The main objective of this research is to explore the unique methodological and practical contributions of Frankfurt school Critical Theorists; the most important and influential group of leftist Intellectuals, Philosophers, Social, Political and Literary Theorists in the twentieth century Germany. This study focuses on the aims and revolutionary contributions of Frankfurt school of Social Research and Critical Theory with special reference to Max Horkheimer [1895-1971], Theodor W. Ardorno [ 1903- 1969], Herbert Marcuse [1898-1979] and Jurgen Habermas [ 1929- ] who have contributed for the Critical theory in a very intensive way in the contemporary philosophical traditions of the West. Max Horkheimer was the second Director of the Institute of Social Research of University of Frankfurt, who introduced the Critical Theory for the Frankfurt school of Social Research. Frankfurt school of social research is a school of thought and their critical theory expressed an explicit interest in the abolition of social injustice. Members of Frankfurt school were affiliated to the Institute of Social Research which was established in 1923. They were interested in critical theory which focuses on Neo – Marxist social theory, social research, Philosophy and the genuine interest in a radical change in the contemporary society with new methodological approaches.
No projects hold a more prominent place in the development of modern European thought than Critical Theory and its practical commitment towards building a better society. Though there were numerous members- Max Horkheimer, Theodo Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Eric Fromm, Friedrich Pollock, Leo Lowenthal, Walter Benjamin, Jurgen Habermas and others contributed intensively for the development of critical Theory, this study focuses mainly on the original works of Max Horkheimer, Theodono Ardono, Herbert Marcuse and Jurgen Habermas with special reference to one of their major works in Critical Theory.. Their unique contribution to social research and methodology was analyzed briefly for overall understanding. Max Horkheimer’s innovation on Traditional and Critical Theory [1937] and its focus on the distinction of Traditional and Critical Theory were evaluated in detail to understand the origins of Critical Theory. And this study on Frankfurt School of Social Research and Critical Theory is focused the important original writings of other major critical Theorists – Adorno, Marcuse and Habermas and this study will contribute to promote our social and political research with the genuine critique of modern society and politics in order to solve major problems in the present context with new methodological innovations.
Methodology of the Research
The quantitative and qualitative methodologies are being used as an integral manner in this research. The quantitative method is being used to identify the same problems in our present social and political context and the integral methodology is being used for the complete evaluation of this research. Max Horkheimer’s original writings- Traditional and Critical Theory [1937] is the Main focus of this Research and his other major writings such as Eclipse of Reason [1947], Dialectic of Enlightenment [with Theodor Adorno-1947], Critique of Instrumental Reason [1967], are being very briefly evaluated in phenomenological hermeneutic methodology. Theodor W. Adorno’s writings , Minima Moralia [1951], The Authoritarian Personality[ 1950], Prisms [ 1955], Against Epistemology [1956], Jargon of Authenticity [1964], Negative Dialectics [1966], Aesthetic Theory [1970] Introduction to the Sociology of Music[1976], Philosophy of Modern Music[1973], Notes to Literature[1992] were the original source analyzed in very brief manner as major contributions for the Critical Theory. Herbert Marcuse’s original writings Hegel’s ontology [1932], Reason and Revolution: Hegel and rise of Social Theory [1941], Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud [1955], One dimensional Man [1964], An Essay on Liberation [1969] Counter Revolution and Revolt [1972] and the Aesthetic Dimension: Toward a Critique of Marxist Aesthetics [1978] are briefly analyzed with the phenomenological hermeneutic approach with special reference to his Reason and Revolution
The second generation Frankfurt school’s Critical Theorist Jurgen Hagerman’s original writings Towards a Rational Society [1971], Knowledge and Human Interest [ 1972] Theory and Practice [1973], Legitimation Crisis [1973], Communication and Evolution of Society [1979], Theory of Communicative Action 2Vols [1984, 1987], Autonomy and Solidarity [1986], A Philosophical discourse of Modernity [1987], On the Logic of the Social Sciences [1988], The structural Transformation the Public Sphere [1989], Moral consciousness and Communicative Action [ 1990], Post Metaphysical Thinking [1992], Justification and Application [1993] are being briefly analyzed with the special reference to his book on Theory of Communicative Action. The overall research analyzes their new methodological approaches towards the social Research and their contribution towards building a society with justice.
