theory, influenced in part by Foucault, and his attempt to articulate and initiate a post-linguistic turn in critical theorizing in The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts.7 My interest in Castoriadis, which seemed to harmonize with my sympathy to anarchist thought, led to the publication of my first article: “The Moral Imaginary of Discourse Ethics.”8 Using Castoriadis’s conception of the imaginary, which is still very important for me, I began to sense the plausibility of developing a more psychoanalytically informed critique of Habermas’s works. My main problem was simple: I found Habermas’s critique of Castoriadis to be persuasive and I found Honneth’s work to remain too close to the original position he set out to criticize. While researching the concept of the imaginary I was directed to the work of Slavoj Žižek by my colleague Darlene Juschka, and for about two years I studied the writings of the Slovene Lacanian School and the writings of Jacques Lacan, with some attention given to the writings of Jacques Der- rida, Julia Kristeva, and Judith Butler. While at first I thought this material would be helpful I gradually became increasingly suspicious and mistrustful of the entire modality of Lacanian inquiry. I include this point because I am aware that this research did influence the tenor of my theoretical trajectory.9 I suspect that anyone familiar with Habermas’s work will recognize that his book Knowledge and Human Interests is theoretically more innovative than the works that come after it. And, at least in my opinion, his debate 4 Discourse, Desire, and Fantasy in Jürgen Habermas’ Critical Theory

with Hans-Georg Gadamer, which has sweeping implications for research in the humanities and social sciences, is among the most fascinating philosophical debates of the 20th century. Reflecting on this I discerned that it was the presence of Habermas’s appropriation of Freud, which was in part still under the influence of the writings of Adorno, Horkheimer, and Marcuse, that interested me, and where I again detected an opening for a version of critical theorizing that seems to have disappeared shortly after the exchange. With this in mind I then, finally, turned back to those scholars identifying with the aims of the critical theory of the Frankfurt School who were also struggling with the less-than-critical tendencies of Habermas’s thought.10 It took a rather long detour to figure out that these were the most valuable thinkers through which to articulate my critique. In most respects each of these thinkers is trying to reconnect Habermasian critical theory with a more differentiated understanding of the entwinement of reason, domination, and autonomy. It is through these influences, some of them productive and others leading into dead ends, that this manuscript took shape. Throughout I have tried to retain many of the precepts of the Frankfurt School as a means of articulating this alternative path. In terms of my theoretical assumptions vis-à-vis Habermas, I am using a concept of the imaginary similar to the one provided by Cornelius Casto- riadis: the imaginary “is the unceasing and essentially undetermined (social- historical and psychical) creation of figures/forms/images, on the basis of which alone there can ever be a question of ‘something.’ What we call ‘real- ity’ and ‘rationality’ are its works.”11 The imaginary is a vital aspect of all human activities, linguistic and performative. It is meaning-constituting and, as creative, generative of the signs and symbols that constitute language. There can be no communication without the intersecting imagining of communication. The imaginary, with its stream of identifications and projections, is the means through which the subject can begin to speak and comprehend at all. The imaginary is not, however, an autonomous partner in a public dialogue; on the contrary, it is the underlying schema of discourse and the agency of the positing, creation, and reception of forms. Dealings with the imaginary, as an irrevocable facet of subjectivity, are best conceptualized along the lines of a volatile subject-object or subject-image dialectic. The imaginary works as a petrifying or fossilizing operation on the one hand and as a fragmenting and dissolving force on the other; learning is accomplish through the dissolution of certain ideas and the fusion of others. The imaginary is also subject to revision, modification, and potential transformation, through brutish instrumental calculation or self-conscious and dialogical reflection. Introduction 5

To further clarify this point: when I am talking about the imaginary as a substratum of subjectivity I have in mind a two-fold notion. First, there is what could be called a natural or prelinguistic imaginary, the interaction of the organic form of the human being with itself in a primary or primordial way. An equally appropriate term would be the instincts. Such an imaginary is primordial and without concept, although not necessarily without shape or form. Second, there is a social and perceptual influence and interaction with this natural imaginary that imprints itself on it: the partial and fragmented— and largely unconscious—acquisition of language and the vicissitudes of the symbolic realm (gestures, posture, and so on). This includes the experience and intensification of perception increasingly mediated by the gradual acquisition of language and eventual emergence of differentiated forms of communication, what I think can be called the non-conceptual or pre-conceptual imaginary. Social interactions give increasing form to the prelinguistic substratum. In both instances, the natural or prelinguistic imaginary and the pre- or non-conceptual imaginary should be viewed as constituting the non-linguistic substratum of consciousness. As I view it, this substratum can be described as an amorphous hunger that is fed with things and with words, gradually merging perceptions and sensations with something more picturesque or phantasmatic than wholly linguistic. The imaginary basis of conscious life operates on and from within our linguistic cognition, with the effect of congealing and fragmenting simultaneously. The easiest, although perhaps misleading, way to describe the relation of the nonlinguistic imaginary to conscious life is through an analogy to the creation of confectionaries. A confectionary is a food product based on sugar. Basically, a candy is made up of raw materials which may include sugar, syrup, or honey and some form of animal or vegetable fat, fruit, etc. In the creation of a candy, the sugar is dissolved in water then boiled and goes through different stages from soft to hard in the crystallization process, resulting in a range of sweets from fudge to toffee and caramel to brittle.12 What I am calling the prelinguistic imaginary is akin to the raw ingredients, the process of boiling is the acquisition of experience wherein the prelinguistic imaginary is dissolved and reconstituted in an increasingly crystallized and conceptual-cultural form. Whatever forms the candy takes, its transformed ingredients retain their plasticity, the elements of heat and water can at any time continue to dissolve or crystallize the confection.13 The unavoidable forward and backward motion in the relation between the imaginary and linguistic cognition is crucial to my understanding of the relation between discourse, desire, and fantasy. Perhaps there is no better phrase to encapsulate this dialectic than Adorno’s aphorism “If thought really yielded to the object . . . the very objects would start talking 6 Discourse, Desire, and Fantasy in Jürgen Habermas’ Critical Theory under the lingering eye.” Or, perhaps one could mention Horkheimer and Adorno’s speculative comments in Dialectic of Enlightenment concerning the possibilities of mindfulness or consciousness of nature in the subject.14 The other kind of imaginary that I refer to is the social imaginary: the world of shared meaning, interpretation and so on, perhaps akin to what Habermas calls the lifeworld.15 Imagination, as opposed to the different valences of the imaginary, simply refers to creativity, the novelty of imagining of something. It is my contention that the natural imaginary cannot be wholly transformed nor rendered transparent, there is a remainder that can best be described as the ineluctable natural basis of human beings, the natural imaginary can be imprinted upon, is malleable, and to some degree is transformed through interaction with others and with the environment, but it is not transcended, otherwise human beings would cease to be natural beings. Jonathan Lear has nicely captured a similar idea with the phrase “the remainder of life.”16 Coupled with the significance of my differentiated understanding of the imaginary is the notion of desire, which I do not view as completely distinct from Habermas’s theory of human interests. My understanding of the concept of desire is Freudian, influenced primarily by Jessica Benjamin. Desire must be equated with lack and with the potential for agency; desire can be conscious, as an interpretation of interests expressed in fantasy or the social imaginary, or, unconscious, in relation to phantasy. Where concepts of interest and desire depart is in relation to the structure of fantasy and the imaginary, and the supposed rationality inherent to the different stratifi- cations of anthropologically deep-seated human interests. Desire “in-itself” cannot be theorized as rational; desire is simply an energizing aspect of practice. Empirically, when desire is situated, it may be appropriate to speak of “ideologies of desire,” ways in which desire is implicated within social interactions, institutional structures, and patterns of individual or collective behavior as well as emancipatory, as in a desire for self-reflection.17

