DOCSLIB.ORG

The History of the Frankfurt School from Criticism to Emancipation Movement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The History of the Frankfurt School from Criticism to Emancipation Movement HISTORIA: International Journal of History Education, Vol. XIII, No. 1 (June 2012) THE HISTORY OF THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL FROM CRITICISM TO EMANCIPATION MOVEMENT Damanhuri Fatah1 ABSTRACT This paper describes the modern society’s major basic idea which has been uphold by Frankfurt School, that is, the crisis of enlightenment, of art and culture, and of history. The school is trying to reunite concretely branches of knowledge in social sciences which have been broken down into pieces without sacrificing their good points. The school also intellectually and socially redefines Marxism in its period. The Frankfurt School of the first period was claimed to have been deadlock in taking part in solving the problem of modern world. The works of Karl Marx, Horkheimer, Adorno, as well as Herbert Marcuse are the severe criticisms on scientism and positivism. According to them, both have interfered modern society as uncovered in the instrumental and technological rationality. The critical tradition previously developed by Marx tried to uproot the hidden system in a certain ideology that had made the society’s creative thinking less interisting. It means that the system which developed at that time was in fact the place where ideological interests of certain parties hid. Marx intended to uproot these interests which was the continued by the Frankfurt School community which was known for their ideological criticism. Key Words: epistemology, Frankfurt School, Habermas, Emancipation 1Damanhuri Fatah, lecturer of IAIN Radean Intan Lampung. For academic interest, the author can be contacted at office address: Jl. Letkol H. Endro Suratmin Sukarame, Bandar Lampung. 95 DAMANHURI FATAH, The History of the Frankfrut School From Critism to Emancipation Movement Introduction 3. Third, influenced by a new interpretation of Marxism by Georg There are three common names of Lukács and Karl Korsch in accordance Frankfrut School, without any particular with the problems of that time. The difference: Institut for Sozialforshsung, reflection concept of Lukacs becomes Critical Theory, and Frankfrut School central. (Kolakowsky, 1978 : 341 – 343). The 4. Fourth, emphasizing on autonomous founder of the institute was a political theories and object to directly involved expert named Felix J. Weil. He was the son (in practical political movement). The of a tycoon, Herman Weil, who had spent all criticism over the society is limited of his assets for funding social reseraches, only on academic movement, trying particularly to revive the Mrax doctrin to to transform the social reality through be restructured in accordance with the era science. (Wiggershaus, 1994: 9, 12-13, 16-17). 5. Fifth, this School accepts some of At first it was the Institute for Marx’s theory such as the exploitation Sozialforschung (Institute for Social and alienation of labor; however, some Research) which was founded in the early views are objected, for example, class 1923 in Frankfurt, as one of the majors in consciousness and revolution. The Frankfurt University. The Institute’s first refication concept applied to all levels director was Carl Grunberg. They had in the Marx’s class division (bourgeois encountered a cultural crisis since 1890 with and proletarian classes). the rapid growth of capitalism in Germany. The German Institute brought this issue to 6. Sixth, this school is the Revisionist the exile and later returned to Germany movement of orthodox Marxism, after the war with the new designation of and a revolutionary intellectuals “Frankfurt School”. In such conditions, the (Kolakowsky, 1978: 341-343) Institute was still established, therefore, it The early figures are Preidrich Pollock is needed to be noted down and study all (1894-1970, an economist), Carl Grunber the six characteritic of the school: (1861-1940, the first director of the 1. First, using Marxism not as the basic Institute), Max Horkheimer (1895-1973, norm (ideology), but only as a starting philosopher, sociologist, psychologist, point and support for analysis and the scond director of the Institute), Karl cultural criticism. Hence the critical Wittfogel ( born in 1869, historian, who analysis models of non-Marxis (Hegel, view the Marxism influence in Asia), Kant, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Spengler, Wiesengrund Theodor Adorno (1903- Freud, and Judaism) has become the 1970, philosopher, sociologist, the third choice. director of the Institute), Leo Lowenthal (born in 1900, a sociologist), Walter 