In Sri Lankan context we are facing numerous problems related to the genuine social research and genuine commitment towards building a better society with the multidisciplinary research potentials. This study identifies following inadequacies and shortcomings in our social Research.
- Lack of Genuine commitment to implement interdisciplinary Social Research.
- Reluctant to adapt new methodologies with the interdisciplinary approach
- Dominant of traditional methods in the Social Research, especially, adopting the scientific method in a narrow sense, dominant of logical positivism or pure analytic trends and the orthodox Marxism.
- Lack of genuine innovations in new methodologies of Social Research
- Inadequacies in understanding of critical approach and critical theories
- Lack of philosophical background in understanding the universally recognized approaches in the field of social Research.
- Lack of reflexive understanding in the overall understanding of our social and political realities.
This study is attempting to give some suggestions to improve the systems in our Social research, in the Sri Lankan context. Evaluation of Frankfurt School of Social Research and Critical Theory and their contribution towards genuine social research with genuine commitment of social change will be very beneficial towards improving the meaningful change in our social research and commitment towards real social and political functions with justice.
Max Horkheimer [1895 – 1971]
Max Horkheimer distinction between traditional and critical theory is in one sense, merely repeated Karl Marx’s dictum that philosophers have always interpreted the world and the point is to change it. The Institute of Social Research and Frankfurt school, in its critique of ideology, has criticized some issues of the philosophical currents especially Positivism, Phenomenology, and Existentialism with an implied critique of contemporary Marxism which had turned dialectics into an alternative science or an ideological dogma. Inspired by interdisciplinary character Critical Theory has been enormously influential and controversial in its claims. This study will employ the emancipatory and interpretatory function of critical theory against its predominant forms of expression. Critical theory is not a system, or reducible to any systems of prescription, but seeks to reinvigorate the interdisciplinary character in social research. This model can be introduced to our social research with the critical perspectives to overcome the negative influences of certain philosophical ideologies, methodologies and to solve social and political problems.
Critical Theory was originally conceived by Max Horkheimer as a materialist enterprise but his version of materialism did not reject the issues of critique inherited from idealism and the commitment to the enlightenment heritage became evident in Horkheimer’s famous claim that the critical theory inherently involves the attempt to actualize the materialist content of idealist philosophy. Critical Theory in this sense continues the theoretical and methodological innovations undertaken by George Lukacs and Karl Korsch in early twenties. George Lukacs’s History and Class Consciousness [1923] and Karl Korsh’s Philosophy and Marxism [1920] influenced the Critical Theorists. Both Thinkers had also promoted a dialectical critique of crude materialism of orthodox Marxism and positivism as well as fixed and finished philosophical systems. Horkheimer’s critical materialism anticipates what has now become known as post metaphysical thinking. The use of ‘Critical theory’ as code word become evident in his early writings enabled a certain interpretation of Marxism to enter academic discourse. His Traditional and Critical Theory focuses on the distinction of traditional and critical theory. The Dialectic of Enlightenment is clearly a critique of enlightenment undertaken from the stand point of enlightenment itself and it remains a landmark in radical thought. Horkheimer expressed that he could philosophically maintain his commitment to emancipation only by turning away from the given historical reality. Horkheimer played an important role in defining the integration of philosophy and social sciences and social research in the Frankfurt school. The overall research of the critical theory of this period was to develop an experiential and historically grounded research projects which were fundamentally interdisciplinary, with aim of overcoming the adequacies of orthodox Marxist Theories of historical and social developments. Although the Institute of Social Research committed to the work in this period on the Hegelian Marxist Philosophy of history, the Frankfurt schools’ theories were criticized by the so- called post Marxist critics. This Frankfurt School started to incorporate elements previously rejected as Marxists ‘bourgeois’ such as the works of Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Max Weber, and Freud and of Hegel. Early Horkheimer’s writings were deeply influenced by only Marxism but later Horkheimer’s writings were on balance; for example Horkheimer says in his Materialism and Morality “Today it is claimed that the Bourgeois ideals of Freedom, Equality, and justice have proven themselves to be poor ones; how ever, it is not the ideals of the bourgeoisie, but conditions which do not correspond to them, which have shown untenability. The battle carries of the Enlightenment and of the French revolution are valid now more than ever. The dialectical critique of the world … consists precisely in the demonstration that they have retained their actuality rather than lost it on the basis of rational society, as they are anticipated in morality as a necessary goal… materialist theory certainly does not afford to the political actor the solace that will necessarily achieve his objective; it is not a metaphysics of history but rather a changing image of the world, evolving in relation to the practical efforts toward its improvement.
