DOCSLIB.ORG

Eleştirel Teori, Habermas Ve Frankfurt Okulu.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Eleştirel Teori, Habermas Ve Frankfurt Okulu.Pdf RAYMOND GEUSS University of Cambridgc’de felsefe profesörü olan Raymond Gc- uss, A.B.D. ve Almanya'daki çeşitli üniversitelerde dc ders vermiş­ tir. Özgürlük kavramı, Nietzsche, Adorno’nun estetik teorisi ve si­ yaset felsefesi üzerine çeşitli çalışmaları yayımlanmış olan Geuss. Eleştirel Teori: Habermas re Frankfurt Okulu nun yanı sıra M o­ rality, Culture, and History (Cambridge, 1999), H istory and Illusi­ on in Politics (Cambridge, 2001) ve Public Goods, Private Goods (Princeton. 2001) adlı kitapların yazarıdır. Aynı zamanda klasik çağ şiirlerinden derleyip İngilizceye çevirdiği bir seçki Patrols, Poets, and Philosophers and Good Advice başlığıyla yayımlanmış­ tır. Aytınır. 369 İnceleme dizisi: İHI Eleştirel Teori Habermiş ve Frankfurt Okulu Rayıınmd Ceııss İngilizceden çeviren Ferda Keskin Yayıma hazırlayan Kamı Aıalay Kitabın özgün adı The Ideu uf.A Crilical Theory Habermus and ılıe Frankjıırı Sclıaal Bu kitabın Almanca çevirisi için yazar tarafından yapılmış olan değişiklikler, yazarın isteği üzerine Türkçe çevirisine de uygulanmıştır Cambridgc liniversity Press/l 981 basımından çevrilmiştir. © Cambridgc liniversity Press Bu çevirinin Türkçe yayım hakları Ayrıntı Yayınları'na aittir. Kapak illüstrasyonu Sevinç Allan Kapak düzeni Arslan Kahraman Düzelti Mehmet Celep Bıskı ve cilt Man Matbaacılık Sanalları Lld. Şii. (0 212) 321 23 00 (phx) Birinci bısım 2002 Baskıadedi 2000 ISBN 975-539-302-1 AYRINTI YAYINLARI www.ayrintiyayinlari.com.tr & [email protected] Dizdariye Çeşmesi Sk. No.: 23/1 34400 Çemberlitaş-isl. Tel.: (0212) 518 76 19 Faks: (0212)5164577 Raymond Geuss Eleştirel Teori Habermas ve Frankfurt Okulu İNCELE MEDİZİSİ ŞENLİKLİ TOPLUM’! KNJı YEŞİL POLİTİKAM Porrıtt a MARKS. FREUO VE GÜNLÜK HAYATIN ELEŞTİRİSİ® Bnr/m a KA- OINLIK ARZULARLA Cmaıd a FREUD'DAN LACAN'A PSİKANALİZ®. M. Tura a NASIL SOSYALİZM’ HANGİ YEŞİL? NİÇİN TİNSELLİK’ !?!. Bahro a ANTROPOLOJİK AÇIDAN ŞİDDET,'Der. D. fbches a ELEŞTİREL AİLE KURAMI M Fesle/ a İKİBIN E DOĞRU® RMams a DEMOKRASİ ARAYIŞINDA KENTİ* Buran: a YARIN/R Hn-emam a DEVLETE KARŞI TOPLUM® Ctastıes ■* RUSYA'DA SOVYETLER 11905-1921 );0. AmreJe/ a BOLŞEVİKLER VE İŞÇİ DENETİMİ.?!. Brinlen a EDEBİYAT KURAMIZ, Eagteton a İKİ FARKLI SİYASET/L. Kürer a ÖZGÜR EĞİTİM« Spıing a EZİLENLERİN PEDAGOJİSİ® Frene a SANAYİ SONRASI ÜTOPYALAR®. Fnnke! a İŞKENCEYİ OURDURUNIT AAfam a ZORUNLU EĞİTİME HAYIR'/C. Baner a SESSİZ YIĞINLARIN GÖLGESİNDE YA DA TOPLUMSALIN SONU«. Saud-Bard a ÖZGÜR BİR TOPLUMDA BILIM'R Feyerabend a VAHŞİ SAVAŞÇININ MUTSUZLUĞU. ?! Cüslras a CEHENNEME ÖVGÜ.’G. Kassa! a GÖSTERİ TOPLUMU VE YORUM­ LAR/G. Defcırd a AĞIR ÇEKİM'!. Sejai > CİNSEL ŞİDOETıA Geden* a ALTERNATİF TEKNOLOJİ/O. Dıcltson a ATEŞ VE GÜNEŞ’İ. Mjfdücfı a OTORİTE/R. Semen a TOTALİTARİZM/S Termev a İSLAM’IN BİLİNÇALTINDA KADIN® Ayı Sabbah a MEDYA VE DEMOKRASİ/« Keane a ÇOCUK HAKLARL'Oer B FraMn a ÇÖKÜŞTEN SONR/VDer R. Blackborn a DÜN­ YANIN BATIULAŞMASI'S. Latouche a TÜRKİYE'NİN BAT ILILAŞTIRiLMASt’C. Aktar a SINIRLARI YIKMAK!