By way of introduction, in the most general terms the critical theory of Jürgen Habermas is a sustained analysis of rationality and enlightenment from a social theoretical perspective, a perspective setting out to chart the distortions and malformations of the human use of reason in society and history. Haber- mas’s writings comprise a body of literature virtually unparalleled throughout the social sciences and humanities, constituting a sustained and systematic defense of the cognitive and normative ideals of the Enlightenment. In brief, Habermas’s thought provides a philosophical justification of the separation of value-spheres and world orientations, the progress of scientific knowledge, Introduction 7

the material possibility of justice and the propensity for moral autonomy, and even extends to reflections on the relevance of art and the future of religion within modernity. Although much of my argument deals with Habermas’s earlier work, from Knowledge and Human Interests to Communication and the Evolution of Society, my aims are not those of a historiographer. Habermas’s earlier work suggests a direction for social theorizing that I argue he opted not to pursue. While Habermas has often found it necessary to amend the justifications given for particular aspects of his theory, I view his work to be thematically consistent throughout. I have chosen to focus on his earlier work because it is the most suggestive for developing an alternative path to the one he has chosen. It is my assumption that the difference in tone and trajectory between his early and later writings is in no short measure due to the proximity of his early work to the writings and personages of the “inner circle” (Horkheimer, Adorno, and Marcuse) and his gradual counter-balancing use of the “outer circle” (especially Walter Benjamin) to justify the growing gap in philosophical affinity.18 While the creativity and innovative depth of Habermas’s early Marxian analyses are self-admittedly plagued with contradictions and tensions, the attempt to resolve these apparent ambiguities has steered his thoughts in the direction of his later inquiries. It should be stressed that I am not providing a sustained or systematic critique of Habermas’s later works. In my view drawing on the unresolved tensions in his earlier work is productive, and in doing so I am seeking to revisit those concepts and ideas that may yet again be taken up within critical theory. My choice is perhaps not unlike Habermas’s decision in his writings on labor and interaction to emphasize Hegel’s writings from his Jena years rather than the later works written in Berlin. My critique and analysis of Habermas’s research has two sides. One is philosophical, presented in my various attempts to clarify Habermas’s basic concepts. The other side is feminist and psychoanalytic, concerned with productive contributions that feminist thought and psychoanalysis have to offer Habermas’s theory of communicative rationality and discourse ethics. The motive for my inquiry is relatively straightforward. I wish to re-infuse Habermas’s work with the critical spirit that first animated his thoughts, a spirit that a politically sensitive Horkheimer once warned Adorno about.19 I pursue this intention by raising questions about his writings in relation to the concerns of the earlier generation of critical theorists, controversies resulting from his debate with Hans-Georg Gadamer, and issues raised by feminist theory and psychoanalysis pertaining to recognition. As I see it, the single most salient problem with Habermas’s theory of communicative rationality is his overdetermination of the role of language as constitutive of 8 Discourse, Desire, and Fantasy in Jürgen Habermas’ Critical Theory subjectivity. It is argued here that the limits and internal contradictions of Habermas’s theory can be detected in his appropriation of psychoanalysis, his debate with Gadamer and the hermeneutic tradition, and his conceptualization of reason and reciprocity. My final judgment on Habermas’s work is that it suffers unnecessarily from an inadequate theorization of the relation between desire and fantasy in intersubjective relations. The result of this inadequacy is that Habermas’s model of interaction produces a hypostatized understanding of the relation between rationality and communication due to an underestimation of the significance of the natural and imaginary elements of human experience. My questions and concerns do not dissolve an interest in the “reasonable conditions of life.”20 The critique of reason is the lynchpin of critical theorizing and for me the critique of communicative rationality, in lights of its apologetic tendencies, is a pressing issue. My manuscript begins by providing a brief introduction to the critical theorizing of the principal members of the Frankfurt School. The first chapter focuses on the trajectory of critical theory highlighting concepts that I think have continued relevance within Habermas’s writings. In particular, I discuss concepts of reason and history, myth and enlightenment, ideology and ideology critique, and subject and object in relation to the utopian tropes of their work. The second chapter discusses Habermas’s appropriation of Freud and his discontinuous writings on nature. Starting with Habermas’s theory of human interests, I demonstrate that the conceptualization of the acquisition of language as instituting a radical break with nature is problematic. Follow- ing Joel Whitebook, it is argued that psychoanalysis provides a bridge to ana- lyze the complexities of internal and external nature that does not dissolve the tension between the subjects’ relation to self as object within the context of the intersubjective formation of subjectivity and identity. The third chapter deals with Habermas’s debate with Hans-Georg Gadamer, the critical theory and hermeneutics encounter. In this debate Habermas deploys psychoanalysis as an example of a form of inquiry that undermines the universality of hermeneutics. Situating Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics as theoretically naïve, Habermas advocates a more scientific and procedural form of analysis and stresses the way in which hermeneutics encounters its limitations from within. Habermas’s solution to this dilemma advances what he calls the reconstructive sciences, a mode of theoretical inquiry that escapes the snares of a historically dependent and interpretively bound approach. My critique in this chapter argues that Habermas does not succeed in his task, at least not completely. As Habermas has formulated his objections he cannot escape the centrality of interpretation in discursive Introduction 9 relations. Furthermore, his understanding of psychoanalytic inquiry and his supposition of language as primarily public and only derivatively private pre- vents him from moving beyond a model of critical hermeneutics. As a rejoin- der, drawing on the work of J. M. Bernstein and Albrecht Wellmer, I argue for a more aesthetic and narrative understanding of intersubjectivity, self- reflection, and self-understanding. Here I show that subjects articulate their identities in a socio-narrative form, a form misperceived when approached in a formal-pragmatic manner, accomplishing both more and less than Haber- mas’s concept of emancipatory self-reflection intends. Understood this way subjective identity is better grasped as structured by a phantasmic and narrative horizon rather than solely by publicly constituted language games. Close attention to this narrative form constitutes part of the aim and object of psychoanalytic inquiry: the elucidation of the imaginary as it serves as the basis of identity and identity-formation. The fourth chapter follows up on the findings of the third. Using the work of Theodor W. Adorno, Walter Benjamin, and Slavoj Žižek as exem- plars, I develop a theory of secular revelation as an alternative to Habermas’s project of reconstructive science, thus keeping with the desire and intention of developing a post-hermeneutic understanding of critical theory. My interests here coincide with Seyla Benhabib’s and J. M. Bernstein’s emphasis on the “transfiguring character of human activity.” It is argued in this chapter that a theory of revelation, which finds a three-fold justification via the philosophy of history, aesthetic theory, and the philosophy of language, is a better means for overcoming hermeneutic objections to critical theory. At this point it is also argued that Habermas’s theory cannot accommodate such insights as long as it remains doggedly attached to an overdetermined and idealized understanding of communication. The fifth chapter examines the different ways in which recognition and the struggle for recognition are developed in the work of Habermas, Axel Honneth, and Jessica Benjamin. Against Habermas and Honneth I argue that Benjamin’s approach is the most promising since it does not reduce subjectivity to its linguistic elements nor does it equate breakdowns in communication as pathological. It is my view that the pathologies diagnosed within Habermas’s communicative theory rest on an unrealistic expectation and a misunderstanding of the constitutive elements of subjectivity, again stemming from his idealized understanding of communicative relations. It is argued that Benjamin’s paradoxical conception of the intersubjective view offers a significant and promising alternative to Habermas’s procedural approach to argumentation and rational adjudication that does justice to the imaginary and narrative elements of subjectivity. Unlike Habermas’s analysis, Benjamin’s 10 Discourse, Desire, and Fantasy in Jürgen Habermas’ Critical Theory feminist approach is also sensitive to the internal constitution of power as an irreducible element of subjectivity and, because of this, is able to progressively theorize the domination of nature within and without, a crucial element of the Frankfurt School’s analysis often marginalized if not abandoned. Summarily, I am seeking to provide an alternative path for critical theorizing, drawing on Habermas earlier works and reconnecting such research to the lineage of the Frankfurt School. It is my view that Habermas’s earlier conception of an emancipatory interest relies not on how language works, his later conclusion, but on a desire for emancipation, a partiality with reason for happiness and freedom. Desire is informed by fantasy and imagination, and the cultivation of the desire for freedom I see to be a modern project, quite close to the emphatic conception of reason that Adorno, Horkheimer, and Marcuse are interested in. For this impulse the critique of reason is simultaneously critique of fantasy. In order for this to be viable it is necessary to develop a theory of imagination alongside a theory of intersubjectivity. I think psychoanalysis is in the best position to do this, but the project receives support in my studies from a variety of fields: linguistics, hermeneutics, his- toriography, and aesthetics. I have selected a theory of recognition as an ideal starting point. Overall, I see my research as contributing to the articulation of a unique form of inquiry: critical theory, a theoretical trajectory that remains aligned with an interest in happiness, freedom, and truth by way of the critique of reason “run amok.” I am not trying to reproduce Habermas’s project by reformulating it in terms of imagination and desire rather than discourse and rationality. I take the position that critical theorizing must address the- ses issues alongside one another without subordinating or privileging any of them. Hence: discourse, desire, and fantasy. Bibliography