Horkheimer’s inaugural address was given as the Director of the Institute of social research, in which he outlined the interdisciplinary research approach of the Frankfurt school. His writings are deeply relevant to the current post philosophy debates, especially ‘On the problem of Truth’ with its focus on pragmatism and the ‘The Rationalism Debate in the current Philosophy’ deals with post Cartesian critique of Consciousness. Most of his essays are relevant to the current debates on continental philosophy. Horkheimer’s Socio-Philosophical aims are stated in 193 ‘The Present situation of Social Philosophy and the Tasks of an Institute f1 in his inaugural address in or Social Research’, that was a attempt to bring out the various social science methodologies of Marxism in an integral manner. Along with Horkheimer Adono worked for the aestheticization of Critical Social Theory. The Dialectic of Enlightenment is the major work of the second phase of critical theory.
Theodor. W Adorno
Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno was a philosopher, Composer, Social Theorist and Musician. Ardorno [1903 – 1969], was one of the first generation of the Frankfurt school of Critical Theory. He focused on theory of culture, art and Music. Later he turned to the problem of the dialectic of modern reason and freedom. In 1927 Adorno began to associate with Horkheimer and other members of the institute of social research, which later would be referred as the “Frankfurt School.” Adorno is best known in the English – Speaking world for two his major philosophical publications – Negative Dialectics and Aesthetic Theory. Adorno was suspicious about systematic Philosophy and doubted whether true thinking could ever achieve transparency he says “ True thoughts are those alone which do not understand themselves.’ []
He was critical about systematic Philosophy and methodological thinking. Adorno’s involvement with music art and literature especially his interest in Philosophy, is the best considered a means of overcoming the pure rational approach of any social problem. This re- introduces the Kantian Aesthetic epistemology and the continuation of the Aesthetic epistemological tradition. And In the Dialectic of Enlightenment Adorno and coauthor Horkheimer deals with the reflective understanding, with subjectivity and subjective reason , this attempt reminds us the precursors of subjective reason and the systematic Philosophy. Subjective reason is best characterized in the reflexive reason. Adorno’s response to the critique structure and subjectivity would be to recommend its transcendence , in other words a kind of Nietzschean overcoming of all the traditional forms of subjectivity, and Adorno’s commitment towards avoiding systematic philosophizing and the critique focuses on subjectivity needs to be interpreted in new progressive ways. Yet this critique does not undermine the scope of subjectivity, rather it elaborates the scope of subjectivity as a dialectical, historical process. Adorno criticized the limitations of the traditional interpretation of Subjectivity.