«. Meler " KAPİ­ TALİZM. SOSYALİZM. EKOLOJL'A Gen a AVRUPAMERKEZCİLİK/S. Arm a AHLAK VE MOOERNLİKı'fl Poote > GÜNDELİK HAYAT KlAVUZU®. IWıs a SİVİL TOPLUM VE DEVLETIDer. J. Keane a TELEVİZYON: ÖLDÜREN EĞLENCE/N Posrnan a MODERNLİĞİN SONUÇLARLA Gijoens a DAHA AZ DEVLET OAHA ÇOK TOPLUM'R CanBen a GELECEĞE BAKMAK ?,!. A'- eert - R Hanneı a MEDYA. DEVLET VE ULUS®. ScMesmger a MAHREMİYETİN DÖNÜŞÜMÜM. Û,ddens a TARİH VE TİN J. Kore! a ÖZGÜRLÜĞÜN EKOLOJİST« Bootefm a DEMOKRASİ VE SİVİL TOPLUM'J. Keane a SU HAİN KALPLERİMİZ/R CmattS a AKU VEDA.® Fayerabend a BEYİN İĞFAL ŞEBEKESİ/A. tHaıte'art a İKTİSADİ AKLIN ELEŞTİRİSİ®. Gore a MO­ DERNLİĞİN SIKIHTIURL'C faytof a GÜÇLÜ DEMOKRASİ® Bart>er > ÇEKİRGE® Suna a KÖTÜLÜĞÜN ŞEFFAFLIĞIZ BaodMatd a ENTELEKTÛEL-’f SaU ar TUHAF HAVA’A Ross a YENİ ZAMANLAR'S. HalFM. Jacgoes -<r TAHAKKÜM VE Dİ­ RENİŞ SANATLARLJ.C. Scett a SAĞLIĞIN GASPI/! NAcrt a SEVGİNİN BİLGELİĞİ!A. Fmiielkraot a KİMLİK VE FARKLILIK! W Connotly ar ANTİPOLİTİK ÇAĞDA POLİ f İKA'G, Malsan -a YENİ BİR SOL ÜZERİNE TARTIŞMALAR/H M m m gbt > DEMOK­ RASİ VE KAPİTALİZM/S. Bowtes-H. Glilfıs a OLUMSALLIK İRONİ VE OAYANIŞMA’fl. Red/ a OTOMOBİLİH EKaOJİSl/P Fre- umPG Maftn a ÖPÜŞME. GIDIKLANMA VE SIKIMA ÜZERİNE/A Philips a İMKÂNSIZIN POLİTİKASI«??. Besmer a GENÇ­ LER İÇİN HAYAT BİLGİSİ EL KİTABI/R. Vanetgem a CENNETİN DİBİIG. Kassa! -a EKOLOJİK BİR TOPLUMA DOĞRU1??. Bookc- bin ar İDEOLOJİ'T Eagteton a DÜZEN VE KALKINMA KISKACINDA TÜRKIYE/A. İnse! ar AMERİKA« 6audWla.il e t poST- MODERNİZM VE TÜKETİM KÜLTÜRÜM. Feathetsıone a ERKEK AKIUG. Ltoyd -a BARBARLIK’M Henry a KAMUSAL İNSA­ NIN ÇÖKÜŞÜ/R. Senne» -a POPÜLER KÜLTURLER/O. Rowe ar BELLEĞİNİ YİTİREN TOPLUM® Jacoby a r GÜLMEıH Berg- son a/ ÖLÜME KARŞI HAYAT,'« O 8reu-n a r SİVİL İTAATSİZLİK,'Der,- Y Cofar ar AHLÂK ÜZERİNE TARTIŞMALAR/J Nurtaıl ar TÜKETİM TOPLUMU/J. Baudnlö/d a EDEBİYAT VE KÖTÜLÜK/G. Bata,İle a ÖLÜMCÜL HASTALIK UMUTSUZLUK®. Km- kegaatd ar ORTAK 8IR ŞEYLERİ OLMAYANLARIN ORTAKLIĞI/A. Ungis a VAKİT ÖLDÜRMEK-'P. Feyerabent a VATAN AŞ- Kl/M. VeoS ar KİMLİK MEKÂNLARI/D. ?ledey-K Rettrts a DOSTLUK ÜZERİNEJS. lyncn -a KİŞİSEL İLİŞKİLER’«. UFollefle ar KADINLAR NEDEN YAZDIKLARI HER MEKTUBU GÖNDERMEZLERİ®. feader ar DOKUNMA/G. Josçbvki a/ İTİRAF EDİ­ LEMEYEN CEMAAT,M, BJaref»! a 1 FLÖRT ÛZERİNE’A. PM/ps ar FELSEFEYİ YAŞAMAK/R »»mgıon -a POLİTİK KAMERA/M Ryan-O. Kettner ■* CUMHURİYETÇİLİK'P Pattı! * POSTMODERN TEORİIS SeslO. Keme t a ’ MARKSİZM VE AHLAK/S Lu- kes a VAHŞETİ KAVRAMAK«.