Observations like these suggest that there are multiple shifts in emphasis between the many different texts that comprise the canon of Critical Theory but no definitive and central shift of perspective. He also points out, though, that several projects that involved empirical research, and which were begun in parallel with and completed after Dialectic of Enlightenment, closely followed the programme of Critical Theory as formulated by Horkheimer in the 1930s, including proposals for reform of the education system meant to prevent the emergence of the ‘authoritarian character’ prone to fascist mobilization (Schmid Noerr, 1987: 448). Schmid Noerr, one of the most authoritative commentators in the German-language literature, asserts that in his writings from the 1930s Horkheimer had seemed more optimistic about the possibility that Critical Theory could be articulated with critical empirical scholarship as well as radical political action than Dialectic of Enlightenment suggests (Schmid Noerr, 1987: 437). There is a general tendency to overstate the extent to which Dialectic of Enlightenment constitutes a turning point in Critical Theory. Much of it is meta-theoretical and often sidesteps detailed textual analysis. The secondary literature on Dialectic of Enlightenment is vast but most contributions focus on one isolated aspect or chapter of the book.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |