Corradetti, Claudio. "The Frankfurt School and Critical Theory." INTERNET ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY October 21, 2011.

The Frankfurt School, also known as the Institute of Social Research (Institut für Sozialforschung), is a social and political philosophical movement of thought located in Frankfurt am Main, Germany. It is the original source of what is known as Critical Theory. The Institute was founded, thanks to a donation by Felix Weil in 1923, with the aim of developing Marxist studies in Germany. The Institute eventually generated a specific school of thought after 1933 when the Nazis forced it to close and move to the United States, where it found hospitality at Columbia University, New York.

The academic influence of the “critical” method is far reaching in terms of educational institutions in which such tradition is taught and in terms of the problems it addresses. Some of its core issues involve the critique of modernities and of capitalist society, the definition of social emancipation and the perceived pathologies of society. Critical theory provides a specific interpretation of Marxist philosophy and reinterprets some of its central economic and political notions such as commodification, reification, fetishization and critique of mass culture.

Some of the most prominent figures of the first generation of Critical Theorists are Max Horkheimer (1895-1973), Theodor Adorno (1903-1969), Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), Walter Benjamin (1892-1940), Friedrich Pollock (1894-1970), Leo Lowenthal (1900-1993), Eric Fromm (1900-1980). Since the 1970s, the second generation has been led by Jürgen Habermas who has greatly contributed to fostering the dialogue between the so called “continental” and “analytical” tradition. This phase has also been substantiated by the works of Ralf Dahrendorf, Gerhard Brandt, Alfred Schmidt, Klaus Offe, Oskar Negt, Albrecht Wellmer and Ludwig von Friedeburg, Lutz Wingert, Josef Früchtl, Lutz-Bachman. More generally, it is possible to speak of a “third generation” of critical theorists, symbolically represented in Germany by the influential work of Axel Honneth. The philosophical impact of the school has been worldwide. Early in the second decade of the twenty-first century, a fourth generation of critical theory scholars emerged and coalesced around one of Honneth’s most proactive representatives: Rainer Forst.

The “first generation” of critical theorists was largely occupied with the functional and conceptual re-qualification of Hegel’s dialectics. After Habermas, preference has been assigned to the understanding of the conditions of action coordination through the underpinning of the conditions of validity for speech-acts. The third generation, then, following the works of Honneth, turned back to Hegel’s philosophy and in particular to Hegel’s notion of “recognition” as a cognitive and pre-linguistic sphere grounding intersubjectivity. . . .

http://www.iep.utm.edu/frankfur/

Westerman, Richard. Review of David Ingram, ed. CRITICAL THEORY TO STRUCTURALISM. NDPR (August 2011).

Ingram, David, ed.  Vol. 5  Critical Theory to Structuralism: Philosophy, Politics, and the Human Sciences.  Vol. 5 of The History of Continental Philosophy.  8 Vols.  Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2010.

According to Hegel, "the history of Philosophy is not a blind collection of fanciful ideas, nor a fortuitous progression," but rather a "necessary development of the successive philosophies from one another, so that the one of necessity presupposes another preceding it." In the end, a history of philosophy narrates the unfolding of "one Philosophy, the contemporary differences of which constitute the necessary aspects of the one principle." Hegel's strictures are perhaps particularly relevant for any history of continental philosophy: though it may be arguable whether the term refers to any coherent school, one thing that unites many of those identified as continental philosophers is that they develop their own ideas in direct engagement with the historical tradition.

Chicago's handsome new eight-volume History of Continental Philosophy is therefore a very welcome addition to the literature: their comprehensive catalogue of the "tradition that has its roots in several different ways of approaching and responding to Immanuel Kant's critical philosophy" will help both the novice and the specialist trace a path through the often-convoluted genealogies of contemporary continental philosophy. Whilst the publishers' website refers to the project as "the most comprehensive reference work to date," the Series Preface suggests an intention to follow Hegel's guidance. There, the series is described as "a coherent and comprehensive account of the continental philosophical tradition." The editors acknowledge that "telling the history of continental philosophy cannot simply take the form of a chronologically organized series of 'great thinker' essays" (pp. vii-viii).