« Peemtsma > SOSYaojİK DÜŞÜNMEK/Z. Baman a POSTMODERN ETİK/Z. Bauman a TOPLUMSAL CİNSİYET VE İKTİDAR!fl. IV Connell a ÇOKKÜLTURLÜ YURTTAŞLIK/IV Kymbcka a KARŞIDEVRİM VE İŞ YAN'TL Marose a KUSURSUZ CİNAYET« Baertnltarb a TOPLUMUN McDONALDLAŞTIRILMASl'G. RİKer a KUSURSUZ Nİ- HILİST/K.A Penisen a HOŞGÖRÜ ÜZERİNE/?/. IVaBs/ a 21 YÜZYIL ANARŞİZMİ'Der., J, Purkis i J. Bo*en a MARKIN ÖZ­ GÜRLÜK ETİĞİ’G. G Brenkert a MEDYA VE GAZETECİLİKTE ETİK SORUNLAR'Der.: A Belsey S Ft. Cbetlnick a HAYATIN DE­ ĞERİ«. Hams a POSTMODERNIZMİN YANILSAMALARI!?, Eagleten a DÜNYAYI DEĞİŞTİRMEK ÜZERİNE/?!. Lbny a ÖKÜ­ ZÜN A'SVB. Sanders a TAHAYYÜL GÜCÜNÜ YENİDEN DÜŞÜNMEK/Der. G. Ftebinson S J. RumfeJ a TUTKULU SOSYaO- M. Geme J A A!e!ea!?e a EDEPSİZLİK, ANARŞİ VE GERÇEKIİK/G. SartvreH a KENTSİZ KENTLEŞME-'M Bookcbın a YÖN­ TEME KARŞVP. Feyerabeno a HAKİKAT OYUNLARI« Fo/resfer a TOPLUMLAR NASIL ANIMSAR’ /R Cormerton a OLME HAKKI/S. Inceogle a ANARŞİZMİN BUGÜNÜ’Der.. Hans-Jergen Değen a MELANKOLİ KADINDIR®. Binkert a SİYAH AN'LAR WW. Baudntlard a MODERNİZM. EVRENSELLİK VE BİREY/Ş. Benbabb a KÜLTÜREL EMPERYALİZM,« Temimsen a GÖ­ ZÜN VİCDANI.® Sennett a KÜRESELLEŞME’Z Baman a ETİĞE GİRİŞ'A. Pıeper a DUYGUÖTESİTOPLUMS Mestrovif a EDEBİYAT OLARAK HAYAT/A Neüemes a İm aj® Rott/B a MEKÂNLARI TÜKETMEK.« tlny a YAŞAMA SANATI/G. Sam«» a ARZU ÇAĞI« Kove! a KOLONYAL İZM POSTKOLONYALİZIAA. Loomba a KREŞTEKİ YABANİ/A P!»«ps a ZAMAN ÜZERİNE/N. Efas a TARİHİN YAPISÖKÜMÜA Afcnsto» a p re u d SAVAŞLARI«. Fiy/esler a ÖTEYE ADIM-M. Bıancnol a POSTYAPISALCI ANARŞİZMİN SİYASET FELSEFESİ/T May a ATEİZMİR Le Poidem a aŞK ILİŞKİLERİiO.F Kemberg a POSTMODERNLİK VE HOŞNUTSUZLUKLARI/Z Bauman a ÖLÜMLÜLÜK. ÖLÜMSÜZLÜK VE DİĞER HAYAT STRATEJILERtZ Baman a TOPLUM VE BUNÇOIŞVK. Leladakis a BÜYÜSÜ BOZULMUŞ DÜNYAYI BÜYÜIEMEK/G. Rtaer a KAHKAHANIN ZAFERİ® Sanders a EDEBİYATIN YARATILIŞI® ft/penl a PARÇALANMIŞ HAYAT/Z Bauman a KÜL­ TÜREL BELLEK/J. Assmann a MARKSİZM VE DİL FELSEFESEK N. Kotafinov a MARXTN HAYALETLERİ« Denida a ERDEM PEŞİNDE® Mac//rtyne a DEVLETİN YENİDEN ÜRETİMİ«. Sfeve/s a ÇAĞDAŞ SOSYAL BİLİMLER FELSEFESİ® Fay a KARNAVALDAN ROMANA'?!. Bakntin a PİYASAJ ONe,» a ANNE: MELEK MI. YOSMA MI’ .'EK K/e«itoı a KUTSAL İNSAN/G. Amgamben a BİLİNÇALTINDA DEVLET/R Lou/aua YAŞADIĞIMIZ SEFALET®. G<n a YAŞAMA SANATI FELSE­ FESİ® Nehamas a KORKU KÜLTÜRÜ®. F im » a EĞİTİMDE ETİK® Hajmes a OUYGUSAL YAŞANTl-'D. Loptan a ELEŞTİREL TEORİ® Geuss HAZIRLANAN KİTAPLAR ARMAĞANIN MANTIĞl-'Der.: A Sebritl a POSTMODERN EDEBİYAT KURAMI M. Lucy a FOUCAULT'NUN ÖZGÜRLÜK SERÜVENİ«.IV. Bernauer a ııiETZSCHE: BİR AHLÂK KARŞITININ ETİĞİ®. Berke-mta a GENEL ETİK® Heilet a İçindekiler — Ö nsöz.............................................................................................................. 7 — G iriş.................................................................................................................9 I. İD E O L O Jİ.............................................. 13 A. Betimsel anlamda ideoloji................................................................ 