No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Critical Theory and Social Organization
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 April 2024
Extract
Critical Theory is usually associated with an intellectual tradition which emerged from the work of a group of social philosophers who coalesced around the Institute for Social Research, established in Frankfurt in 1923. This tradition is now considered to have two major branches: the first related to the work of Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse, Erich Fromm, Leo Lowenthal, and Walter Benjamin, while the second pertains to the expansion of this original work which has been proffered by Jürgen Habermas, Claus Offe, Niklas Luhmann, Karl-Otto Apel, and others. It should be immediately noted that Critical Theory does not form a unity, for it does mean different things to both its early and current adherents. Without overstating the case, however, the common theme which unites these theorists is a dislike for the types of determinism which saw socialism arising automatically from either appropriate social conditions or at the behest of elite party members. In each case the belief was inadvertently advanced that people do not make their own history. In line with the work of Lukács and Korsch, these critical theorists wanted to develop a more vital Marxist theory, one which understands human praxis to be at the center of social development and, thus, human liberation.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1982 Fédération Internationale des Sociétés de Philosophie / International Federation of Philosophical Societies (FISP)
Footnotes
*
This paper is an outgrowth of a larger work which attempts to critique modern humanistic management philosophy (as promulgated by Frederick Herzberg, Abraham Maslow, and Douglas McGregor) in terms of the method offered by Critical Theory. Subsequent to this critique, I proffer some new approaches to understanding the social organization of the workplace, one of which is Critical Theory.
References
1 Gibson Burrell and Gareth Morgan, Sociological Paradigms and Organiz ational Analysis, London, Heinemann, 1979, pp. 310-325.
2 Jürgen Habermas, "Towards a Theory of Communicative Competence", in Recent Sociology, No. 2., H-P Dreitzel, New York, The MacMillan Co., 1970, pp. 115-148.
3 John E. Baird, The Dynamics of Organizational Communication, New York, Harper and Row, 1977, p. 6.
4 Ibid., pp. 257-296.
5 Jerry W. Koehler, Karl W.E. Anatol and Ronald L. Applbaum, Organiz ational Communication: Behavioral Perspectives, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1976, pp. 42-58.
6 Aubrey C. Stanford, Gary T. Hunt and Hyler J. Bracey, Communication Behavior in Organizations, Columbus, Ohio, Charles E. Merrill Co., 1976, pp. 183-251.
7 Jürgen Habermas, "Toward a Theory of Communicative Competence", Recent Sociology, 2, p. 130.
8 Ibid., p. 134.
9 Ibid., p. 140.
10 Jürgen Habermas, Communication and the Evolution of Society, Boston, Beacon Press. 1979, p. 98; p. 104.
11 Jürgen Habermas, Legitimation Crisis, Boston, Beacon Press, 1974, p. 4.
12 Karl-Otto Apel, Towards a Transformation of Philosophy, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1980, p. 138.
13 Ibid., p. 151.
14 Ibid., p. 248.
15 Luhmann, Niklas, Trust and Power, New York, John Wiley, 1979, p. 11.
16 Ibid. p. 13.
17 Ibid., p. 18.
18 Ibid., p. 28.
19 Offe, Claus, Industry and Inequality, London, Edward Arnold, 1979, p. 25ff.
20 Ibid., p. 29.