The Experience of European fascism and the second World War disillusioned Horkheimer and Adorno to the possibility of a positive program of social inquiry based on an emancipatory and normative concept of Reason derived from the tradition of Enlightenment. They were critical of Orthodox Marxism and Methodology and turning towards Nietzscean and Weberian themes. This skepticism regarding the emancipatory potential of science as a whole led them this time to abandon the former goal of empirical, scientific interdisciplinary research program. And their focus and the theoretical interest devoted to the cultural and aesthetic criticism.
Herbert Marcuse
Herbert Marcuse has contributed Philosophy, Aesthetics and social Sciences and Psychoanalytic Theory and Aesthetic of Alienation. He first published his work on Contributions on phenomenology of historical Materialism in 1928.Throuout most of his life Marcuse remained as Hegelian Marxist and critically developed Marxist dialectics in his own continental tradition to address the problems of racial and ethnic prejudice, fascism, alienation and mass culture in the context of Capitalism. He became very influential in the New Left politics during the period of 6os and 70s. Marcuse’s Critical theory synthesized and developed the insights he got from diverse background in phenomenology, existentialism, humanist Marxist and Freudian Psychoanalysis. He reconciled Marxism with dialectical Phenomenology,
Hegel, too, believed in a unity of thought and being, but, as we have already seen, his conception of the unity differed from Kant’s. He rejected Kant’s idealism on the ground that it assumed the existence of ‘things-in-themselves’ apart from ‘phenomena’, and left these ‘things’ untouched by the human mind and therefore untouched by reason. The Kantian philosophy left a gulf between thought and being, or between subject and object, which the Hegelian philosophy sought to bridge. The bridge was to be made by positing one universal structure of all being. Being was to be a process wherein a thing ‘comprehends’ or ‘grasps’ the various states of its existence and draws them into the more or less enduring unity of its ‘self’, thus actively constituting itself as ‘the same’ throughout all change. Everything, in other words, exists more or less as a ‘subject’. The identical structure of movement that thus runs through the entire realm of being unites the objective and subjective worlds.
Hegel, too, believed in a unity of thought and being, but, as we have already seen, his conception of the unity differed from Kant’s. He rejected Kant’s idealism on the ground that it assumed the existence of ‘things-in-themselves’ apart from ‘phenomena’, and left these ‘things’ untouched by the human mind and therefore untouched by reason. The Kantian philosophy left a gulf between thought and being, or between subject and object, which the Hegelian philosophy sought to bridge. The bridge was to be made by positing one universal structure of all being. Being was to be a process wherein a thing ‘comprehends’ or ‘grasps’ the various states of its existence and draws them into the more or less enduring unity of its ‘self’, thus actively constituting itself as ‘the same’ throughout all change. Everything, in other words, exists more or less as a ‘subject’. The identical structure of movement that thus runs through the entire realm of being unites the objective and subjective worlds
The history of the human world does not begin with the struggle between the individual and nature, since the individual is really a later product in human history. The community comes first, although in a ready-made, ‘immediate’ form. It is as yet not a rational community and does not have freedom as its quality. Consequently, it soon splits up into numerous antagonisms. Hegel calls this original unity in the historical world ‘consciousnesses, thus re-emphasizing that we have entered a realm in which everything has the character of the subject.
The first form consciousness assumes in history is not that of an individual but of a universal consciousness, perhaps best represented as the consciousness of a primitive group with all individuality submerged in the community. Feelings, sensations, and concepts are not properly the individual’s but are shared among all, so that the common and not the particular determine the consciousness. But even this unity contains opposition; consciousness is what it is only through its opposition to its objects. To be sure, these, as objects of consciousness, are ‘comprehended objects’ or objects that cannot be divorced from the subject. Their ‘being comprehended’ is part of their character as objects. Either side of the opposition, consciousness or its objects thus has the form of subjectivity, as do all the other types of opposition in the realm of mind. The integration of the opposing elements can only be integration within subjectivity.