David Ingram takes on the job of editing Volume Five of the collection -- a difficult task, since most of the writers covered in this volume did not treat philosophical problems in isolation, but instead both used philosophical ideas to interpret social and political problems and also tried to answer philosophical questions with reference to the social sciences. As he explains in a comprehensive, clear introduction, "the figures, schools of thought, and themes represented in this volume can best be understood as responses to this chronic crisis of modernity and, more specifically, the liberal state." (p. 1) Ingram rightly highlights the way this practical crisis led to a deeper philosophical scepticism about the value of reason. Hanging over this volume, then, is the fundamental question of disciplinary boundary: how far can normative philosophical arguments be applied to concrete social or political problems, and what is left to philosophy when other disciplines begin to answer some of its central questions? . . .

http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/25759-critical-theory-to-structuralism-philosophy-politics-and-the-human-sciences/

Calcagno, Antonio. Review of Alan D. Schrift, ed. POSTSTRUCTURALISM AND CRITICAL THEORY'S SECOND GENERATION. NDPR (August 2011).

Schrift, Alan D., ed.  Poststructuralism and Critical Theory's Second Generation.  Vol. 6 of The History of Continental Philosophy.  8 Vols.  Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2010.

Alan's Schrift's work, as scholar, philosopher and editor, is known for both its acuity and rigour. This volume of his The History of Continental Philosophy is yet another testament to Schrift's ability to gather leading scholars around an important theme, ultimately producing an excellent history of and guide to more recent developments in Continental philosophy. Volume 6: Poststructuralism and Critical Theory's Second Generation consists of 17 entries that commence with the reception of Nietzsche's thought into recent French philosophy and end with a discussion of Rorty among the Continentals, covering a period of Continental philosophy from about 1945 to 2007. The volume is also supplemented with a useful bibliography of major works relevant to the period as well as a chronology that simultaneously lists major philosophical, cultural and political events. This certainly helps situate thinkers, ideas and movements within the context of events in general but also within the broader developments in philosophy, including the Anglo-American and analytic traditions.

The volume opens with a preface by Schrift in which he explains the evolution of Continental philosophy. He notes,

"Continental Philosophy" itself is a contested concept. For some, it is understood to be any philosopher after 1780 originating on the European continent . . . . Such an understanding would make Georg von Wright or Rudolf Carnap . . . a "continental philosopher," an interpretation neither they nor their followers would easily accept. For others, "continental philosophy" refers to a style of philosophizing, one more attentive to the world of experience and less focused on a rigorous analysis of concepts or linguistic usage. (vii)

Rather than focus on a discussion of what constitutes Continental philosophy proper, Schrift maintains that one way to approach the question is to focus on the history of Continental philosophy, thereby avoiding nettling, polemical discussions between analytic and Continental philosophers. What we have, then, is the presentation of the content of a tradition broadly defined. This broad approach is both comprehensive and yields much food for thought about the particular philosophers discussed as well as the tradition as a whole, its past, present and future.

Schrift is not only the General Editor for the History but he also serves as the Editor of the poststructuralism volume. In total, there are eight volumes that constitute the whole History. In his Introduction to the present volume, Schrift sets the stage for poststructuralism, "French" Feminism and second-generation critical thinkers. Though he is mindful that poststructuralism has roots that go deeper than the turbulent years of the 1960s on the Continent, he begins with the theme of conflict and change that mark those years. Key in the development of poststructuralism in France was not only the death of philosophy as the master-discourse, mostly through the structuralists' engagements with the social sciences, but also the death of existentialism, which privileged subjectivity and consciousness. (5) Schrift identifies Foucault, Deleuze and Derrida as laying the groundwork for what would become dominant in the remainder of the twentieth century as Continental philosophy. . . .

http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/25628-poststructuralism-and-critical-theory-s-second-generation/

"Thinking Feeling: Critical Theory, Culture, Feeling," University of Sussex, May 18-19, 2012.

‘Happiness is obsolete: uneconomic’ (Theodor Adorno, Minima Moralia)

As the recent UK riots indicate, there is no escaping the fact that economics provokes, amongst other things, strong feelings. Whether we like it or not, a neoliberal language of economics now pervades and colours our inner ‘private’ emotional lives; the government’s emerging plans to compile
a ‘happiness index’ is a clear example of how a rhetoric of ‘feeling’ can be co-opted by capital. More than ever, then, it is important we do not simply accept ‘feeling’ as a spontaneous or natural phenomenon, but instead subject it to genuinely critical scrutiny. Are some feelings static, essential and ahistorical, or can we trace their genealogies? Are feelings entirely subjective and individual, or are they actually objective and social? If they are social, whose feelings are they?