2. Second, the programs structured Benjamin (1892-1940, literary critic), are the programs expressing critical Frank Neumann, (law expert), Hendryk characteristics, and is non party (not Grossman (1881-1950, economists and part of a political movement). political), Arkadij Gurland (economy and 96 HISTORIA: International Journal of History Education, Vol. XIII, No. 1 (June 2012) socialogy expert). They are the leaders of revival of Marxism after World War I. This the Institute for Social Research school of social interests is to uncover the The school would like to try a more ideology of criticism and rejected claims of concrete way to reunite branches of absolute validity. knowledge in the social sciences that had The term “Frankfurt School” came into been fragmented without sacrificing its use around 1950 to refer back to the above positivity. The school also tried to redefine Institute (Kolakowsky, 1978: 341). The term Marxism at that time intellectually and is synonymous with the redevelopment socially. of the Institute after the war. The figures In the early 1930 the Institute released of Frankfrut School diminishing because their interest on labor movements. During many of them never returned from exile that time Marx Horkheimer was replacing and no one returned to East Germany. Carl Grunberg position and become the They are Horkheimer, Adorno, Pollock, leader of Zeitschrift fur Sozialforschung, Marcuse, Lowenthal (two of them, Marcuse a journal for Social Research) to replace and Lowenthal lived in the U.S.) the journals by Carl Grunberg, Archiv fur The term “Critical Theory” refers to die Geschicte des Sozialismus und der the paper of Horheimer, Kritische Theorie, Arbeiterbewegng (Discourse on History which was written in 1937 and published of Socialism and the Labour Movement). in the Journal and republished in 1968. The main analysis subject was shifted from This paper talks about the projects of class analysis to culture and authority the Institute. The figures often called as analysis. He “academized” politics (Gillian the first generation of Critical Theory are Rose, 1978: 2). Then the critical element in Max Horkaeimer, Theodor Adorno, and the historical process requires dealing with Herbert Marcuse. While Jurgen Habermas German authorities. is a Second Generation Critical Theory who Under the leadership of Horkheimer has a similar point of view with Lukacs both in Germany and during exile and Korsch in his interest in the legacy of (United States), the instituion which had German idealism, but in some cases they emphasized the conservatism and science were also regarded as the successor to the during Carl Grunberg time, shifted their spirit of the Left Wing Hegelianism in 1840 objective to emphasizing social research, (Jay, 1973: 43-44), technically and theoretically. Most articles The emerge of Frankrurt School is of this school appeared in the themes closely related to the views of Karl Marx that complained about the knowledge and his successors (Marxist), especially fragmentation during that time, the idea western Marxism which is known as of totality as the missing perspective, the Critical Marxism (Neo-Marxism). resistance to positivism, and symptoms This school emerged as a reaction to the to return to the tradition of Gillian Rose, restriction of Karl Marx doctrins which was (1978: 2). This emphasis illustrates the fears the ideology of the Communist Party of the of German academics against capitalism. Soviet Union (Arato and Gebhardt, 1978: The particularity of Frankfurt School is 4-18). Many German academics reject the that it was always against idealism and the pro-Soviet Communist Party developed in 97 DAMANHURI FATAH, The History of the Frankfrut School From Critism to Emancipation Movement Germany for betraying the doctrin of Marx Communist Party. His work Marxismus and the Social Democratic Party who lost und Philosophie (1923) (Marxism and his Marxist nature. As a result they tried to Philosophy), explaining that the doctrine define the Marx doctrine in accordance with of Marxism is a theory of his time with the the era. During that time they review the material conditions that exist in society. doctrin of Hegel which resurfaced idealism Another figure, such as Antonio Gramschi in Germany. The figures of the first wave called the view of the two figures mentioned of Neo-Maxis are including George Lukacs above as the “philosophy of praxis” as it (1885-1971), Ernst Bloch (1885-1974), and attempts to connect theory and praxis based Karl Korsch (1889-1963). on the doctrin of Marxism and German George Lukacs was actually the Idealism (Hegel) (Arato, 1982: 5). David Hungarian Communist Party activist. His Ryazanoov the director of Marx-Engels work, Geschichte und Klassenbewusstein Institute in Moscow published the Paris (1923) (History and Class Consciousness) Manuscript in 1932 which distribution was emphasizes on the awareness of proletarian prohibited by the Marxists who want to re- class and excluding the automatic element define the Marx doctrines in accordance (by itself) towards the history of capitalism with the era (Winggershaus, 1994: 31-32, that ended in accordance with Marxism 615). Ortodiks. According to Lukacs, the supra- However, the political situation under structure existed, the knowledge and communist during that time tested their ideology, need to be activated in order to views validity. Lukacs finally denied his enble changes (Wiggershaus, 1994: 15). views under the threat of the authority Ernist Bloch bought a big theme in his which at that time was on the hand of the philosophical effort in the form of. The Communist Party, while Korsch who did not theme was connected with the matter of want to deny his theory had to relinquish his ‘hope’.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Thejudaic Element in the Teachings of the Frankfurt School
    The Judaic Element in the Teachings of the Frankfurt School BY JUDITH MARCUS AND ZOLTAN TAR INTRODUCTION j In dealing with the question of the Judaic element in the teachings of the Frankfurt School, one does well to proceed as the Hebrew script does, that is, from right to left.* First, there should be a highly compressed account ofwhat on or publication of the Frankfurt School was about, and, second, an explanation ofwhat is meant by the teachings of the Frankfurt School, that is, the theoretical content of the School. Finally, we take up the main business at hand, that is, the examination of the Judaic element in the work of three Frankfurt School theorists: Max Horkheimer, Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno and Erich Fromm. Even in the case ofsuch a relatively modest and at times descriptive task as personal use only. Citati this has to be, a social scientist and historian of ideas is bound to refer to the rums. Nutzung nur für persönliche Zwecke. methodology applied. The approach will follow several lines of investigation, tten permission of the copyright holder. most notably that of the sociology of knowledge, i.e., the "existential determination of ideas" approach. If Hegel is right in saying that "to comprehend what is, is the task of philosophy [and] whatever happens, every individual is a child of his time; and philosophy is [but] its own time comprehended in thought",' then this is particularly true of the thinkers of the Frankfurt School. We might add to Hegel's dictum that each social philosophy is and remains limited and/or influenced by the historical conditions, and, subjectively, by the physical and mental constitution of its originator.
    [Show full text]
  • NATURE, SOCIOLOGY, and the FRANKFURT SCHOOL by Ryan
    NATURE, SOCIOLOGY, AND THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL By Ryan Gunderson A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Sociology – Doctor of Philosophy 2014 ABSTRACT NATURE, SOCIOLOGY, AND THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL By Ryan Gunderson Through a systematic analysis of the works of Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, and Erich Fromm using historical methods, I document how early critical theory can conceptually and theoretically inform sociological examinations of human-nature relations. Currently, the first-generation Frankfurt School’s work is largely absent from and criticized in environmental sociology. I address this gap in the literature through a series of articles. One line of analysis establishes how the theories of Horkheimer, Adorno, and Marcuse are applicable to central topics and debates in environmental sociology. A second line of analysis examines how the Frankfurt School’s explanatory and normative theories of human- animal relations can inform sociological animal studies. The third line examines the place of nature in Fromm’s social psychology and sociology, focusing on his personality theory’s notion of “biophilia.” Dedicated to 바다. See you soon. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe my dissertation committee immense gratitude for offering persistent intellectual and emotional support. Linda Kalof overflows with kindness and her gentle presence continually put my mind at ease. It was an honor to be the mentee of a distinguished scholar foundational to the formation of animal studies. Tom Dietz is the most cheerful person I have ever met and, as the first environmental sociologist to integrate ideas from critical theory with a bottomless knowledge of the environmental social sciences, his insights have been invaluable.