Adorno, Theodor W. “The Actuality of Philosophy.” Telos 31 (1977): 120–133. ———. Aesthetic Theory, translated by Robert Hullot-Kentor. Minneapolis: Univer- sity of Minnesota Press, 1997. ———. Against Epistemology: A Metacritique, translated by Willis Domingo. Cam- bridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1983. ———. Critical Models: Interventions and Catchwords, translated by Henry W. Pick- ford. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998. ———. The Culture Industry: Selected Essays on Mass Culture, edited by J. M. Bern- stein. London: Routledge, 1991. ———. Hegel: Three Studies, translated by Shierry Weber Nicholsen. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1993. ———. The Jargon of Authenticity, translated by Knut Tarnowski and Frederic Will. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1973. ———. Kierkegaard: Construction of the Aesthetic, edited and translated by Robert Hullot- Kentor. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989. ———. Minima Moralia: Reflections from Damaged Life, translated by E. F. N. Jeph- cott. London: New Left Books, 1974. ———. Negative Dialectics, translated by E. B. Ashton. New York: Continuum, 1983. ———. Notes to Literature, volume one, edited by Rolf Tiedemannn, translated by Shierry Weber Nicholsen. New York: Columbia University Press, 1991. ———. Notes to Literature, volume two, edited by Rolf Tiedemannn, translated by Shierry Weber Nicholsen. New York: Columbia University Press, 1992. ———. Philosophy of Modern Music, translated by Anne G. Mitchell and Wesley V. Blomster. New York: Seabury Press, 1973. ———. Prisms, trans. Samuel Weber and Shierry Weber. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1981. ———, et al. The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology, translated by Glyn Adey and David Frisby. New York: Harper & Row, 1976.

215 216 Bibliography

———. Problems of Moral Philosophy, edited by Thomas Schröder, translated by Rodney Livingston. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2000. ———. “Sociology and Psychology.” New Left Review 46 (1967): 67–80. ———. “Sociology and Psychology—II.” New Left Review 47 (1968): 79–97. Adorno, Theodor W. and Max Horkheimer. “Odysseus or Myth and Enlighten- ment.” New German Critique 56 (1992): 109–142. Agamben, Giorgio. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, translated by Daniel Heller-Roazen. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998. Agger, Ben. The Discourse of Domination: From the Frankfurt School to Postmodern- ism. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1992. Ahlers, Rolf. “How Critical is Critical Theory?: Reflections on Jürgen Habermas.” Cultural Hermeneutics 3 (1975): 119–136. Alford, C. Fred. “Habermas, Post-Freudian Psychoanalysis, and the End of the Indi- vidual.” Theory, Culture and Society 4 (1987): 3–29. ———. “Is Jürgen Habermas’s Reconstructive Science Really Science?” Theory and Society 14, no. 3 (1985): 321–340. ———. Science and the Revenge of Nature: Marcuse and Habermas. Gainesville: Uni- versity Presses of Florida, 1985. ———. What Evil Means to Us. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997. Always, Joan. Critical Theory and Political Possibilities: Conceptions of Emancipatory Politics in the Works of Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, and Habermas. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1995. Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, revised edition. London: Verso, 1991. Apel, Karl-Otto, ed. Hermeneutik und Ideologiekritik. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1971. ———. Towards a Transformation of Philosophy, translated by Glyn Adey and David Frisby. London: Routledge, 1980. Arato, Andrew and Eike Gebhardt, eds. The Essential Frankfurt School Reader. New York: Continuum, 1982. Baynes, Kenneth. The Normative Grounds of Social Criticism: Kant, Rawls, Haber- mas. Albany: State of New York University Press, 1992. Baynes, Kenneth, James Bohman, and Thomas McCarthy, eds. After Philosophy: End or Transformation? Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1987. Becker, Ernest. The Denial of Death. New York: Free Press, 1973. Benhabib, Seyla. The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002. ———. Critique, Norm, and Utopia: A Study of the Foundations of Critical Theory. New York: Columbia University Press, 1986. ———, ed. Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1996. ———, et al. Feminist Contentions: A Philosophical Exchange. New York: Routledge, 1995. Bibliography 217

———. The Reluctant Modernism of Hannah Arendt. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publica- tions, 1996. ———. Situating the Self: Gender, Community, and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. New York: Routledge, 1992. Benhabib, Seyla and Drucilla Cornell, eds. Feminism as Critique: On the Politics of Gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987. Benhabib, Seyla, and Fred Dallmayr, eds. The Communicative Ethics Controversy. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1990. Benhabib, Seyla and Nancy Fraser, eds. Pragmatism, Critique, Judgment: Essays for Richard J. Bernstein. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2004. Benhabib, Seyla and Maurizio Passerin d’Entrèves, eds. Habermas and the Unfinished Project of Modernity: Critical Essays on the Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1997. Benhabib, Seyla, Wolfgang ßonss, and John McCole, eds. On Max Horkheimer: New Perspectives. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1993. Benjamin, Andrew, ed. The Problems of Modernity: Adorno and Benjamin. London: Routledge, 1989. Benjamin, Jessica. “Authority and the Family Revisited: or, A World Without Fathers?” New German Critique 13 (1978): 35–57. ———. The Bonds of Love: Psychoanalysis, Feminism, and the Problem of Domination. New York: Pantheon Books, 1988. ———. “The End of Internalization: Adorno’s Social Psychology.” Telos 32 (1977): 42–64. ———. Like Subjects, Love Objects: Essays on Recognition and Sexual Difference. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995. ———. “The Oedipal Riddle: Authority, Autonomy, and the New Narcissism.” In The Problem of Authority in America, edited by John P. Diggins and Mark E. Kann. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1981. ———. Shadow of the Other: Intersubjectivity and Gender in Psychoanalysis. New York: Routledge, 1998. Benjamin Walter. The Arcades Project, edited by R. Tiedemann, translated by Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaughlin. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press, 1999. ———. Illuminations: Essays and Reflections, edited by Hannah Arendt, translated by Harry Zohn. New York: Schocken Books, 1968. ———. Reflections: Essays, Aphorisms, Autobiographical Writings, edited by Peter Demetz. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978. Bernstein, J. M. Adorno: Disenchantment and Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2001. ———. The Fate of Art: Aesthetic Alienation from Kant to Derrida and Adorno. Uni- versity Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1992. ———, ed. The Frankfurt School: Critical Assessments. Six Volumes. London: Rout- ledge, 1994. 218 Bibliography

———. Recovering Ethical Life: Jürgen Habermas and the Future of Critical Theory. London: Routledge, 1995. Bernstein, Richard J. Beyond Objectivism and Relativism: Science, Hermeneutics, and Praxis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1983. ———, ed. Habermas and Modernity. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1985. ———. “Negativity: Theme and Variations.” Praxis International 1, no. 1 (1981): 87–100. ———. The New Constellation: The Ethical-political Horizons of Modernity/postmo- dernity. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1992. ———. Radical Evil: A Philosophical Interrogation. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2002. Bleicher, Josef, ed. Contemporary Hermeneutics: Hermeneutics as Method, Philosophy, and Critique. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980. Bohman, James. “‘When Water Chokes’: Ideology, Communication, and Practical Rationality.” Constellations 7, no. 3 (2000): 382–392. Bourdieu, Pierre. Outline of a Theory of Practice, translated by Richard Nice. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. Braaten, Jane. Habermas’s Critical Theory of Society. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1991. Brandom, Robert B. Making it Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Com- mitment. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1994. Brenkman, John. Culture and Domination. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1987. Brittain, Christopher Craig. “Shepherding the Human Being? The Sloterdijk-Haber- mas Skandal over Gene Technology.” Unpublished paper, 2001. ———. “The Weight of Objectivity: Critical Social Theory and Theology.” PhD diss., University of St. Michael’s College, 2002. Browning, Don S. and Francis Schüssler Fiorenza, eds. Habermas, Modernity, and Public Theology. New York: Crossroad, 1992. Brunkhorst, Hauke. “The Enlightenment Rationality: Remarks on Horkheimer and Adorno’s Dialectic of Enlightenment.” Constellations 7, no. 1 (2000): 133–140. Bubner, Rüdiger. Essays in Hermeneutics and Critical Theory, translated by Eric Mat- thews. New York: Columbia University Press, 1988. Buck-Morss, Susan. The Dialectics of Seeing: Walter Benjamin and the Arcades Project. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1989. ———. Dreamworld and Catastrophe: The Passing of Mass Utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2000. ———. The Origin of Negative Dialectics: Theodor W. Adorno, Walter Benjamin and the Frankfurt Institute. New York: Free Press, 1977. Butler, Judith. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex.” New York: Routledge, 1993. ———. Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative. New York: Routledge, 1997. ———. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Rout- ledge, 1990. Bibliography 219