By placing contemporary cultural and literary theory (especially as it deals with ‘affect’) alongside the tradition of Critical Theory, this conference asks what might be at stake politically, aesthetically and even experientially in the recent turn towards a discourse of feeling. With its roots in Hegel, Marx and Freud, Critical Theory has always been concerned with the role of feeling, in all its senses. Meanwhile, literary theorists and practitioners as diverse as Georges Bataille, Raymond Williams and Eve Sedgwick have also focused on relations between culture, society and felt experience.

The conference will therefore set out to utilise these approaches for a critique of modern and contemporary culture. Contributors are encouraged to engage notions of feeling as they relate to particular cultural practices, objects or texts, and are also invited to use recent work on the emotions to rethink aspects of the Marxist theoretical tradition. We welcome proposals from all relevant fields, including philosophy, literary studies, visual culture, music theory, art history, sociology, political economy, psychology, etc.

Possible topics may include but are not limited to the following:

The intersection of emotion and economics in contemporary life, literature, film or art; the genealogy of feeling; feeling and revolutionary potential; the political economy of feeling; rhetoric and feeling; the commodification of emotion; culture and ‘modern’ moods (guilt, cynicism, ecstasy, indifference, anxiety, melancholia, depression, shame, boredom, paranoia, rage, paralysis, joy, (un)happiness, etc.)

Abstracts of 200-250 words should be sent to Dr Doug Haynes, University of Sussex: d.e.haynes@sussex.ac.uk (please mark the subject heading as ‘Thinking Feeling’)

Cfp: "Critical Theory and Social Justice," Fourth International Conference on Critical Theory, John Felice Rome Center of Loyola University Chicago, May 9-11, 2011.

The conference will examine the importance and the developments of the Frankfurt School by addressing both the philosophical tradition of the early stages of Critical Theory – and in particular the works of Walter Benjamin, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer and Herbert Marcuse – as well as the application of their theories to our contemporary society. In order to reflect the wide range of topics addressed by Critical Theory, the conference will cover different aspects of philosophical reflection on justice, politics, aesthetics, sociology, technology, literature and any other relevant field of study.

During the sessions, each speaker will have 30 minutes. All presentations will be made in English.

Keynote Speakers:

Deborah Cook, University of Windsor, Canada
Alessandro Ferrara, University of Rome, Tor Vergata.
David Ingram, Loyola University Chicago
Stefano Petrucciani, University of Rome, La Sapienza

If you are interested in presenting a paper or organizing a panel (of up to 5 speakers), please submit a 1-2 page abstract by January 29, 2011 (including name, eventual institutional affiliation and mailing address). Abstracts should be submitted by email. Decisions regarding the program will be made by February 2011. To submit an abstract, or for more information, contact: Stefano Giacchetti Ludovisi, PhD – stefano.giacchetti@tiscali.it.

"Self, Psychoanalysis and Society in the 21st Century," Gothenburg, Sweden, July 10, 2010.

The relationship of self and society has intrigued philosophers, psychoanalysts, and sociologists for over a century. In the early part of the last century, as economic conditions fostered alienation, malaise and despair, the neo-Marxist Frankfurt School, among the first scholars influence by both the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, as well as Freudian psychology, began to investigate and theorize the social psychological factors that disposed certain people to Fascism. At about the same time, in the US, scholars such as Cooley, James and above all GH Mead began to think about socialization and the formation of self. These early perspectives played a major role in the rise of symbolic interactionism. These theories have seen a number of developments and transformations. While the work of Reich, Fromm, Adorno and Horkhiemer was groundbreaking, Marcuse, Habermas and Jessica Benjamin have added to that tradition. Surely the work of Althusser, Lacan and Foucault has added a number of other concerns and dimensions. For the past few years, a number of scholars have gathered together before the American Sociological Association meetings to discuss the vagaries of contemporary selfhood, largely, but not exclusively from a psychoanalytical perspective. This year, given the many European and International scholars that will be attending the ISA, we decided to move our venue to Gothenburg, Sweden, and schedule our meeting the day before ISA meets. The meeting will be sponsored by RC36 Alienation Theory and Research. We would like to invite all interested scholars to join us in what have been among the most stimulating meetings. Please send an abstract of about 200-250 words to Lauren Langman, Llang944@aol.com and Lynne Chancer, lchancer@hunter.cuny.edu. Please send by April 30, 2010.