    [Show full text]
  • Feminist Theory and the Frankfurt School: Introduction
    wendy brown Feminist Theory and the Frankfurt School: Introduction Feminism is a revolt against decaying capitalism. —Marcuse There is a quaintness to Herbert Marcuse’s manifesto on behalf of “feminist socialism,” here reprinted for the first time since its appearance thirty years ago in Women’s Studies. It is not only an open- hearted and hopeful little effort at theoretically codifying the expansive revolutionary promise of the second wave of the Women’s Movement, a promise that would soon be dashed from within and without. Marcuse’s political and philosophical assumptions were also vulnerable to emerg- ing postfoundational critiques of the humanist subject, progressive his- toriography, and their entailments: essentialized identities, totalizing identities, undeconstructed binary oppositions, faith in emancipation, and revolution. Openhearted, hopeful, vulnerable, imaginative, revolution- ary: precisely the qualities Marcuse thought feminism brought to the unyielding and ultimately unemancipatory rationality of a masculinist radical politics, on the one hand, and a dreamless liberal egalitarianism, on the other. This unemancipatory rationality was the terrain that the Frankfurt School worked from every direction, as it upturned the myth of Volume 17, Number 1 doi 10.1215/10407391-2005-001 © 2006 by Brown University and d i f f e r e n c e s : A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/differences/article-pdf/17/1/1/405311/diff17-01_02BrownFpp.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 Feminist Theory and the Frankfurt School Enlightenment reason, integrated psychoanalysis into political philosophy, pressed Nietzsche and Weber into Marx, attacked positivism as an ideology of capitalism, theorized the revolutionary potential of high art, plumbed the authoritarian ethos and structure of the nuclear family, mapped cultural and social effects of capital, thought and rethought dialectical materialism, and took philosophies of aesthetics, reason, and history to places they had never gone before.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Marxism and Cultural Studies Douglas Kellner
    Cultural Marxism and Cultural Studies Douglas Kellner (http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/) Many different versions of cultural studies have emerged in the past decades. While during its dramatic period of global expansion in the 1980s and 1990s, cultural studies was often identified with the approach to culture and society developed by the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies in Birmingham, England, their sociological, materialist, and political approaches to culture had predecessors in a number of currents of cultural Marxism. Many 20th century Marxian theorists ranging from Georg Lukacs, Antonio Gramsci, Ernst Bloch, Walter Benjamin, and T.W. Adorno to Fredric Jameson and Terry Eagleton employed the Marxian theory to analyze cultural forms in relation to their production, their imbrications with society and history, and their impact and influences on audiences and social life. Traditions of cultural Marxism are thus important to the trajectory of cultural studies and to understanding its various types and forms in the present age. The Rise of Cultural Marxism Marx and Engels rarely wrote in much detail on the cultural phenomena that they tended to mention in passing. Marx’s notebooks have some references to the novels of Eugene Sue and popular media, the English and foreign press, and in his 1857-1858 “outline of political economy,” he refers to Homer’s work as expressing the infancy of the human species, as if cultural texts were importantly related to social and historical development. The economic base of society for Marx and Engels consisted of the forces and relations of production in which culture and ideology are constructed to help secure the dominance of ruling social groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Theory, Totality, Critique: the Limits of the Frankfurt School Critical Theory, Marxism and Modernity