The world of man develops, Hegel says, in a series of integrations of opposites. In the first stage, the subject and its object take the form of consciousness and its concepts; in the second stage, they appear as the individual in conflict with other individuals; and in the final stage they appear as the nation. The last stage alone represents the attainment of a lasting integration between subject and object; the nation has its object in itself; its effort is directed solely towards reproducing itself. Corresponding to the three stages are three different ‘media’ of integration: language, labour, and property.
Language is the medium in which the first integration between subject and object takes place. It is also the first actual community in the sense that it is objective and shared by all individuals. On the other hand, language is the first medium of individuation, for through it the individual obtains mastery over the objects he knows and names. A man is able to stake out his sphere of influence and keep others from it only when he knows his world, is conscious of his needs and powers, and communicates this knowledge to others. Language is thus also the first level of appropriation. [Marcuse in Reason and Revolution]
Marcuse developed in his Reason and Revolution the foundations of Hegel’s Philosophy and its historical and philosophical settings. And he traces the roots of Philosophical foundations for social Theory. He further analyzed the dialectical foundations of Social Theory, and also discussed about the foundations of positivism and sociology and the end of Hegelianism. The neo- approaches of the social theory and the revision of the dialectics also being analyzed by Herbert Marcuse in his Reason and Revolution.
Jurgen Habermas [1929- ]
Jurgen Habermas is a leading German Sociologist and Philosopher in the tradition of the second generation of the Frankfurt school of social research and the critical theory. His writings focus on foundations of social theory and epistemology. He analyzes the advanced Capitalist Societies and Democracy and the rule of law in the critical social evolutionary programs in the contemporary politics. His theoretical system is devoted to re introduce the nature of reason and its practical implementation. He uses and reveals the reason’s function in the social emancipation and Critical theory deals with the rational critical communication of ethics in the social and political context.
Habermas currently ranks as one of the most influential living Philosopher of the world, he is bridging the two major current trends of the western philosophy-bridging the continental and the Anglo- American traditions of thought. His extensive written work addresses to Social Political Theory to Aesthetics, Epistemology to Language Philosophy and Philosophy of Religion of the Critical Theory. His Ideas influenced the political and legal Theories, sociology, Communication Studies Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric. He represents the linguistic turn of the Critical Theory and his Theory of communicative Action deals with the Reason and the Rationalization of Society. In this book Habermas analyzes the problem of Rationality and the aspects of rationality in the sociological concepts of Action. He elucidates the problem of understanding the meaning of the Social Sciences. This study focuses on Habermas’s Theory of Communicative Action and Habermas understands on Max Weber’s Theory of Rationalization. And Habermas focuses in this work the rationalization of Max Weber in the tradition of the Western Marxism, and Lukacs to Adorno to understand the rationalization as Reification. He also deals with the Critique of Instrumental Reason.
Habermas’s encounter with speech act theory proved to be particularly decisive for this project. In speech act theory, he finds the basis for a conception of communicative competence (on the model of Chomsky’s linguistic competence). Given this emphasis on language, Habermas is often said to have taken a kind of “linguistic turn” in this period. He framed his first essays on formal pragmatics (1976ab) as an alternative to Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory. Habermas understands formal pragmatics as one of the “reconstructive sciences,” which aim to render theoretically explicit the intuitive, pretheoretical know-how underlying such basic human competences as speaking and understanding, judging and acting. Unlike Kant’s transcendental analysis of the conditions of rationality, reconstructive sciences yield knowledge that is not necessary but hypothetical, not a priori but empirical, not certain but fallible. They are nevertheless directed to invariant structures and conditions and raise universal, but defensible claims to an account of practical reason.
With the turn to language and reconstructive science, Habermas undermines both of the traditional Kantian roles for philosophy: philosophy as the sole judge in normative matters and as the methodological authority that assigns the various domains of inquiry to their proper questions. In Habermas’s view, philosophy must engage in a fully cooperative relationship with the social sciences and the empirical disciplines in general. This step is completed in The Theory of Communicative Action, to which, this study focuses deeply to understand Habermas’s Critical Theory. This book is one of the broadest, most comprehensive, elaborate and intensive Theoretical works in the field of Social Theory and the Theory of Communicative Action represents a major contribution to the contemporary social theory.