Pensky, Max. Review of Thomas Wheatland, THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL IN EXILE. NDPR (January 2010).

Wheatland, Thomas. The Frankfurt School in Exile. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2009. Following in the footsteps of earlier compendious intellectual histories of the Frankfurt School by Martin Jay and Rolf Wiggershaus, Thomas Wheatland's The Frankfurt School in Exile offers a thorough intellectual, political and institutional history of the adventures of the Frankfurt Institut fuer Sozialforschuung in the United States. Concentrating on this rich and strange institutional odyssey, and tapping the previously ignored archives of the Department of Sociology in Columbia University, Wheatland presents a far more vivid, nuanced, and strange picture of the Frankfurt Institute's American years. Among the many entrenched myths punctured in this book, the most important one to fall is the received view that the key figures of the Institute and their American, primarily New York, academic hosts were mutually indifferent. Just as significantly, however, Wheatland documents that the cadre of New York intellectuals gathered around the so-called 'little journals' of the nascent anti-Stalinist Left also had far more interest in, and were in far closer contact with, the Institute members than the existing historical literature suggests. These findings in general compel a reappraisal of the Institute's New York exile. And though Wheatland himself touches only very lightly on the political implications of this more intense and complex relationship, his history also, inevitably, raises questions about the developments that set both the New York anti-Stalinist Left, and less conspicuously the 'core' members of the Institute, on the path toward variations of neo-conservatism. The Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School has always been a candidate for an intellectual-historical approach: there is first of all the simple fact of its extraordinarily interesting history, the personal dramas of its eccentric and compelling cast of characters, and of course the extraordinary times in which these men lived and wrote. The intellectual history of the members of the Frankfurt School is indeed the history of twentieth century Europe in microcosm: bourgeois and proletariat, religion and secularism, philosophy and politics, crisis and critique. The intellectual histories of critical theory have surpassed in both number and quality the philosophical analyses. In English or in translation, Jay's classic Dialectical Imagination, and Wiggershaus' The Frankfurt School remain unsurpassed, and untranslated German works by Alex Demirovic and Wolfgang Kraushaar document the political life of the postwar Institute in West Germany in minute detail. But oddly the American years of Critical Theory remain, if not unresearched, then certainly under-researched and susceptible to caricature. Horkheimer and Adorno, comprising the center of the Frankfurt institute, adeptly shifted both personnel and resources to New York, where an uneasy but productive relationship through most of the 1930s produced much of the Frankfurt School's empirical work on authoritarianism and anti-Semitism. Political prudence and justified fears at American anti-communism in the prewar and wartime years led the critical theorists to adopt an attitude of deep reserve with their American hosts, while personally dismayed at the callow mass culture of the United States, the critical theorists nevertheless slogged through their fifteen-year exile in New York and California. Horkheimer and Adorno returned to post-war Germany as the rubble was barely cool, while Marcuse, at Santa Cruz, transformed himself into a Hawaiian-shirted guru of the American New Left. Well, not quite, as Wheatland's historical research shows in a series of linked studies of the myths and half-truths that this received view is based on. This research turns up no smoking guns or shocking disclosures. But it does considerably complicate and expand our understanding of what happened to the Frankfurt School in New York and California, and this expanded understanding will make it difficult for some of the myths of the received view to survive much longer. . . . Read the whole review here: http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=18727.

Kirsch, Adam. "Frankfurt on the Hudson." TABLET MAGAZINE August 18, 2009.