    Studies in 20th Century Literature Volume 16 Issue 1 Special Issue on Contemporary Spanish Article 11 Poetry: 1939-1990 1-1-1992 Theory, Totality, Critique: The Limits of the Frankfurt School Critical Theory, Marxism and Modernity Philip Goldstein University of Delaware Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/sttcl Part of the German Literature Commons, and the Modern Literature Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Goldstein, Philip (1992) "Theory, Totality, Critique: The Limits of the Frankfurt School Critical Theory, Marxism and Modernity," Studies in 20th Century Literature: Vol. 16: Iss. 1, Article 11. https://doi.org/ 10.4148/2334-4415.1297 This Review Essay is brought to you for free and open access by New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Studies in 20th Century Literature by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Theory, Totality, Critique: The Limits of the Frankfurt School Critical Theory, Marxism and Modernity Abstract Theory, Totality, Critique: The Limits of the Frankfurt School Critical Theory, Marxism and Modernity by Douglas Kellner. Keywords Frankfurt School, WWII, Critical Theory Marxism and Modernity, Post-modernism, society, theory, socio- historical perspective, Marxism, Marxist rhetoric, communism, communistic parties, totalization, totalizing approach This review essay is available in Studies in 20th Century Literature: https://newprairiepress.org/sttcl/vol16/iss1/11 Goldstein: Theory, Totality, Critique: The Limits of the Frankfurt School Cr Review Essay Theory, Totality, Critique: The Limits of the Frankfurt School Philip Goldstein University of Delaware Douglas Kellner, Critical Theory, Marxism and Modernity.
    [Show full text]
  • University of California Santa Cruz from Mass Culture To
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ FROM MASS CULTURE TO PERSONALIZATION A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in HISTORY OF CONSCIOUSNESS by Lindsay A. Weinberg June 2018 The Dissertation of Lindsay A. Weinberg is approved: ___________________________________ Professor Robert Meister, co-chair ___________________________________ Professor Carla Freccero, co-chair ___________________________________ Professor Warren Sack ___________________________________ Professor Mark Andrejevic _____________________________ Tyrus Miller Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction, p. 1 Chapter One, p. 36 Rethinking the Frankfurt School Chapter Two, p. 118 On the Question of Labor Chapter Three, p. 180 Attention and Design Chapter Four, p. 231 Surveillance and Privacy Conclusion, p. 274 References, p. 283 ! iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Kelvinator “Automatic Cook” advertisement................................................195 2. Hotpoint All-Electric Kitchen advertisement…............................................196 3. Original advertisement for the Honeywell Kitchen Computer......................199 4. Apple’s “1984” advertisement………………………………………….......202 ! iv Abstract From Mass Culture to Personalization Lindsay Weinberg This dissertation argues that personalization—the web of technologies and cultural practices that generate information about consumers to market goods and services to target audiences—is part of a larger cultural and economic
    [Show full text]
  • MA Thesis Yu-Hsuan
    The University of Chicago The New Left vs. Liberal Debate in China: How Ideology Shapes the Perception of Reality By Yu-Hsuan Sun July 2021 A paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Masters of Arts Degree in the Masters of Arts Program in the Social Sciences (MAPSS) Faculty Advisor: Marco Garrido Preceptor: Wen Xie Abstract: The tragic June 4th Crackdown on the Tiananmen Student Movement dealt a devastating blow to the hope of China’s democratization. In the 1980s, the majority of young Chinese students expressed overwhelming support for the democracy movement and the New Enlightenment thought trend which preceded the 1989 protests. The homogeneity of the 80s intellectual sphere, however, is a stark contrast to the intense debate between the “New Left” and “Liberal” camps in China which began in the late 1990s. My paper seeks to answer the question: “Why did China’s intellectual homogeneity dissolve so quickly in the 90s?” And more importantly, “What is at stake in those debates between intellectual camps?” To answer these questions, I argue that ideological differences among Chinese intellectuals fundamentally change their perception of China’s post-1989 reality. After the Tiananmen Movement, Deng Xiaoping intensified China’s economic reforms as an answer to both the internal and external crises to his political power after June 4th. While this new wave of reforms brought about unprecedented economic growth and commerce in China, it also created looming social problems such as inequality and corruption. However, these social issues generated polarizing responses from Chinese intellectuals who offered contradicting explanations to these social and economic issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Preserving the Radical Potential of Critical Legal Studies Through a Reexamination of Frankfurt School Critical Theory