13 B. Yerici anlamda ideoloji.................................................................... 25 C. Pozitif anlamda ideoloji.................................................................... 39 D. İdeologiekritik..................................................................................... 44 II. Ç IK A R LA R ............................................................................................... 70 A. Gerçek çıkarlar................................................................................70 III. ELEŞTİREL T E O R İ.............................................................................. 84 A. Bilgisel v ap ı ........................................................................................84 B. B elg elem e...........................................................................................114 C. Epistemoloji....................................................................................133 — Adı geçen eserler....................................................................................143 — D iz in ........................................................................................................145
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geuss-On-Rorty.Pdf
    Richard Rorty at Princeton: Personal Recollections RAYMOND GEUSS When i arrived in Princeton during the 1970s my addiction to tea was already long-standing and very well entrenched, but I was so concerned about the quality of the water in town that I used to buy large containers of allegedly “pure” water at Davidson’s—the local supermarket, which seems now to have gone out of business. I didn’t, of course, have a car, and given the amount of tea I consumed, the trans- port of adequate supplies of water was a highly labor-inten- sive and inconvenient matter. Dick and Mary Rorty must have noticed me lugging canisters of water home, because, with characteristic generosity, they developed the habit of call- ing around at my rooms in 120 Prospect, often on Sunday mornings, offering to take me by car to fill my water bottles at a hugely primitive and highly suspicious-looking outdoor water tap on the side of a pumphouse which was operated by the Elizabethtown Water Company on a piece of waste land near the Institute Woods. This pumphouse with its copiously dripping tap was like something out of Tarkhovski’s film about Russia after a nuclear accident, Stalker, and the sur- rounding area was a place so sinister one half expected to be attacked by packs of dogs in the final stages of radiation sick- ness or by troops of feral children who had been left by their parents to fend for themselves while the parents went off to the library to finish their dissertations.