Wheatland, Thomas. The Frankfurt School in Exile. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2009. It would be hard to overstate the importance of the Frankfurt School in recent American thought. Philosophers, psychologists, and sociologists like Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, Herbert Marcuse, Erich Fromm, and Max Horkheimer—to name just the best-known members of the group—helped to develop a subtle and powerful way of thinking about the problems of modern society. Critical Theory, as it is usually capitalized, adapted the revolutionary impulse of Marxism to 20th century conditions, in which mass culture and totalitarianism seemed to shut off any real possibility of social transformation. Especially appealing to academics is the way Critical Theory makes the analysis of culture feel like a revolutionary act in and of itself. Reading Adorno on modern music, or Benjamin on literature, it is momentarily possible to believe that criticism is a weapon of liberation, rather than simply a hermetic exercise for intellectuals. No wonder that after the 1960s, as Thomas Wheatland writes in his impressive new study The Frankfurt School in Exile, “ambitious young sympathizers with the New Left” in the academy turned en masse to the Frankfurt School, a scholarly subject that they could explore “without having to disguise or hide their intellectual and political orientations.” It is strange that it took until the 1960s for the Frankfurters to make a major impact on America, however, since from 1934 to 1949 they were actually living in the United States. The Institute for Social Research—the institutional home of the Frankfurt School thinkers—had to uproot itself from Germany in 1933, following Hitler’s rise to power. After a brief period in Geneva, it relocated to Morningside Heights, where it formed an uneasy partnership with Columbia University. From its headquarters at 428 West 117th Street, the Institute struggled with the intellectual and practical challenges involved in doing European-style Critical Theory in America. While the members of the Institute eventually scattered—Horkheimer and Adorno moved to Los Angeles, joining the German émigré colony there, while after Pearl Harbor Marcuse and others went to Washington, applying their skills to the war effort—New York remained the Institute’s official home until 1949, when Horkheimer moved it back to the University of Frankfurt. In his book, an unusually thorough blend of intellectual and institutional history, Wheatland sheds new light on this phase of the Frankfurt School’s existence. . . . Read the rest here: http://www.tabletmag.com/arts-and-culture/books/13644/frankfurt-on-the-hudson/.

Cfp: "From Lifeworld to Biopolitics: Empire in the Age of Obama," Third Annual TELOS Conference, New York, January 16, 2010.

In the context of a dramatic reorganization of the relationships among state, market, and society, the 2010 Telosconference will turn its attention to competing accounts, both theoretical and empirical, of the new modalities of administration, domination, and power. Facing the authoritarian state and a politicized market, how does one “defend society”? The conference will address the extension of politicized control into ever greater realms of social life. What theoretical tools are available? How can we trace the process historically? Classical Critical Theory of the mid-twentieth century described a “totally administered society” in which an elaborate bureaucracy combined with a “culture industry” in order to eliminate spontaneity. Yet some viewed the era of deregulation (and the paradigms of postmodernism) as a rollback of administration and homogeneity. Do we now face the return to the strong state and a repoliticization of society in the name of left populism in the United States? Or has it been the transition from the old mass media to the Internet that has reshaped the dynamic of politics and culture? Meanwhile, the brief moment of a presumed single superpower and unilateralism is shading into an international disorder of multiple power conflicts among strong states, no longer confronted with human rights expectations or a democratization agenda. The resurgent control of society has taken on global proportions: China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, and Venezuela. How does international power operate in new forms of empire? Have “military-industrial complexes” been replaced by cultural hegemonies, defined by the spread of languages and religions? Do developments such as political Islam or Chinese nationalism indicate that “society” has been the hidden driver of state power all along? What about the shared “liberal” and “realistic” assumption that economic liberalization will produce political opening and democratization? Has state capitalism in the East responded better to the global economic crisis than market capitalism in the West? Presentation topics can include (but are not limited to) themes such as: theories of domination in Critical Theory, post-structuralism, and other traditions (e.g., Schmitt, Arendt, Agamben); phenomenology versus bureaucracy; executive authority (Schmitt) and the defense of society against “biopolitics” (Foucault); “civil rights” or “human rights”?; terrorism, the war on terror, and continuities from Bush to Obama; the structural transformation of the press and of public criticism; new technologies and power; populism, elites, and the new class; “smart power” and the role of intellectuals; traditions, religion, and resistance. Proposals (one-page abstract) for twenty-minute conference papers are due by October 1 at telospress@aol.com. (Please put the words “conference proposal” in the subject line of your email.) Conference Registration Fee: $95 (before October 15), otherwise $115 (includes one-year subscription to Telos). For current holders of individual subscriptions to Telos, the registration fee is $35 until October 15 and $55 thereafter. If you have any further questions about the conference, please contact us at telospress@aol.com. Cross-posted from www.continental-philosophy.org.

Cfp: "Rethinking 1968," Special Issue of PHAENEX (forthcoming).