    Florida State University Law Review Volume 26 Issue 3 Article 3 1999 From Criticism to Critique: Preserving the Radical Potential of Critical Legal Studies Through a Reexamination of Frankfurt School Critical Theory Jason E. Whitehead [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Jason E. Whitehead, From Criticism to Critique: Preserving the Radical Potential of Critical Legal Studies Through a Reexamination of Frankfurt School Critical Theory, 26 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 701 (1999) . https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr/vol26/iss3/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida State University Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW FROM CRITICISM TO CRITIQUE: PRESERVING THE RADICAL POTENTIAL OF CRITICAL LEGAL STUDIES THROUGH A REEXAMINATION OF FRANKFURT SCHOOL CRITICAL THEORY Jason E. Whitehead VOLUME 26 SPRING 1999 NUMBER 3 Recommended citation: Jason E. Whitehead, From Criticism to Critique: Preserving the Radical Potential of Critical Legal Studies Through a Reexamination of Frankfurt School Critical Theory, 26 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. 701 (1999). FROM CRITICISM TO CRITIQUE: PRESERVING THE RADICAL POTENTIAL OF CRITICAL LEGAL STUDIES THROUGH A REEXAMINATION OF FRANKFURT SCHOOL CRITICAL THEORY JASON E. WHITEHEAD* I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seminar in Frankfurt School Critical Theory
    Seminar in Frankfurt School Critical Theory Professor Andrew Feenberg School of Communication tel: 604-291-5169 | email: [email protected] | www.sfu.ca/~andrewf This course introduces Frankfurt School Critical Theory through the writings of Benjamin, Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, and Habermas. The course also includes background readings in Marx and Lukács. The course presupposes some knowledge of Marx’s work and the philosophical tradition. If you do not know Marx, at the very least read Marx and Engels' Communist Manifesto carefully to get an idea what you’ve been missing. A minimal acquaintance with modern philosophy (Descartes to Kant) will be very helpful. I will lecture on the philosophical background and the more difficult texts. The course has six parts, as follows: Part I: The Marxist Background. The first assignment consists of Marx’s early “Manuscripts of 1844” and Marcuse’s interpretation of this text. We will read next a selection from the founding text of Western Marxism, Lukacs's History and Class Consciousness, followed by Horkheimer’s classic introduction to Critical Theory. Part II: The Fate of Enlightenment. The second part of the course includes several texts by Marcuse on individuality and science followed by the first chapter of Horkheimer and Adorno's Dialectic of Enlightenment. Part III: On Art. This section includes classic articles on art by Benjamin and Marcuse. The selection brings together Benjamin’s theory of the aura and his rather open view of mass culture and Marcuse’s critique of bourgeois culture. Part IV: Mass Culture. This section includes the chapter on the culture industry from Dialectic of Enlightenment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Frankfurt School Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Freely Available at The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://www.iep.utm.edu/frankfur/ Claudio Corradetti The Frankfurt School and Critical Theory The Frankfurt School, also known as the Institute of Social Research ( Institut für Sozialforschung ), is a social and political philosophical movement of thought located in Frankfurt am Main, Germany. It is the original source of what is known as Critical Theory . The Institute was founded, thanks to a donation by Felix Weil in 1923, with the aim of developing Marxist studies in Germany. The Institute eventually generated a specific school of thought after 1933 when the Nazis forced it to close and move to the United States, where it found hospitality at Columbia University, New York. The academic influence of the “critical” method is far reaching in terms of educational institutions in which such tradition is taught and in terms of the problems it addresses. Some of its core issues involve the critique of modernities and of capitalist society, the definition of social emancipation and the