Arguing for Classical Critical Theory

In my view, making the case for a specific interpretation of Critical Theory is problematic. Although the term has a prestigious origin stemming from Horkheimer’s 1937 paper, Traditional and Critical Theory,2 given during his term as Director of the Institute for Social Research at Frankfurt Univers...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inFilozofija i društvo (Zbornik radova) Vol. 32; no. 1; pp. 5 - 10
Main Author Rasmussen, David
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory 2021
Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju
Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, Belgrade
Subjects
critical theory
democracy
History
History of Philosophy
horkheimer
Philosophy
science
critical theory
Horkheimer
history
democracy
science
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:In my view, making the case for a specific interpretation of Critical Theory is problematic. Although the term has a prestigious origin stemming from Horkheimer’s 1937 paper, Traditional and Critical Theory,2 given during his term as Director of the Institute for Social Research at Frankfurt University and generating the enthusiasm of its members, the term and the movement associated would be defined and radically redefined not only by subsequent generations but by its very author. One of the merits of the book under discussion is that even before the first chapter an ‘Interlude’ is presented entitled Arguing for Classical Critical Theory signifying to the reader that Horkheimer got it right when he defined the subject and that it is possible to return to that particular definition after 83 years. This paper challenges Professor Sorensen’s claims for the restoration of classical Critical Theory on three levels: the scientific, the historical and the political level
ISSN:0353-5738
2334-8577
DOI:10.2298/FID2101005R