———. The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford: Stanford Univer- sity Press, 1997. Butler, Judith, Ernesto Laclau, and Slavoj Žižek. Contingency, Hegemony, Universal- ity: Contemporary Dialogues on the Left. London: Verso, 2000. Butler, Judith and Joan W. Scott, eds., Feminists Theorize the Political. New York: Routledge, 1992. Calhoun, Craig J., ed. Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1992. Cameron, W. S. K. “On Communicative Actors talking Past One Another: The Gadamer-Habermas Debate.” Philosophy Today 40 (1996): 160–168. Castoriadis, Cornelius. “Democracy as Procedure and Democracy as Regime.” Con- stellations 4, no. 1 (1997): 1–18. ———. The Imaginary Institution of Society, translated by Kathleen Blamey. Cam- bridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1987. ———. Philosophy, Politics, Autonomy, translated by David Ames Curtis. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991. ———. World in Fragments: Writings on Politics, Society, Psychoanalysis, and the Imagination, translated by David Ames Curtis. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997. Chambers, Simone. Reasonable Democracy: Jürgen Habermas and the Politics of Dis- course. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996. Chancer, Lynn S. Sadomasochism in Everyday Life: The Dynamics of Power and Power- lessness. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1992. Cohen, Margaret. Profane Illumination: Walter Benjamin and the Paris of Surrealist Revolution. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993. Colburn Jr., Kenneth. “Critical Theory and the Hermeneutic Circle.” Sociological Inquiry 56 (1986): 367–380. Connerton, Paul ed. Critical Sociology: Selected Readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1976. ———. The Tragedy of Enlightenment: An Essay on the Frankfurt School. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Cook, Deborah. “Adorno, Ideology and Ideology Critique.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 27, no. 1 (2000): 1–20. ———. “Adorno’s Critical Materialism.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 32, no. 6 (2006): 719–737. ———. The Culture Industry Revisited: Theodor W. Adorno on Mass Culture. Lan- ham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1996. ———. “The Talking Cure in Habermas’s Republic.” New Left Review 12 (2001): 135–151. ———. “The Two Faces of Liberal Democracy in Habermas.” Philosophy Today 45, no. 1 (2001): 95–104. Cooke, Maeve. “Between ‘Objectivism’ and ‘Contextualism’: The Normative Foun- dations of Critical Theory.” Critical Horizons 1, no. 2 (2000): 93–127. 220 Bibliography

———. “Habermas, Autonomy and the Identity of the Self.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 18, no. 3/4 (1992): 262–292. ———. Language and Reason: A Study of Habermas’s Pragmatics. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1994. ———. “Meaning and Truth in Habermas’s Pragmatics.” European Journal of Phi- losophy 9, no. 1 (2001): 1–23. ———. ‘Realizing the Post-conventional Self.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 20, no. 1/2 (1994): 87–101. ———. “Redeeming Redemption: The Utopian Dimension of Critical Social The- ory.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 30, no. 4 (2004): 413–429. ———. “Socio-Cultural Learning as a ‘Transcendental Fact’: Habermas’s Postmeta- physical Perspective.” International Journal of Philosophical Studies 9, no. 1 (2001): 63–83. Cornell, Drucilla. Beyond Accommodation: Ethical Feminism, Deconstruction, and the Law. New York: Routledge, 1991. ———. The Imaginary Domain: Abortion, Pornography and Sexual Harassment. New York: Routledge, 1995. ———. The Philosophy of the Limit. New York: Routledge, 1992. ———. Transformations: Recollective Imagination and Sexual difference. New York: Routledge, 1993. Cornell, Drucilla, Michel Rosenfeld, and David Gray Carlson, eds. Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice. New York: Routledge, 1992. Critchley, Simon and Peter Dews, eds. Deconstructive Subjectivities. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996. Critchley, Simon and Chantal Mouffe, eds. Deconstruction and Pragmatism. London: Routledge, 1996. Dahmer, Helmut. “Psychoanalysis as Social Theory.” Te l o s 32 (1977): 27–41. Dallmayr, Fred R. “Critical Theory Criticized: Habermas’s Knowledge and Human Interests and its Aftermath.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 2 (1972): 211– 229. Dallmayr, Fred R. and Thomas A. McCarthy, eds. Understanding and Social Inquiry. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1977. Davis, Creston, John Milbank, and Slavoj Žižek, eds. eds. Theology and the Political: The New Debate. Durham: Duke University Press, 2005. Depew, David J. “The Habermas-Gadamer Debate in Hegelian Perspective.” Phi- losophy and Social Criticism 4, no. 8 (1981): 427–446. Derrida, Jacques. Limited Inc., translated by Gerald Graff. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1988. ———. Politics of Friendship, translated by George Collins. London: Verso, 1997. ———. Resistances of Psychoanalysis, translated by Peggy Kamuf, Pascale-Anne Brault, and Michael Naas. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998. ———. Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning, and the New International, translated by Peggy Kamuf. New York: Routledge, 1994. Bibliography 221

Derrida, Jacques and Jürgen Habermas. Philosophy in a Time of Terror: Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida, edited by Giovanna Borradori. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. Derrida, Jacques and Gianni Vattimo, eds. Religion. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1998. Desser, David and Garth S. Jowett, eds. Hollywood Goes Shopping. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000. Dews, Peter, ed. Habermas: A Critical Reader. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1999. ———. The Limits of Disenchantment: Essays on Contemporary European Philosophy. London: Verso, 1995. DiCenso, James. The Other Freud: Religion, Culture, and Psychoanalysis. London: Routledge, 1999. Dolar, Mladen. “Beyond Interpellation.” Qui Parle 6, no. 2 (1993): 75–96. ———. “Lord and Bondsman on the Couch.” The American Journal of Semiotics 9, no. 2 (1992): 69–90. ———. “Where Does Power Come From?” New Formations 3 (1998): 79–92. Dor, Joël. Introduction to the Reading of Lacan: The Unconscious Structured Like a Language, edited by Judith Feher Gurewich in collaboration with Susan Fair- field. New York: The Other Press, 1998. Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concept of Pollution and Taboo. London: Routledge, 2005. Dreitzel, Hans Peter, ed. Recent Sociology No. 2: Patterns of Communication. New York: Macmillan, 1970. Dubiel, Helmut. Theory and Politics: Studies in the Development of Critical Theory, translated by Benjamin Gregg. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1985. Duvenage, Pieter. Habermas and Aesthetics: The Limits of Communicative Reason. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2003. Eagleton, Terry. Walter Benjamin, or, Towards a Revolutionary Criticism. London: Verso, 1981. Edelman, Bernard. The House that Kant Built: A Moral Tale, trans. by Graeme Hunter. Toronto: Canadian Philosophical Monographs for the Canadian Association for Publishing in Philosophy, 1987. Edgar, Andrew. Habermas: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge, 2006. Evans, Dylan. An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis. London: Rout- ledge, 1996. Fink, Bruce. A Clinical Introduction to Lacanian Psychoanalysis: Theory and Technique. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1997. ———. The Lacanian Subject: Between Language and Jouissance. Princeton: Princ- eton University Press, 1995. Finlayson, James Gordon. “What are ‘Universalizable Interests’?” Journal of Political Philosophy 8, no. 4 (2000): 456–469. Flax, Jane. Thinking Fragments: Psychoanalysis, Feminism, and Postmodernism in the Contemporary West. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990. 222 Bibliography

Fleming, Marie. Emancipation and Illusion: Rationality and Gender in Habermas’s The- ory of Modernity. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997. Flynn, Bernard Charles. “Reading Habermas Reading Freud.” Human Studies 8 (1985): 57–76. Forester, John, ed. Critical Theory and Public Life. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1995. Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, translated by Alan Sheridan. New York: Vintage Books, 1995. Fraser, Nancy. Unruly Practices: Power, Discourse, and Gender in Contemporary Social Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989. Freud, Sigmund. The Penguin Freud Library, 15 vols. Edited by Angela Richards and Albert Dickson. Translated by James Strachey. New York: Penguin Books. Freundlieb, Dieter, Wayne Hudson, and John Rundell, eds. Critical Theory after Habermas. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Fultner, Barbara. “The Politics of Vulnerability: On the Role of Idealization in But- ler and Habermas.” Philosophy Today 42 (1998): 94–103. Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Hans-Georg Gadamer on Education, Poetry, and History: Applied Hermeneutics, edited by Dieter Misgeld and Graeme Nicholson, translated by Lawrence Schmidt and Monica Reuss. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992. ———. The Idea of the Good in Platonic-Aristotelian Philosophy, translated by P. Christopher Smith. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986. ———. Philosophical Apprenticeships, translated by Robert R. Sullivan. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1985. ———. Philosophical Hermeneutics, edited and translated by David E. Linge. Berke- ley: University of California Press, 1976. ———. Reason in the Age of Science, translated by Frederick G. Lawrence. Cam- bridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1982. ———. The Relevance of the Beautiful and Other Essays, edited by Robert Ber- nasconi, translated by Nicholas Walker. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. ———. Truth and Method, second revised edition, translated by Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall. New York: Continuum, 2004. Gamwell, Franklin I. “Habermas and Apel on Communicative Ethics.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 23, no. 2 (1997): 21–45. Gaon, Stella. “Pluralizing Universal ‘Man’: The Legacy of Transcendentalism and Teleology in Habermas’s Discourse Ethics.” The Review of Politics 60, no. 4 (1998): 685–718. Gasché, Rodolphe. The Tain of the Mirror: Derrida and the Philosophy of Reflection. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1986. Gay, Peter. Freud: A Life for Our Time. New York: Norton, 1988. Gellner, Ernest. The Psychoanalytic Movement: The Cunning of Unreason. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2003. Bibliography 223

Geuss, Raymond. The Idea of a Critical Theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt School. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Giddens, Anthony. Studies in Social and Political Theory. London: Hutchinson of London, 1977. Gilligan, Carol. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1993. Gilroy, Paul. The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1993. Giurlanda, Paul. “Habermas’ Critique of Gadamer: Does it Stand Up?” International Philosophical Quarterly 27, no. 1 (1987): 33–41. Grünbaum, Adolf. The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique. Berke- ley: University of California Press, 1984. Gutmann, Amy, ed. Multiculturalism, Examining the Politics of Recognition. Princ- eton: Princeton University Press, 1994. Habermas, Jürgen. Autonomy and Solidarity: Interviews with Jürgen Habermas, revised edtion, edited by Peter Dews. London: Verso, 1992. ———. A Berlin Republic: Writings on Germany, translated by Steven Rendall. Lin- coln: University of Nebraska Press, 1997. ———. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, translated by William Rehg. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1996. ———. Communication and the Evolution of Society, translated by Thomas McCar- thy. Boston: Beacon Press, 1979. ———. “From Kant to Hegel: On Robert Brandom’s Pragmatic Philosophy of Lan- guage.” European Journal of Philosophy 8, no. 3 (2000): 322–355. ———. “From Kant to Hegel and Back Again—The Move Towards Detranscen- dentalization.” European Journal of Philosophy 7, no. 2 (1999): 129–157. ———. The Future of Human Nature, translated by Hella Beister and William Rehg. Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2003. ———. The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, edited by Ciaran Cro- nin and Pablo De Greiff. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1998. ———. “Introductory Remarks to a Theory of Communicative Competence.” Inquiry 13, no. 4 (1970): 360–376. ———. Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics, translated by Ciaran P. Cronin. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1993. ———. Knowledge and Human Interests, translated by Jeremy J. Shapiro. Boston: Beacon Press, 1971. ———. Legitimation Crisis, translated by Thomas McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press, 1975. ———. The Liberating Power of Symbols: Philosophical Essays, translated by Peter Dews. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2001. ———. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, translated by Christian Lenhardt and Shierry Weber Nicholsen. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1990. 224 Bibliography

———. The New Conservatism: Cultural Criticism and the Historians’ Debate, edited and translated by Shierry Weber Nicholsen. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1989. ———. On the Logic of the Social Sciences, translated by Shierry Weber Nicholsen and Jerry A. Stark. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1988. ———. On the Pragmatics of Communication, edited by Maeve Cooke. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1998. ———. On the Pragmatics of Social Interaction: Preliminary Studies in the Theory of Communicative Action, translated by Barbara Fultner. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2001. ———. “On Systematically Distorted Communication.” Inquiry 13, no. 3 (1970): 205–218. ———. The Past as Future, translated by Max Pensky. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1994. ———. The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures, translated by Fred- erick G. Lawrence. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1987. ———. Philosophical-Political Profiles, translated by Frederick G. Lawrence. Cam- bridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1983. ———. Postmetaphysical Thinking: Philosophical Essays, translated by William Mark Hohengarten. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1992. ———. The Postnational Constellation: Political Essays, edited and translated by Max Pensky. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2001. ———. “A Postscript to Knowledge and Human Interests.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 3 (1973): 157–189. ———. “Reconciliation through the Public Use of Reason: Remarks on John Raw- ls’s Political Liberalism.” The Journal of Philosophy 92, no. 3 (1995): 109–131. ———. Religion and Rationality: Essays on Reason, God, and Modernity, edited by Eduardo Mendieta. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2002. ———. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Cat- egory of Bourgeois Society, translated by Thomas Burger with the assistance of Frederick Lawrence. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1989. ———. “Summation and Response.” Continuum 8 (1970): 123–133. ———. The Theory of Communicative Action, volume 1: Reason and the Rationaliza- tion of Society, translated by Thomas McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press, 1984. ———. The Theory of Communicative Action, volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Cri- tique of Functionalist Reason, translated by Thomas McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press, 1987. ———. Theory and Practice, translated by John Viertel. Boston: Beacon Press, 1973. ———. Toward a Rational Society: Student Protest, science, and Politics, translated by Jeremy J. Shapiro. Boston: Beacon Press, 1970. ———. Truth and justification, translated by Barbara Fultner. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2003. Bibliography 225

Hahn, Lewis Edwin, ed. Perspectives on Habermas. Chicago: Open Court, 2000. ———, ed. The Philosophy of Hans-Georg Gadamer. Chicago: Open Court, 1997. Harrington, Austin. “Some Problems with Gadamer’s and Habermas’s Dialogical Model of Sociological Understanding.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behav- iour 29, no. 4 (1999): 371–384. Harris, H. S. Hegel’s Development, Night Thoughts (Jena 1801–1806). Oxford: Clar- endon Press, 1983. Hawkes, David. Ideology. London: Routledge, 1996. Heath, Joseph. Communicative Action and Rational Choice. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2001. ———. “The Problem of Foundationalism in Habermas’s Discourse Ethics.” Phi- losophy and Social Criticism 21, no. 1 (1995): 77–100. ———. “What is a Validity Claim?” Philosophy and Social Criticism 24, no. 4 (1998): 23–41. Hegel, G. W. F. Hegel and the Human Spirit: A Translation of the Jena Lectures on the Philosophy of Spirit (1805–6) with Commentary, edited and translated by L. Rauch. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1983. ———. Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, translated by T. M. Knox. London: Clarendon Press, 1967. ———. Phenomenology of Spirit, translated by J. N. Findlay and A. V. Miller. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977. ———. System of Ethical Life (1802/3) and First Philosophy of Spirit (part III of the System of Speculative Philosophy 1803/4), translated by H. S. Harris and T. M. Knox. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1979. ———. The Encyclopaedia Logic: Part I of the Encyclopaedia of Philosophical Sciences with the Zusätze, translated by T. F. Geraets, W. A. Suchting, and H. S. Harris. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1991. Held, David. Introduction to Critical Theory: Horkheimer to Habermas. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980. Held, David and John B. Thompson, eds. Habermas: Critical Debates. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1982. Heller, Agnes. Beyond Justice. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1987. ———. “The Discourse Ethics of Habermas: Critique and Appraisal.” Thesis Eleven 10/11 (1984/1985): 5–17. ———. An Ethics of Personality. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1996. ———. “On the New Adventures of the Dialectic.” Telos 31 (1977): 134–142. ———. A Philosophy of History in Fragments. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1993. ———. A Theory of Feelings. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1979. ———. A Theory of Modernity. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers, 1999. Hewitt, Andrew. “A Feminine Dialectic of Enlightenment: Horkheimer and Adorno Revisited.” New German Critique 56 (1992): 143–170. ———. Political Inversions: Homosexuality, Fascism, and the Modernist Imaginary. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996. 226 Bibliography

Hewitt, Marsha Aileen. Critical Theory of Religion: A Feminist Analysis. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995. Hjort, Anne-Meete. “The Conditions of Dialogue: Habermas-Gadamer Debate.” Eidos 4 (1985): 11–37. Hohendahl, Peter. Prismatic Thought: Theodor W. Adorno. Lincoln: Nebraska Univer- sity Press, 1985. Hollinger, Robert, ed. Hermeneutics and Praxis. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1985. Holub, Robert C. Jürgen Habermas: Critic in the Public Sphere. London: Routledge, 1991. Homer, Sean. “The Frankfurt School, the Father and Social Fantasy.” New Forma- tions 38 (1999): 78–90. Honneth, Axel. “Communication and Reconciliation: Habermas’ Critique of Adorno.” Telos 39 (1979): 45–61. ———. The Critique of Power: Reflective Stages in a Critical Social Theory, translated by Kenneth Baynes. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1991. ———. The Fragmented World of the Social: Essays in Social and Political Philosophy, translated by Charles W. Wright. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995. ———. “The Possibility of a Disclosing Critique of Society: The Dialectic of Enlight- enment in Light of Current Debates in Social Criticism.” Constellations 7, no. 1 (2000): 116–127. ———. The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts, translated by Joel Anderson. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1996. Honneth, Axel and Hans Joas, eds. Communicative Action: Essays on Jürgen Haber- mas’s The Theory of Communicative Action, translated by Jeremy Gaines and Doris L. Jones. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1991. ———. Social Action and Human Nature, translated by Raymond Meyer. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Honneth, Axel, Thomas McCarthy, Claus Offe, and Albrecht Wellmer, eds. Cul- tural-Political Interventions in the Unfinished Project of Enlightenment, translated by Barbara Fultner. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1992. ———, eds. Philosophical Interventions in the Unfinished Project of Enlightenment, translated by William Rehg. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1992. Horkheimer, Max. Between Philosophy and Social Science: Selected Early Writings, translated by G. Frederick Hunter, Matthew S. Kramer, and John Torpey. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1993. ———. Critical Theory: Selected Essays, translated by Matthew J. O’Connell. New York: Continuum, 1982. ———. Critique of Instrumental Reason: Lectures and Essays since the End of World War II, translated by Matthew J. O’Connell. New York: Continuum, 1985. ———. Eclipse of Reason. New York: Continuum, 1985. Bibliography 227

———. “Reason Against Itself: Some Remarks on Enlightenment.” What is Enlight- enment? Eighteenth-Century Answers and Twentieth-Century Questions, edited by James Schmidt. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996. Horkheimer, Max and Theodor W. Adorno. Dialectic of Enlightenment, translated by John Cumming. New York: Seabury Press, 1972. ———. Horkheimer, Max and Theodor. W. Adorno. Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments, edited by Gunzelin Schmid Noerr, translated by Edmund Jephcott. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2002. ———. Dialektik der Aufklärung: Philosphische Fragmente. Frankfurt am Main: Ver- lag, 2000. Horowitz, Asher. “‘How Can Anyone Be Called Guilty?’ Speech, Responsibility, and the Social Relation in Habermas and Levinas.” Philosophy Today 44, no. 3 (2000): 295–317. ———. “Like a Tangled Mobile.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 24, no. 1 (1998): 1–23. Hoy, David Couzens and Thomas McCarthy. Critical Theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1994. Hullot-Kentor, Robert. “Back to Adorno.” Telos 81 (1989): 5–29. ———. “Notes on Dialectic of Enlightenment: Translating the Odysseus Essay.” New German Critique 56 (1992): 101–108. Ingram, David. Critical Theory and Philosophy. New York: Paragon House, 1990. ———. Habermas and the Dialectic of Reason. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987. ———. “The Possibility of a Communicative Ethic Reconsidered: Habermas, Gadamer, and Bourdieu on Discourse.” Man and World 15 (1982): 149– 161. Jacoby, Russell. Social Amnesia: A Critique of Conformist Psychology from Adler to Laing. Boston: Beacon Press, 1975. Jameson, Frederic. The Ideologies of Theory: Essays 1971–1986. Minneapolis: Univer- sity of Minnesota Press, 1988. ———. Late Marxism: Adorno, or, the Persistence of the Dialectic. London: Verso, 1990. ———. Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham: Duke University Press, 1991. Jarvis, Simon. Adorno: A Critical Introduction. New York: Routledge, 1998. Jay, Martin. Adorno. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1984. ———. The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Insti- tute of Social Research, 1923–1950. London: Heinemann, 1973. ———. Marxism and Totality: The Adventures of a Concept from Lukács to Habermas. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. ———. Permanent Exiles: Essays on the Intellectual Migration from Germany to Amer- ica. New York: Columbia University Press, 1985. Jäger, Lorenz. Adorno: A Political Biography. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004. 228 Bibliography

Joas, Hans. The Creativity of Action, translated by Jeremy Gains and Paul Keast. Chi- cago: The University of Chicago Press, 1996. Johnson, Pauline. “Distorted Communications: Feminism’s Dispute with Haber- mas.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 27, no. 1 (2001): 39–62. Keat, Russell. The Politics of Social Theory: Habermas, Freud, and the Critique of Posi- tivism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981. Kellner, Douglas. Herbert Marcuse and the Crisis of Marxism. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Kelly, Michael, ed. Critique and Power: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debate. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1994. ———, ed. Hermeneutics and Critical Theory in Ethics and Politics. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1990. Kögler, Hans Herbert. The Power of Dialogue: Critical Hermeneutics after Gadamer and Foucault, translated by Paul Hendrickson. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1996. Kortian, Garbis. Metacritique: The Philosophical Argument of Jürgen Habermas. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Koselleck, Reinhart. Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time, translated by Keith Tribe. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1985. Krips, Henry. Fetish: An Erotics of Culture. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999. Kristeva, Julia. Black Sun: Depression and Melancholia, translated by Leon S. Roud- iez. New York: Columbia University Press, 1989. ———. Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection, translated by Leon S. Roudiez. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection, translated by Alan Sheridan. New York: Norton, 1977. ———. The Ego in Freud’s Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954–1955, edited by Jacques-Alain Miller, translated by Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Norton, 1988. ———. The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, 1959–1960, edited by Jacques-Alain Miller, translated by Dennis Porter. New York: Norton, 1992. ———. Feminine Sexuality, edited by Juliette Mitchell and Jacqueline Rose, translated by Jacqueline Rose. New York: Norton, 1982. ———. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-analysis, edited by Jacques-Alain Miller, translated by Alan Sheridan. New York: Norton, 1978. ———. Freud’s Papers on Technique, 1953–1954, edited by Jacques-Alain Miller, translated by John Forrester. New York: Norton, 1988. ———. The Psychoses, 1955–1956, edited by Jacques-Alain Miller, translated by Russell Grigg. New York: Norton, 1993. ———. Television: A Challenge to the Psychoanalytic Establishment, edited by Joan Copjec, translated by. Denis Hollier, Rosalind Krauss, Annette Michelson, and Jefffrey Mehlman. New York: Norton, 1990. Bibliography 229

Laclau, Ernesto and Chantal Mouffe.1985. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso, 1985. Lalonde, Marc P. Critical Theology and the Challenge of Jürgen Habermas: Toward a Critical Theory of Religious Insight. New York: P. Lang, 1999. Landes, Joan B. Women and the Public Sphere in the Age of the French Revolution. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1988. Laplanche, Jean. Essays on Otherness, edited and translated by John Fletcher. London: Routledge, 1999. ———. Life and Death in Psychoanalysis, translated by Jeffrey Mehlman. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976. Laplanche, Jean and J.-B. The Language of Psycho-analysis, translated by Donald Nicholson Smith. New York: Norton, 1974. Lara, Maria Pia. “Albrecht Wellmer: Between Spheres of Validity.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 21, no. 2 (1995): 1–22. ———. Moral Textures: Feminist Narratives in the Public Sphere. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998. Lear, Jonathan. Happiness, Death, and the Remainder of Life. Cambridge, Mass.: Har- vard University Press, 2000. Leiss, William. The Domination of Nature. Boston: Beacon Press, 1974. Lenhardt, Christian. “Anamnestic Solidarity: The Proletariat and its Manes.” Telos 25 (1975): 133–154. ———. “Rise and Fall of Transcendental Anthropology.” Philosophy of Social Sci- ences 2 (1972): 231–246. Lepenies, Wolf. “Anthropology and Social Criticism: A View on the Controversy between Arnold Gehlen and Jürgen Habermas.” The Human Context 3, no. 1 (1971): 205–225. Livesay, Jeff. “Habermas, Narcissism, and Status.” Te l o s 64 (1985): 75–90. Löwith, Karl. Meaning in History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949. MacCannell, Juliet Flower. The Hysteric’s Guide to the Future Female Subject. Min- neapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000. ———. The Regime of the Brother: After the Patriarchy. London: Routledge, 1991. MacKendrick, Kenneth G. “The Moral Imaginary of Discourse Ethics.” Critical Horizons 1, no. 2 (2000): 247–269. Marcus, Judith and Zoltán Tar, eds. Foundations of the Frankfurt School of Social Research. London: Transaction Books, 1984. Marcuse, Herbert. The Aesthetic Dimension: Toward a Critique of Marxist Aesthetics. Boston: Beacon Press, 1978. ———. Counter-Revolution and Revolt. Boston: Beacon Press, 1972. ———. Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud. Boston: Beacon Press, 1966. ———. Five Lectures: Psychoanalysis, Politics, and Utopia, translated by Jeremy J. Shapiro and Shierry M. Weber. Boston: Beacon Press, 1970. 230 Bibliography

