Filozofija i drustvo 2021 Volume 32, Issue 1, Pages: 5-10
https://doi.org/10.2298/FID2101005R
Full text ( 251 KB)
Arguing for classical critical theory
Rasmussen David M. (Boston College), david.rasmussen@bc.edu
In my view, making the case for a specific interpretation of Critical Theory
is problematic.1 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 Sørensen’s claims for the restoration of
classical Critical Theory on three levels: the scientific, the historical
and the political level.
Keywords: critical theory, Horkheimer, science, history, democracy