    [Show full text]
  • Nietzsche and the Pathologies of Meaning
    Nietzsche and the Pathologies of Meaning Jeremy James Forster Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2016 © 2016 Jeremy James Forster All rights reserved ABSTRACT NIETZSCHE AND THE PATHOLOGIES OF MEANING Jeremy Forster My dissertation details what Nietzsche sees as a normative and philosophical crisis that arises in modern society. This crisis involves a growing sense of malaise that leads to large-scale questions about whether life in the modern world can be seen as meaningful and good. I claim that confronting this problem is a central concern throughout Nietzsche’s philosophical career, but that his understanding of this problem and its solution shifts throughout different phases of his thinking. Part of what is unique to Nietzsche’s treatment of this problem is his understanding that attempts to imbue existence with meaning are self-undermining, becoming pathological and only further entrenching the problem. Nietzsche’s solution to this problem ultimately resides in treating meaning as a spiritual need that can only be fulfilled through a creative interpretive process. CONTENTS Introduction 1 Chapter I: The Birth of Tragedy and the Problem of Meaning 30 Part I: Background 33 Part II: Meaningfulness in Artistic Cultures 45 Part III: Meaningfulness in Tragic Cultures 59 Part IV: Meaningfulness in Socratic Cultures 70 Conclusion: The Solution to Socratism 78 Chapter II: Meaning, Science, and the “Perceptions of Science
    [Show full text]
  • Deep Contextualism and Radical Criticism: the Argument for a Division of Labor
    1 Deep Contextualism and Radical Criticism: The Argument for a Division of Labor Mathias Thaler [email protected] Abstract: Raymond Geuss has recently argued for a “realist” re‐orientation of political theory. This argument is based on a devastating critique of what he calls the “ethics first”‐approach, that is, an approach to politics that is essentially derived from, and thus tributary to, ethics. Geuss’s own account of realist political theory urges us to engage in two distinct activities: (1) embracing some form of deep contextualism and (2) exploiting the potential for radical criticism. This paper argues that these imperatives cannot be fully synthesized because they impose completely different requirements on the philosopher: the former forces the philosopher to immerse herself into the analysis of the real world so as to tailor her normative judgments to the particularities of the situation under scrutiny, while the latter might actually be served better if the principles of justice remained untainted by any considerations of the real world. To illustrate this claim about the structural incompatibility, I will start by unfolding a continuum of various positions in the debate about the relationship between deep contextualism and radical criticism. This continuum has at one extreme Michael Walzer’s notion of “immanent criticism”, and on the other extreme we can find G. A. Cohen’s suggestion that principles of justice should remain “fact‐insensitive”. The final part of this paper suggests that we best conceive of deep contextualism and radical criticism not as mutually exclusive, but rather as reciprocally complimentary. This idea is encapsulated in the notion that we need a division of labor between idealizing and realist approaches to politics.