———. Hegel’s Ontology and the Theory of Historicity, translated by Seyla Benhabib. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1987. ———. Negations: Essays in Critical Theory, translated by Jeremy J. Shapiro. Boston: Beacon Press, 1968. ———. One-dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society. Boston: Beacon Press, 1991. ———. Reason and Revolution: Hegel and the Rise of Social Theory. Boston: Beacon Press, 1960. Marcuse, Herbert, Barrington Moore Jr., and Robert Paul Wolff. A Critique of Pure Tolerance. Boston: Beacon Press, 1969. Matuštík, Martin J. Beck. “Existence and the Communicatively Competent Self.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 25, no. 3 (1999): 93–120. ———. “Habermas on Communicative Reason and Performative Contradiction.” New German Critique 47 (1995): 143–172. ———. Jürgen Habermas: A Philosophical—Political Profile. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2001. ———. Postnational Identity: Critical Theory and Existential Philosophy in Habermas, Kierkegaard, and Havel. New York: Guilford Press, 1993. ———. Specters of Liberation: Great Refusals in the New World Order. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998. McAfee, Noëlle. Habermas, Kristeva, and Citizenship. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2000. McCarthy, Thomas. The Critical Theory of Jürgen Habermas. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1978. ———. Ideals and Illusions: On Reconstruction and Deconstruction in Contemporary Critical Theory. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1991. ———. “A Theory of Communicative Competence.” Philosophy of the Social Sci- ences 3 (1973): 135–156. McIntosh, Donald. “Habermas on Freud.” Social Research 44 (1977): 562–598. Meehan, Johanna, ed. Feminists Read Habermas: Gendering the Subject of Discourse. New York: Routledge, 1995. Mendelson, Jack. “The Habermas-Gadamer Debate.” New German Critique 18 (1979): 44–73. Mendieta, Eduardo. The Frankfurt School on Religion: Key Writings by the Major Thinkers. New York: Routledge, 2005. Michelfelder, Diane P. And Richard E. Palmer, eds. Dialogue and Deconstruction the Gadamer-Derrida Encounter. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989. Mills, Patricia Jagentowicz. Woman, Nature, and Psyche. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987. Misgeld, Dieter. “Discourse and Conversation: The Theory of Communicative Competence and Hermeneutics in the Light of the Debate between Habermas and Gadamer.” Cultural Hermeneutics 4 (1977): 321–344. Bibliography 231

———. “Science, Hermeneutics, and the Utopian Content of the Liberal-Demo- cratic Tradition. On Habermas’ Recent Work: A Reply to Mendelson.” New German Critique 22 (1981): 123–144. Morris, Martin. Rethinking the Communicative Turn: Adorno, Habermas, and the Problem of Communicative Freedom. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2001. Mouffe, Chantal. The Democratic Paradox. London: Verso, 2000. Mueller-Vollmer, Kurt, ed. The Hermeneutics Reader: Texts of the German Tradition from the Enlightenment to the Present. New York: Continuum, 1985. Nägele, Rainer. “Freud, Habermas and the Dialectic of Enlightenment: On Real and Ideal Discourses.” New German Critique 22 (1981): 41–62. ———. “The Provocation of Jacques Lacan: Attempt at a Theoretical Topography apropos a Book about Lacan.” New German Critique 16 (1979): 5–29. ———. Reading after Freud: Essays on Goethe, Hölderlin, Habermas, Nietzsche, Bre- cht, Celan, and Freud. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987. Nichols, Christopher. ‘Science or Reflection: Habermas on Freud.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 2 (1972): 261–270. Nicholsen, Shierry Weber. Exact Imagination: Late Work on Adorno’s Aesthetics. Cam- bridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1997. Nicholson, Graeme. Seeing and Reading. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press, 1984. Nicholson, Linda J., ed. Feminism / Postmodernism. New York: Routledge, 1990. Nobus, Dany. Jacques Lacan and the Freudian Practice of Psychoanalysis. London: Routledge, 2000. ———. Key Concepts of Lacanian Psychoanalysis. New York: Other Press, 1999. Nussbaum, Charles. “Habermas and Gruenbaum on the Logic of Psychoanalytic Explanations.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 17 (1991): 193–216. Nye, Andrea. Feminist Theory and the Philosophies of Man. New York: Routledge, 1988. O’Neill, John, ed. On Critical Theory. New York: Seabury Press, 1976. ———, ed. Hegel’s Dialectic of Desire and Recognition: Texts and commentary. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996. Ormiston, Gayle L. and Alan D. Schrift, eds. The Hermeneutic Tradition: From Ast to Ricoeur. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1990. Owen, David S. Between Reason and History: Habermas and the Idea of Progress. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002. Pensky, Max, ed. The Actuality of Adorno: Critical Essays on Adorno and the Postmod- ern. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997. ———. “On the Use and Abuse of Memory: Habermas, ‘Anamnestic Solidarity’ and the Historikerstreit.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 15, no. 4 (1989): 351– 380. Pinkard, Terry P. Hegel: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Postone, Moshie. Time, Labor, and Social Domination: A Reinterpretation of Marx’s Critical Theory. Cambridge England: Cambridge University Press, 1993. 232 Bibliography

Ragland, Ellie. Jacques Lacan and the Philosophy of Psychoanalysis. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1986. Ragland-Sullivan, Ellie. Essays on the Pleasures of Death from Freud to Lacan. New York: Routledge, 1995. Rasmussen, David M., ed. The Handbook of Critical Theory. Oxford: Blackwell Pub- lishers, 1996. ———, ed. Universalism vs. Communitarianism: Contemporary Debates in Ethics. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1990. Rehg, William. Insight and Solidarity: A Study in the Discourse Ethics of Jürgen Haber- mas. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994. Reinhard, Kenneth, and Eric L. Santner, and Slavoj Žižek. The Neighbor: Three Inquiries in Political Theology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005. Ricoeur, Paul. Figuring the Sacred: Religion, Narrative, and Imagination, edited by Mark I. Wallace, translated by David Pellauer. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995. ———. Freud and Philosophy: An Essay on Interpretation, translated by Denis Sav- age. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970. ———. Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning. Fort Worth: Texas Christian University Press, 1976. ———. Lectures on Ideology and Utopia, translated by George H. Taylor. New York: Columbia University Press, 1986. ———. Oneself as Another, translated by Kathleen Blamey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. ———. The Symbolism of Evil, translated by Emerson Buchanan. New York: Harper & Row, 1967. Robinson, Paul A. The Freudian Left: Wilhelm Reich, Geza Roheim, Herbert Marcuse. New York: Harper & Row, 1969. Roderick, Rick. Habermas and the Foundations of Critical Theory. New York: St. Mar- tin’s Press, 1986. Rorty, Richard. Consequences of Pragmatism: Essays, 1972–1980. Minneapolis: Uni- versity of Minnesota Press, 1982. ———. Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. ———. Essays on Heidegger and Others. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. ———. Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. ———. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979. Rose, Gillian. The Melancholy Science: An Introduction to the Thought of Theodor W. Adorno. London: Macmillan, 1978. ———. Mourning becomes the Law: Philosophy and Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Bibliography 233