perceived pathologies of society. Critical theory provides a specific interpretation of Marxist philosophy and reinterprets some of its central economic and political notions such as commodification, reification, fetishization and critique of mass culture. Some of the most prominent figures of the first generation of Critical Theorists are Max Horkheimer (1895-1973), Theodor Adorno (1903-1969), Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), Walter Benjamin (1892-1940), Friedrich Pollock (1894-1970), Leo Lowenthal (1900-1993), Eric Fromm (1900-1980). Since the 1970s, the second generation has been led by Jürgen Habermas who has greatly contributed to fostering the dialogue between the so called “continental” and “analytical” tradition.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Theory CHRISTIAN FUCHS University of Westminster, UK
    Critical Theory CHRISTIAN FUCHS University of Westminster, UK Introduction Critical theory is an approach that studies society in a dialectical way by analyzing polit- ical economy, domination, exploitation, and ideologies. It is a normative approach that is based on the judgment that domination is a problem, that a domination-free society is needed. It wants to inform political struggles that want to establish such a society. Tequestionofwhatitmeanstobecriticalisofhighimportanceforpoliticalcommu- nication. All contemporary political communication is in a specifc way critical because it consists of speech acts that normally question political opinions and practices of cer- tain actors. Modern politics is a highly competitive system, in which elections and war- fare are ways of distributing and redistributing power. Tis understanding of critique stands in the tradition of Kantian enlightenment that considered the Enlightenment as an age of criticism. In contrast to Kant’s general understanding of critique, Karl Marx and the Marxian tradition understands the categoric imperative as the need to over- come all forms of slavery and degradation and to unmask alienation. Tis school of thought points out a more specifc understanding of being critical, namely the question- ing of power, domination, and exploitation, the political demand and struggle for a just society. Critical theory is understood as a critique of society. Scholars in the Marxian- inspired tradition employ the term “critical” to stress that not all science is critical, but that a lot of it has a more administrative character that takes power structures for granted, does not question them, or helps to legitimate them. What is critical theory? Some defne critical theory as the Frankfurt School’sworks, a tradition of critical think- ing that originated with the works of scholars like Herbert Marcuse, Max Horkheimer, and TeodorW.Adorno.HerbertMarcusewasaphilosopher,borninGermanyin1898, who fed Nazi Germany to the United States in 1934, where he spent the rest of his life.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIT 19 LUKACS, Gramscl and the FRANKFURT SCHOOL
    UNIT 19 LUKACS, GRAMSCl AND THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL Structure 1 9.1 Introduction 19.2 Georg Lultacs (1 885-1971 ) 19.2.1 Rejection of Dialectical Materialism 19.2.2 Denial of Lenin's Vanguard 1'11esis 19.2.3 Relation of Subject and Object 19.3 Antonio Grainsci (1 891-1937) 19.3.1 Notion of Hegemony 19.3.2 Role of Intellectuals 19.3.3 Philosophy of Praxis 19.3.4 Relation between the Base and the Super-Structure and the Notion of Historic Bloc 19.4 Frankfurt Scllool (Or Critical Theory) 19.4.1 Opposition to all Forms of Domination 19.4.2 Critique of O~thodoxMarxism 19.4.3 In Search of Emancipation 19.5 Summary 19.6 Exercises G' 19.1 INTRODUCTION In the previous unit, we have discussed the main ideas of the tl~reeprominent advocates of Marxism: Marx, Lenin and Mao. As indicated earlier, all the three have contributed not only to tile Marxist ~herzqv,but have also made significant contribution to revolutionary practice. This is particularly true of Lenin and Mao. In this unit, we propose to discuss another three major streams which have enriched Marxist theory. These are associated with Lukacs (a Hungarian), Gramsci (an Italian) and the Frankfurt School (Germany). It is important for you to remember that their contribution is more to theory than to revolutionarypractice. It is also useful to bear in mind that besides these three, there are several others like Trotsky, Plekhanov, Stajanovic, Altllusser, Kolakowski and Poulantazas etc. who have aIso contributed to the thcory of Marxism.
    [Show full text]