Time, Labor and Social Domination: A Reinterpretation of Marx's Critical Theory.

1994 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Clarke ◽  
Moishe Postone
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
Social Domination

Time, Labor, and Social Domination: A Reinterpretation of Marx's Critical Theory.

Social Forces ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 1172
Author(s):  
Richard D. Wolff ◽  
Moishe Postone
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
Social Domination

Time, Labor and Social Domination: A Reinterpretation of Marx's Critical Theory.

1995 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Fracchia ◽  
Moishe Postone
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
Social Domination

Herrschaft begreifen: Anerkennung und Macht in Axel Honneths kritischer Theorie

2014 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Allen
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
Recognition Model ◽  
Axel Honneth ◽  
Social Domination ◽  
Satisfactory Analysis ◽  
Struggle For Recognition

AbstractAxel Honneth frames his contribution to the tradition of critical theory as an attempt to do justice to both the structures of social domination in contemporary Western societies and the practical resources for their overcoming. This paper assesses how well Honneth’s critical theory, which centers on the notion of the struggle for recognition, accomplishes the first of these two tasks. I argue that Honneth has yet to offer a fully satisfactory analysis of domination because his recognition model is unable to make sense of modes of subordination that function without producing any struggle.

The Trouble with Logical Positivism: Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno, and the Origins of Critical Theory

2019 ◽  
pp. 25-64
Author(s):  
Matthew Handelman
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
First Generation ◽  
Logical Positivism ◽  
Instrumental Reason ◽  
Max Horkheimer ◽  
Social Domination ◽  
History Of ◽  
Authoritarian Government ◽  
And Mathematics

How did critical theory, at least as it was first envisioned by Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno, come to be so opposed to mathematics? Chapter 1 examines the transformation of Horkheimer, Adorno, and Walter Benjamin’s prewar confrontation with Logical Positivism into a history of thinking that equated mathematics with the downfall of Enlightenment. According to the first generation of critical theorists, the reduction of philosophy to the operations and symbols of mathematics, as proposed by Logical Positivists such as Otto Neurath and Rudolph Carnap, rendered modern philosophy politically impotent and acquiesced to the powers of industry and authoritarian government. This initial phase of critical theory defined itself against the Logical Positivists’ equation of thought and mathematics, subsuming mathematics in their interpretation of reason’s return to myth and barbarism. Horkheimer and Adorno’s postwar texts and the work of second-generation critical theorists perpetuated this image of mathematics, canonizing it as an archetype of instrumental reason, reification, and social domination.

scholarly journals The concept of social domination in axel Honneth’s critical theory

Sociologija ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-24
Author(s):  
Marjan Ivkovic
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
Group Dynamics ◽  
Theoretical Perspective ◽  
Central Place ◽  
Recent Attempt ◽  
Theoretic Approach ◽  
Early Article ◽  
Theoretical System ◽  
Social Domination ◽  
Influential Theory

This paper attempts to reconstruct the concept of social domination articulated in the early works of Axel Honneth, a key figure of the ?third generation? of critical theory. The author argues that one of the key ambitions of the early Honneth, expressed through his critique of Jurgen Habermas, was to theorize the process of societal reproduction in contemporary capitalism in ?action-theoretic? terms, i.e. as determined by the inter-group dynamics of social conflict and domination, as opposed to Habermas? systems-theoretic approach. The author analyzes Honneth?s criticism of Habermas developed in ?The Critique of Power?, and focuses more narrowly on Honneth?s conceptualization of social domination outlined in the early article ?Moral Conscioussness and Class Domination?. The analysis grounds the author?s subsequent reconstruction of the early Honneth?s conception of social domination as a two-dimensional phenomenon that encompasses an ?intentional? and a ?structural? dimension. Turning towards Honneth?s mature perspective, the author argues that a critique of social domination no longer occupies a central place in Honneth?s influential theory of recognition. Finally, the author considers Honneth?s only recent attempt at theorizing domination presented in the article ?Recognition as Ideology?, and argues that Honneth has so far missed the opportunity to integrate the early social-theoretical perspective on domination into his mature theoretical system.

scholarly journals K metodě kritické teorie a jejímu rozvíjení v „novém čtení Marxe“

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 20-47
Author(s):  
Martin Nový
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
Capitalist Society ◽  
Constituent Power ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Domination ◽  
The Way

Tato studie se zabývá problémem metody v kritické teorii. Nejprve zkoumá ustavující texty, v nichž založili Horkheimer a Marcuse kritickou teorii jako dialektický a materialistický přístup k analýze kapitalistické společnosti adekvátní její objektivně-abstraktní povaze. Stať diskutuje též Hegela a Marxe, nejdůležitější předchůdce frankfurtské školy, a způsob, jímž kritická teorie čerpá z jejich děl. Dále příspěvek obrací svou pozornost k Adornovým metodologickým postulátům, jež vyústily v analytické kategorie „reálné abstrakce“ a „objektivní konceptuality“. Reichelt a Backhaus vyšli z Adorna, jehož byli žáky, a interpretovali v tradici kritické teorie Marxovo dílo jako úsilí o zachycení určité kvality procesu inverze, v němž je práce, lidská moc ustavující společnost, nahrazena sociálním panstvím kapitalistických abstrakcí, které degradují její tvůrčí potenciál. Nové čtení Marxe dále analyzuje mizení smyslovosti v říši nadsmyslné reality kapitálu jako vůdčí hegeliánský motiv v celé Marxově práci. The essay deals with the problem of method in Critical theory. Firstly, it explores the constituent texts in which Horkheimer and Marcuse founded Critical theory as a dialectical and materialist approach for analysing capitalist society in terms of its objectively-abstract nature. It discusses its most important predecessors – Hegel and Marx – and the way critical theory is based on their works. Secondly, the essay turns its attention to Adorno's methodological postulates that resulted into analytical categories of ‘real abstraction’ and ‘objective conceptuality’. Building upon Adorno, their mentor, Reichelt and Backhaus interpreted, in the tradition of critical theory, Marx's oeuvre as an endeavour to catch determinate quality of the process of inversion in which labour, humanity's constituent power, is displaced and demoted by the social domination of capitalist abstractions. The neue Marx-Lektüre further analyses the disappearance of sensuousness in the realm of supersensible reality of capital as the defining Hegelian motive in Marx.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document