Rothenberg, Molly Anne, Dennis Foster, and Slavoj Žižek, eds. Perversion and the Social Relation. Durham: Duke University Press, 2003. Roudinesco, Elisabeth. Jacques Lacan. New York: Columbia University Press, 1997. ———. Why Psychoanalysis?, translated by Rachel Bowlby. New York: Columbia University Press, 2001. Rundell, John. “Imaginative Turns in Critical Theory: Imagining Subjects in Ten- sion.” Critical Horizons 2, no. 1 (2001): 61–92. Rush, Fred, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Critical Theory. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 2003. Salecl, Renata. On Anxiety. London: Routledge, 2004. ———. (Per)versions of Love and Hate. London: Verso, 1998. ———, ed. Sexuation. Durham: Duke University Press, 2000. ———. The Spoils of Freedom: Psychoanalysis and Feminism after the Fall of Socialism. London: Routledge, 1994. Salecl, Renata and Slavoj Žižek, eds. Gaze and Voice as Love Objects. Durham: Duke University Press, 1996. Santner, Eric L. My Own Private Germany: Daniel Paul Schreber’s Secret History of Modernity. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996. ———. On the Psychotheology of Everyday Life: Reflections on Freud and Rosenzweig. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2001. Scarry, Elaine. The Body in Pain: The Making and Unmaking of the World. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. Scheuerman, William E. Between the Norm and the Exception: The Frankfurt School and the Rule of Law. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1994. Schivelbusch, Wolfgang. The Culture of Defeat: On National Trauma, Mourning, and Recovery. New York: Metropolitan Books, 2003. Schmidt, James. “Language, Mythology, and Enlightenment: Historical Notes on Horkheimer and Adorno’s Dialectic of Enlightenment.” Social Research 65, no. 4 (1998): 807–838. ———. “Offensive Critical Theory? Rely to Honneth.” Te l o s 39 (1979): 62–70. Schneiderman, Stuart. Jacques Lacan: The Death of an Intellectual Hero. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1983. Schoolman, Morton. The Imaginary Witness: The Critical Theory of Herbert Marcuse. New York: Free Press, 1980. Schroeder, Jeanne L. The Vestal and the Fasces: Hegel, Lacan, Property, and the Femi- nine. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998. Seel, Martin. “On Rightness and Truth: Reflections on the Concept of World Dis- closure.” Thesis Eleven 37 (1994): 64–81. Shapiro, Susan E. “Rhetoric as Ideology Critique: The Gadamer-Habermas Debate Reinvented.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 62, no. 1 (1994): 123–150. Sherratt, Yvonne. “The Dialectic of Enlightenment: A Contemporary Reading.” His- tory of the Human Sciences 12, no. 3 (1999): 35–54. 234 Bibliography

———. “Instrumental Reason’s Unreason.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 25, no. 4 (1999): 23–42. Silverman, Hugh J., ed. Gadamer and Hermeneutics. New York: Routledge, 1991. Sloan, Tod Damaged Life: The Crisis of the Modern Psyche. London: Routledge, 1996. Smith, Gary, ed. On Walter Benjamin: Critical Essays and Recollections. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1988. Smith, Nicholas H. Strong Hermeneutics: Contingency and Moral Identity. New York: Routledge, 1997. Stavrakakis, Yannis. Lacan and the Political. New York: Routledge, 1999. Steuerman, Emilia. The Bounds of Reason: Habermas, Lyotard, and Melanie Klein on Rationality. London: Routledge, 2000. Stirk, Peter. M. R. “Eros and Civilization Revisited.” History of the Human Sciences 12, no. 1 (1999): 73–90. Tar, Zoltán. The Frankfurt School: The Critical Theories of Max Horkheimer and The- odor W. Adorno. New York: Schocken Books, 1985. Taussig, Michael T. The Devil and Commodity Fetishism in South America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980. ———. The Magic of the State. New York: Routledge, 1997. ———. Mimesis and Alterity: A Particular History of the Senses. New York: Rout- ledge, 1993. Taylor, Charles. The Ethics of Authenticity. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1992. ———. Hegel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. ———. Modern Social Imaginaries. Durham: Duke University Press, 2004. ———. Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1989. Thompson, John B. Critical Hermeneutics: A Study in the Thought of Paul Ricoeur and Jürgen Habermas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Turkle, Sherry. Psychoanalytic Politics: Jacques Lacan and Freud’s French Revolution. 2nd Edition. New York: Guilford Press, 1992. Verhaeghe, Paul. Does the Woman Exist? From Freud’s Hysteric to Lacan’s Feminine. New York: The Other Press, 1999. Vetlesen, Arne Johan. Perception, Empathy, and Judgment: An Inquiry into the Precon- ditions of Moral Performance. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994. Vogel, Steven. Against Nature: The Concept of Nature in Critical Theory. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996. Wachterhauser, Brice R., ed. Hermeneutics and Truth. Evanston: Northwestern Uni- versity Press, 1994. Warnke, Georgia. “Feminism and Democratic Deliberation.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 26, no. 3 (2000): 61–74. Bibliography 235

———. Gadamer: Hermeneutics, Tradition, and Reason. Stanford: Stanford Univer- sity Press, 1987. ———. Justice and Interpretation. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1993. Weber, Samuel. The Legend of Freud: expanded edition. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2000. ———, ed. Return to Freud: Jacques Lacan’s Dislocation of Psychoanalysis, translated by Michael Levine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Webster, Fiona. “The Politics of Sex and Gender: Benhabib and Butler Debate Sub- jectivity.” Hypatia 15, no. 1 (2000): 1–22. Wellmer, Albrecht. Critical Theory of Society, translated by John Cumming. New York: Herder and Herder, 1971. ———. Endgames: The Irreconcilable Nature of Modernity, translated by David Midgley. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1998. ———. The Persistence of Modernity: Essays on Aesthetics, Ethics, and Postmodernism, translated by David Midgley. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1991. White, Stephen K., ed. The Cambridge Companion to Habermas. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1995. Whitebook, Joel. Perversion and Utopia: A Study in Psychoanalysis and Critical Theory. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1995. ———. “The Problem of Nature in Habermas.” Telos 40 (1979): 41–69. Wiggershaus, Rolf. The Frankfurt School: Its History, Theories, and Political Signifi- cance. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1994. Williams Robert R. Hegel’s Ethics of Recognition. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997. Wohlfarth, Irving. “Presentation of Adorno.” Telos 46 (1967): 63–66. Wolff, Janet. “Hermeneutics and the Critique of Ideology.” Sociological Review 4 (1975): 11–828. Wolin, Richard. Walter Benjamin: An Aesthetic of Redemption. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994. Wright, Elizabeth, ed. Feminism and Psychoanalysis: A Critical Dictionary. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1992. Young, Iris Marion. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton Univer- sity Press, 1990. Young-Bruehl, Elisabeth. The Anatomy of Prejudices. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996. Žižek, Slavoj. On Belief. London: Routledge, 2001. ———, ed. Cogito and the Unconscious. Durham: Duke University Press, 1998. ———. Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism? London: Verso, 2001. ———. Enjoy your symptom! Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out. New York: Rout- ledge, 1992. ———, ed. Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Lacan (but were afraid to ask Hitchcock). London: Verso, 1992. 236 Bibliography

———. For They Know Not What They Do: Enjoyment as a Political Factor. London: Verso, 1991. ———. The Fragile Absolute, or, Why is the Christian Legacy Worth Fighting For? London: Verso, 2000. ———. How to Read Lacan. New York: Norton, 2007. ———. The Indivisible Remainder: An Essay on Schelling and Related Matters. Lon- don: Verso, 1996. ———. Iraq: The Borrowed Kettle. London: Verso, 2004. ———. Looking Awry: An Introduction to Jacques Lacan Through Popular Culture. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1991. ———, ed. Mapping Ideology. London: Verso, 1994. ———. The Metastases of Enjoyment: Six Essays on Woman and Causality. London: Verso, 1994. ———. The Parallax View. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2006. ———. The Plague of Fantasies. London: Verso, 1997. ———. The Puppet and the Dwarf: The Perverse Core of Christianity. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2003. ———. The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso, 1989. ———. Tarrying with the Negative: Kant, Hegel, and the Critique of Ideology. Dur- ham: Duke University Press, 1993. ———. The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology. London: Verso, 1999. ———. Welcome to the Desert of the Real! Five Essays on 11 September and Related Dates. London: Verso, 2002. ———. The Žižek Reader, eds. Elizabeth Wright and Edmond Wright. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1999. Žižek, Slavoj and F. W. J. Schelling. The Abyss of Freedom / Ages of the World. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1997. Zuidervaart, Lambert. Adorno’s Aesthetic Theory: The Redemption of Illusion. Cam- bridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1991. Zupančič, Alenka. Ethics of the Real: Kant, Lacan. London: Verso, 2000. ———. The Shortest Shadow: Nietzsche’s Philosophy of the Two. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2003.