This Study also identified in our country, the problems and the influences of orthodox Marxism and Positivism in the fields of Education, Research, Social Sciences, Social and Political Cultures undermine the genuine progress of our society in its practical fields. The social sciences and the social research should have critical approach with new rational revolutionary focus in order to have progressive change in the society and in the field political culture. The following suggestions will be give to improve our Social Research and genuine commitments towards the ethical Social change and to improve the present situation of the Social and political culture.
I] Change the Traditional approaches and Methodologies in the field of Social Research with deeper understanding of Philosophy and with the Critical understanding
II] Bridging the gap of Anglo- American Analytic Philosophy and the Continental Philosophy.
III] Introducing integral Philosophical methodology for Critical genuine Social Research
IV] Implementation of genuine commitment towards the social Research in the universities and other social organizations for real social change for a better just society.
V] Improving the practical reflexive sociological understanding with deeper practical progressive ideologies.
This Research project on the Frankfurt School of Social Research and Critical Theory as pioneering work on the field of social Research with real commitment towards understanding the Sri Lankan society and to implement new methodologies to improve our social system for better future in the present context.
Select Bibliography
1] Max Horkheimer [1937], Traditional and Critical Theory: Selected Essays, Seabury, New York 1972
2] Max Horkheimer [With Adorno 1947], Dialectic of Enlightenment, Verso, London1979
3] Max Horkheimer [1947], Eclipse of Reason, New, Seabury, New York, 1974
4] Max Horkheimer, [1967], Critique of Instrumental Reason, Seabury, New York, 1974
5] Stephen Eric Bronner, [1994], Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists, Blackwell, U.K
6] Rolf Wiggershaus, [1986], The Frankfurt School, Polity Press, U.K
7] Max Horkheimer, Trd by Fredrick Hunter, Mathew S. Kramer, and John Torpey,
Between Philosophy and Social Sciences, The MIT Press, USA 1993
8] Ed by Tom Huhn, The Cambridge Companion to Adorno, Cambridge University press, USA, 2004
9] Theodor W. Adorno, Aesthetic Theory, Continuum USA 1997.
10] Theodor W.Adorno, Negative Dialectics, Seabury, USA 1973
11] Ed by Richard Kearney and Mara Rainwater, The continental Philosophy Reader, Routledge, USA 1996
12] David Held, Introduction to Critical Theory –Horkheimer to Habermas, Hutchinson, South Africa 1980
13] Herbert Marcuse, Studies in Critical Theory, Trd by Joris De Bres, NLB , UK. 1972
14] Herbert Marcuse, Reason and Revolution: Hegel and the Rise of Social Theory, Oxford University Press, UK 1941
15] Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical inquiry into Freud, Beacon Press, USA 1955
16] Herbert Marcuse, The Aesthetic Dimension: toward a critique of Marxist Aesthetics, Boston, Beacon Press, USA 1978
17] Herbert Marcuse, One Dimensional: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced industrial Society, Boston, Beacon Press, USA 1964.
18] Jurgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action; Reason and Rationalization of Society, Trd by Thomas McCarthy, Beacon Press, USA 1984 VOL I& II
19] Jurgen Habermas, Towards a Rational Society, Boston, Beacon Press, USA 1971
20] Jurgen Habermas, Knowledge and Human Interests, Boston, Beacon Press, USA , 1972
21] Jurgen Habermas, Moral Consciousness and communicative Action Cabridge , Mass, MIT press , USA , 1990
22] Jurgen Habermas, Post Metaphysical Thinking, Cambridge Mass, MIT Press, USA 1992
Mallika Rajaratnam
University of Peradeniya/Catholic University of America