The events of 1968 shook the world. On the 40th anniversary of the protests in France, Germany and the United States, the EPTC organized a series of panels to investigate these industrial and student actions, and whether they can serve as a basis for critiquing our current political climate. We want to ask if the philosophical underpinnings of these revolutionary acts have continued relevance today. For example, in France, the French phenomenologist and existentialist, turned Marxist, Jean-Paul Sartre was held up as one of the intellectuals who could provide an intellectual basis for the revolution. Alongside structuralists like Althusser, Sartre was viewed as an intellectual god-father of the movement, not only because of his writings critical of capitalism and the bourgeois system, be they his early writings on existentialism, or his later reformulation of Marxism in the Critique of Dialectical Reason, nor because he linked left-wing activism in the first world with support for the oppressed elsewhere, but because he was willing to lend his name and support to the Maoists against the Gaullist government. Similarly, in Germany, two philosophers, the phenomenologically-inspired and Marxist Herbert Marcuse and the neo-Marxist and member of the Frankfurt School Jürgen Habermas were central figures for the student revolutionaries. As a member of the Frankfurt School’s second generation, Habermas was viewed by the students as safely removed from the alleged post-World War II conservatism of Adorno and Horkheimer. For the first several years following its publication, Habermas’s habilitation thesis, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, was a text central to the student struggle in Germany. Similarly, Marcuse’s texts, Reason and Revolution, Eros and Civilization, and One-Dimensional Man, as well as his occasional writings, were used as rallying cries by the left both in Europe and in the United States. The question we propose for this volume is, what relevance do these philosophers’s works have today, in light of the continued expansion of the capitalist system, and the fact that student leaders like Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Bernard Kouchner, and Joschka Fischer have renounced extra-political activities and joined the political mainstream. We are interested in papers that explore the relevance of the philosophical critiques that inspired the movements of 1968 for present day radical politics, including papers that use the philosophical inspirations behind 1968: (1) To critique global capitalism while providing a positive way forward, (2) To examine American hegemony, (3) To examine possibilities for overturning existing political structures in either the developed or developing world, (4) To examine issues surrounding the environment or environmental justice, (5) Or any other topic, provided that the paper deals extensively with the philosophical ideas of 1968 and their relevance for today’s changed political landscape. Interested authors should submit a copy of their paper in RTF or WORD format to PhaenEx's website (http://www.phaenex.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/phaenex). Queries should be sent to: Kevin W. Gray at kevin-william.gray.1@ulaval.ca. The submission deadline is July 1, 2009.

Petrucciani, Stefano. "Rethinking Critical Theory." KRITIKOS 6 (2009).

The philosophical reflections developed by the first and the second generation of the Frankfurt School (through the work of Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse and Habermas) constitute, in my opinion, a contribution of vital importance to the construction of a critical theory capable of responding to the current challenges of society and politics. However, in order to reconstruct a critical theory for the present times, it is necessary to start from the problems that the Frankfurt tradition left open. With regard to this, my thesis is that the evolution from the first to the second generation of the Frankfurt School, in particular from Adorno to Habermas, can be framed as a passage from a social theory of domination to a normative theory of democracy. I am convinced that, if isolated from each other, both perspectives are insufficient. In my view, Habermas was right in underlining the normative deficit of the critical theory of the first generation, but his normative theory of democracy – developed in Between Facts and Norms and in the following books – lacks a conceptualization of the reality of power as social domination. Despite his awareness of the problem, Habermas failed to embed it into an adequate theoretical framework. Apparently Habermas has also abandoned the attempt, developed in Theory of Communicative Action, of conceptualizing the pathologies of modernity in terms of a “colonization of the life-world.” This account was meant to be a viable alternative to Adorno’s totalizing account of domination, but it seems that Habermas took no interest in developing it further. In my view the separation between a theory of domination and a normative theory of democracy reveals a theoretical problem. Hence, a reconstructed critical theory should aim at the reconciliation of these two dimensions (theory of power and theory of democracy), both fundamental for a critical understanding of the present. However, a concrete development of this theoretical proposal requires broader conceptual tools than those of the critical theory of the Frankfurt school. As far as the theory of power is concerned, it is necessary to undertake a critical confrontation not only with the Marxist tradition, in particular with some neo-Marxist approaches, like the one proposed in recent years by the French scholar Jacques Bidet, but also with other aspects of the contemporary research on power. As far as the normative perspective is concerned, it is important to critically consider the revitalization of normative political theory put forward by John Rawls and by many other scholars. . . . Read the rest here: http://intertheory.org/petrucciani.htm.