    [Show full text]
  • Dewey and the Project of Critical Social Theory*
    ..··:.:r.·.'· , DEWEY AND THE PROJECT OF CRITICAL ·,····.·.,·,·.·,1··,···",::·' :~ F. ~. r SOCIAL THEORY* ·',:1: ROBERT J. IZENT University of Kansas Social Thought & Research, 2000, Vol. 23, 1&2 Abstract The project of critical social theory shares with progressive (bllt not classical, free 1Harket) liberalism a value-orientation composed ofan egalitarian conception of socialjustice; a positive, delJelopmental vie1v of libertY as selfrealization; and a participatory notion of democracy. Differentiating critical theory fro»: all strains of liberalism is the comsction that capitalism cannot StljJport theinstitutionalieation of this value-orientation, and that tinder modern conditions onlY some form of democratic socialism can. Given thisualue-orientation, thispaperoutlines the mission and struaur: of theproject of critical theory. In its RJOSt recent retreat to the academy, practitioners have losttoud: not onlY 1vith its mission but also lvith the level ofhistorical specificity at wbicb the project can RIOSt effectivelY bepracticed. TIl/O proposals aresuggestedfor recoverilJg and executing its mission. Thefirst is to address citizens in particular societies about the mora! and political significance of contemporary social change. The second is that theory, description, critique, and vision should proceed at a level ofabstraction I callregi1lle analYsis. Here the object ofanalYsis is a specific society with its own history, institutionalfeatures; and cultura! identity. It is suggested that John Dewey': proposals for the retitalization of philosophy are relevant to the recovery of theproject of critical social theory. Following Dewf!Y j • For theirpatience and support over the years I wish to thank my friends Tom Skrtic, Bob Antonio, Mohamed El-Hodiri, Bardwell Smith, and the late Clifford Griffin. This work was supported in part by Grant No.
    [Show full text]
  • Nietzsche on Morality
    Copyrighted Material-Taylor & Francis Copyrighted Material-Taylor & Francis Nietzsche on Morality Both an introduction to Nietzsche’s moral philosophy, and a sustained commentary on his most famous work, On the Genealogy of Morality, this book has become the most widely used and debated secondary source on these topics over the past dozen years. Many of Nietzsche’s most famous ideas – the “slave revolt” in morals, the attack on free will, perspectivism, “will to power,” and the “ascetic ideal”–are clearly analyzed and explained. The first edition established the centrality of nat- uralism to Nietzsche’s philosophy, generating a substantial scholarly literature to which Leiter responds in an important new Postscript. In addition, Leiter has revised and refreshed the book throughout, taking into account new scholarly literature, and revising or clarifying his treatment of such topics as the objectivity of value, epiphenomenalism and consciousness, and the possibility of “autonomous” agency. Brian Leiter is the Karl N. Llewellyn Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the Center for Law, Philosophy and Human Values at the University of Chicago, USA, where he teaches and writes about moral, political, and legal philosophy in both the Anglophone and Continental European traditions. Copyrighted Material-Taylor & Francis This page intentionally left blank Copyrighted Material-Taylor & Francis Nietzsche on Morality Second Edition Brian Leiter ROUTLEDGE Routledge~~o~;!~n~~~up LONDON AND NEW YORK Copyrighted Material-Taylor & Francis First published as Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Nietzsche on Morality 2002 by Routledge This edition published as Nietzsche on Morality 2015 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2002, 2015 Brian Leiter The right of Brian Leiter to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
    [Show full text]
  • Impure Theorizing in an Imperfect World: Politics, Utopophobia and Critical Theory in Geuss's Realism
    This is a repository copy of Impure theorizing in an imperfect world: Politics, utopophobia and critical theory in Geuss’s realism. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/137091/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Verovsek, P.J. (2019) Impure theorizing in an imperfect world: Politics, utopophobia and critical theory in Geuss’s realism. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 45 (3). pp. 265-283. ISSN 0191-4537 https://doi.org/10.1177/0191453718794745 © 2018 The Author(s). This is an author produced version of a paper subsequently published in Philosophy and Social Criticism. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. Article available under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Impure Theorizing in an Imperfect World: Politics, Utopophobia and Critical Theory in Geuss’s Realism1 Peter J.