Dallmayr, Fred. Review of Nikolas Kompridis' CRITIQUE AND DISCLOSURE. NDPR (February (2009).

Kompridis, Nikolas. Critique and Disclosure: Critical Theory between Past and Future. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006. The fate of reason today hangs in the balance. This is no small matter. Ever since its historical beginnings, reason or rationality has been the central focus and point of honor of Western modernity -- a focus enshrined in Descartes' cogito, Enlightenment rationalism, and Kantian (and neo-Kantian) critical philosophy. The result of this focus was an asymmetrical dichotomy: separated from the external world of "matter" (or nature), the cogito assumed the role of superior task master and overseer -- a role fueling the enterprise of modern science and technology. During the past century, the edifice of Western modernity has registered a trembling, due to both internal and external contestations. Subverting the modern asymmetry, a host of thinkers – with views ranging from American pragmatism to European life philosophy and phenomenology -- have endeavored to restore pre-cognitive "experience" (including sense perception and affect) to its rightful place. In the context of French "postmodernism," a prominent battle cry has been to dislodge "logocentrism" (the latter term often equated with anthropocentrism). In the ambiance of recent German philosophy, the battle lines have been clearly marked: pitting champions of modern rationalism, represented by Jürgen Habermas, against defenders of experiential "world disclosure," represented by Martin Heidegger. In his book, Nikolas Kompridis endeavors to shed new light on this controversy, with the aim not so much of bringing about a cease fire but of providing resources for arriving at better mutual understanding. Kompridis does not exactly assume a position above the contestants (he repeatedly rejects the "view from nowhere"). As the book's subtitle indicates, his point of departure is "critical theory" as championed by the Frankfurt School, and his attempt is to nudge that theory beyond a certain rationalist orthodoxy in the direction of possible "future" horizons. While appreciating some of its merits -- such as the "linguistic turn" and the emphasis on "communicative" rationality -- Kompridis finds Habermas's reformulation of the Frankfurt program on the whole unhelpful and debilitating. In his words (p. 17): "For all there is to recommend it, Habermas's reformulation has produced a split between new and old critical theory so deep that the identity and future of critical theory are at risk." The main reason is that the "normative gain" deriving from the linguistic turn remains attached to narrow rationalist premises that have "needlessly devalued" the theory's potential. In Kompridis's view, Habermas's evolving thought exhibits a break or rupture (quite apart from the linguistic turn): namely, a move toward pure "theory" which happened soon after the publication of Knowledge and Human Interests. "That turn to theory," he writes (pp. 232-234), "refashioned the project of critical theory as a strenge Wissenschaft, less bound by or beholden to the historical and existential exigencies of modernity" -- thereby undermining modernity's intrinsic "relation to time." As a result of this refashioning, critical theory was catapulted in the direction of an abstractly rational universalism disdainful of cultural and practical modes of pluralism. The upshot was a growing "insensitivity to particularity," justifying the suspicion that the basic concepts of communicative rationality had from the start been "rigged in favor of the universal." But, the book adds sharply, "a provinciality-destroying reason is a meaning-destroying reason" and the latter is "a history-destroying reason." Considerations of this kind serve to buttress the book's basic "thesis" (p. 17) that Habermas's reformulation is "in need of urgent reassessment if critical theory is to have a future worthy of its past." In Kompridis's view (pp. 28-29), critical theory's renewal has to rely on alternative resources, including insights "central to the German tradition from Hegel to Heidegger and Adorno" and phenomenological explorations of the "life-world." In this context, a crucial resource is Heidegger's notion of "world disclosure," articulated variously under the labels of "Erschlossenheit," "Lichtung," and "Ereignis." The basic point of the notion of disclosure is that "we operate 'always already' with a pre-reflective, holistically structured, and grammatically regulated understanding of the world" (pp. 32-33) -- which means that our thinking and reasoning is always embedded in a pre-cognitive experiential setting. . . . Read the rest here: http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=15167.

Cfp: "Images of a Demystified World," Third Conference on Critical Theory, John Cabot University, Rome, May 13-15, 2009.