    [Show full text]
  • Adorno's Politics
    This is the penultimate draft; the final version appears in Philosophy & Social Criticism 40.9 (November 2014): http://psc.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/08/05/0191453714545198.abstract; please cite that version. Adorno’s Politics: Theory and Praxis in Germany’s 1960s∗ Fabian Freyenhagen University of Essex [email protected] Adorno inspired much of Germany’s 1960s student movement, but he came increasingly into conflict with this movement about the practical implications of his critical theory. As early as 1964, student activist lamented what they saw as an unbearable discrepancy between his analysis and his actions.1 As one of his PhD students later expressed it: […] Adorno was incapable of transforming his private compassion towards the “damned of the earth” into an organized partisanship of theory engaged in the liberation of the oppressed. […] his critical option that any philosophy if it is to be true must be immanently oriented towards practical transformation of social reality, loses its binding force if it is not also capable of defining itself in organizational categories. […] Detachment […] drove Adorno […] into complicity with the ruling powers. […]. As he moved more and more away from historical ∗ This article was originally conceived as part of my Adorno’s Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), and should be considered as integral to it. My thanks go to all of those who have commented on earlier drafts, especially Gordon Finlayson, Raymond Geuss, Béatrice Han-Pile. Patrice Maniglier, Richard Raatzsch, Jörg Schaub, Dan Swain, and Dan Watts. 1 For example, they produced leaflets with passages from Adorno’s own work – passages such as the following: “There can be no covenant with this world; we belong to it only to the extent that we rebel against it” – and invited students to contact Adorno to complain that he did not act accordingly (see Esther Leslie, ‘Introduction to Adorno/Marcuse Correspondence on the German Student Movement’, New Left Review I/233, January- February 1999, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • 132 Raymond Geuss. Changing the Subject: Philosophy from Socrates
    Philosophy in Review XXXIX (August 2019), no. 3 Raymond Geuss. Changing the Subject: Philosophy from Socrates to Adorno. Harvard University Press 2017. 368 pp. $29.95 USD (Hardcover ISBN 9780674545724). When Gerry Cohen reflected on how he acquired his enviable skill-set as a philosopher, he concluded that ‘nobody ever told me how to do it.’ He also thought that it may be ‘impossible to explain to anybody how philosophy is to be done.’ In light of these and other reflections, he concluded that ‘[t]he only way to teach people how to do [philosophy] is by letting them watch, and listen, and imitate’ (G.A. Cohen, On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice, and Other Essays in Political Philos- ophy, Princeton University Press, 2011, 225). We might see introductory texts on philosophy as giv- ing their readers opportunities to listen, if not to watch and imitate. In Changing the Subject: Philos- ophy from Socrates to Adorno, Raymond Geuss plainly has aspirations of this sort. For he seeks to convey to his readers an understanding of the circumstances in which ‘[p]hilosophy takes place’ (5). Philosophers have approached this tricky task in a variety of ways. José Ortega y Gasset sought to do it by focusing on what he took to be philosophy’s essence. This is, on his account, a ‘surging impulse toward clarification’ that he traces back to ancient Greece and identifies as the enduring achievement of a group of philosophers he calls ‘magistrate[s] of thought’ (The Origin of Philosophy, University of Illinois Press, 2000 [1967], 24 and 109).
    [Show full text]
  • The Philosopher As Engaged Citizen : Habermas on the Role of the Public Intellectual in the Modern Democratic Public Sphere
    This is a repository copy of The philosopher as engaged citizen : Habermas on the role of the public intellectual in the modern democratic public sphere. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/172849/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Verovšek, P.J. (2021) The philosopher as engaged citizen : Habermas on the role of the public intellectual in the modern democratic public sphere. European Journal of Social Theory. ISSN 1368-4310 https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310211003192 Verovšek PJ. The philosopher as engaged citizen: Habermas on the role of the public intellectual in the modern democratic public sphere. European Journal of Social Theory. March 2021. Copyright © 2021 The Author. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310211003192. Article available under the terms of the CC- BY-NC-ND licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ The Philosopher as Engaged Citizen: Habermas on the Role of the Public Intellectual in Modern Democratic Life* Peter J.
    [Show full text]
  • Berg on Neumann and Marcuse and Kirchheimer, 'Secret Reports on Nazi Germany: the Frankfurt School Contribution to the War Effort'
    H-German Berg on Neumann and Marcuse and Kirchheimer, 'Secret Reports on Nazi Germany: The Frankfurt School Contribution to the War Effort' Review published on Wednesday, October 15, 2014 Franz Neumann, Herbert Marcuse, Otto Kirchheimer. Secret Reports on Nazi Germany: The Frankfurt School Contribution to the War Effort. Edited by Raffaele Laudani. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013. 704 pp. $45.00 (e-book), ISBN 978-1-4008-4646-7; $45.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-691-13413-0. Reviewed by Anne Berg (University of Michigan)Published on H-German (October, 2014) Commissioned by Chad Ross Legible Enemy When the news broke last November that Cornelius Gurlitt, the eighty-year-old son of a former Nazi art dealer, was sitting on more than 1,200 pieces of artwork confiscated by the Nazi regime, The New York Times somewhat indignantly reported that "the 1938 law"—on the basis of which the regime seized "thousands of other Modernist artworks deemed 'degenerate' because Hitler viewed them as un-German or Jewish in nature—remains on the books to this day."[1] The failure of the Federal Republic of Germany to effectively eradicate traces of Nazism from its laws is more easily seen in relation to Vergangenheitsbewältigung—Germany's attempts to come to terms with the Nazi past—rather than in the context of the postwar politics of occupation and reconstruction. But as Raffaele Laudani's collection of secret reports by members of the Frankfurt School working for the Research and Analysis Branch the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) illustrates, concrete suggestions about Germany's political and legal reconfiguration after defeat were already being discussed and planned by the Allies while the war was still raging in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Adorno's Politics: Theory and Praxis in Germany's 1960S∗
    This is the penultimate draft; the final version appears in Philosophy & Social Criticism 40.9 (November 2014): http://psc.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/08/05/0191453714545198.abstract; please cite that version. Adorno’s Politics: Theory and Praxis in Germany’s 1960s∗ Fabian Freyenhagen University of Essex [email protected] Adorno inspired much of Germany’s 1960s student movement, but he came increasingly into conflict with this movement about the practical implications of his critical theory. As early as 1964, student activist lamented what they saw as an unbearable discrepancy between his analysis and his actions.1 As one of his PhD students later expressed it: […] Adorno was incapable of transforming his private compassion towards the “damned of the earth” into an organized partisanship of theory engaged in the liberation of the oppressed. […] his critical option that any philosophy if it is to be true must be immanently oriented towards practical transformation of social reality, loses its binding force if it is not also capable of defining itself in organizational categories. […] Detachment […] drove Adorno […] into complicity with the ruling powers. […]. As he moved more and more away from historical ∗ This article was originally conceived as part of my Adorno’s Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), and should be considered as integral to it. My thanks go to all of those who have commented on earlier drafts, especially Gordon Finlayson, Raymond Geuss, Béatrice Han-Pile. Patrice Maniglier, Richard Raatzsch, Jörg Schaub, Dan Swain, and Dan Watts. 1 For example, they produced leaflets with passages from Adorno’s own work – passages such as the following: “There can be no covenant with this world; we belong to it only to the extent that we rebel against it” – and invited students to contact Adorno to complain that he did not act accordingly (see Esther Leslie, ‘Introduction to Adorno/Marcuse Correspondence on the German Student Movement’, New Left Review I/233, January- February 1999, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Idea of a Critical Political Theory
    Columbia University Center for Contemporary Critical Thought Fall 2015 Seminar The Idea of a Critical Political Theory Professor Linda Zerilli Monday Through Friday, October 19-23, 2015 Seminar Description Anyone who goes beyond procedural questions of a discourse theory of morality and ethics and, in a normative attitude . embarks on a theory of the well- ordered, or even emancipated, society will quickly run up against the limits of his own historical situation. --Habermas For some time now, a certain strand of contemporary critical theory has understood its task not in terms of providing a substantive critique of real world power relations, let alone an alternative normative conception of what social relations might be, but of how to justify critique as such: how to “justify those elements which critique owes to its philosophical origins” (Habermas), albeit in a nonfoundationalist manner. This focus on—if not obsession with—the theoretical problem of how to ground one’s own critique arose largely as an intervention into the now longstanding debate over positivism and scientism in figurations of the relation between theory and practice. As important as this intervention has been for exposing the dangers of, and social/political philosophy’s implication in, a purely technocratic order, it has not been without costs to the very idea of critique itself: namely the crucial connection between critique and social/political transformation. Seyla Benhabib has usefully characterized the two tasks of critical theory as “explanatory-diagnostic” and “anticipatory-utopian.” In this seminar we aim to explore what each of these tasks might be and how they are connected.
    [Show full text]