John Cabot University of Rome is hosting the third international conference on Critical Theory, which will be held at its campus in Rome, Italy – Via della Lungara 233. The conference will examine the importance and the developments of the Frankfurt School by addressing both the philosophical tradition of the early stages of Critical Theory – and in particular the works of Walter Benjamin, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer and Herbert Marcuse – as well as the application of their theories to our contemporary society. In order to reflect the wide range of topics addressed by Critical Theory, the conference will cover different aspects of philosophical reflection on politics, aesthetics, sociology, technology, literature and any other relevant field of study. Keynote Speakers: Andrew Feenberg, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver David Ingram, Loyola University Chicago Stefano Petrucciani, University of Rome, La Sapienza David Schweickart, Loyola University Chicago Francesco Saverio Trincia, University of Rome, La Sapienza Confirmed Speakers: John Abromeit, SUNY Buffalo State; Andrew Cutrofello, Loyola University Chicago; Anne-Marie Feenberg-Dibon, Simon Fraser University; James Gordon Finlayson, University of Sussex; Samir Gandesha, Simon Fraser University; Johan Frederick Hartle, University of Amsterdam; Hugh Miller, Loyola University Chicago; Brian O’Connor, University College Dublin; Frederik van Gelder, Institut für Sozialforschung - Frankfurt; Steven Vogel, Denison University. If you are interested in presenting a paper, please submit a 1-2 page abstract by January 11, 2009 (including name, eventual institutional affiliation and mailing address). Abstracts should be submitted by email. Decisions regarding the program will be made by February 2009. A selection of the presented papers will be printed in a book dedicated to the conference. To submit an abstract, or for more information, contact: Prof. Stefano Giacchetti – sgiacchetti@johncabot.edu; Tel: (+39) 06-81905467.

CFP: "Beyond Reification: Critical Theory and the Challenge of Praxis," John Cabot University, May 21-23, 2008.

Update: The programme is here: http://intranet.johncabot.edu/myjcu/public_site/news.aspx?cat=Events. Original Post (November 15, 2008): John Cabot University is hosting the second international conference on Critical Theory, which will be held at its campus in Rome, Italy – Via della Lungara 233. The conference will examine the importance and the developments of the Frankfurt School by addressing both the philosophical tradition of the early stages of Critical Theory – and in particular the works of Walter Benjamin, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer and Herbert Marcuse – as well as the application of their theories to our contemporary society. In order to reflect the wide range of topics addressed by Critical Theory, the conference will cover different aspects of philosophical reflection on politics, aesthetics, sociology, technology, literature and any other relevant field of study. The conference will be held at John Cabot University on May 21-23, 2008. It will begin on Wednesday morning and end by Friday afternoon. During the sessions, each speaker will have one hour, with 30-40 minutes for presentation, followed by 20-30 minutes of discussion. All presentations will be made in English. Keynote speakers: Andrew Cutrofello, Loyola University Chicago Andrew Feenberg, Simon Fraser University Alessandro Ferrara, University of Rome, Tor Vergata David Ingram, Loyola University Chicago Martin Matustik, Purdue University Hugh Miller, Loyola University Chicago Stefano Petrucciani, University of Rome, La Sapienza Francesco Saverio Trincia, University of Rome, La Sapienza If you are interested in presenting a paper, please submit a 1-2 page abstract by January 15, 2008 (including name, institutional affiliation if any, and mailing address). Abstracts should be submitted by email. Decisions regarding the program will be made by February, 2008. The presented papers will be published in a volume dedicated to the conference. To submit an abstract, or for more information, contact: Prof. Stefano Giacchetti Ludovisi – sgiacchetti@johncabot.edu or Tel: (+39) 06-81905467.

"Beyond Reification: Critical Theory and the Challenge of Praxis," John Cabot University, Rome, May 21-23, 2008.

The conference will examine the importance and the developments of the Frankfurt School by addressing both the philosophical tradition of the early stages of Critical Theory – and in particular the works of Walter Benjamin, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer and Herbert Marcuse – as well as the application of their theories to our contemporary society. In order to reflect the wide range of topics addressed by Critical Theory, the conference will cover different aspects of philosophical reflection on politics, aesthetics, sociology, technology, literature and any other relevant field of study. During the sessions, each speaker will have one hour, with 30-40 minutes for presentation, followed by 20-30 minutes of discussion. All presentations will be made in English. Keynote speakers:

• Andrew Cutrofello, Loyola University Chicago
• Andrew Feenberg, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver
• Alessandro Ferrara, University of Rome, Tor Vergata
• David Ingram, Loyola University Chicago
• Martin Matustik, Purdue University
• Hugh Miller, Loyola University Chicago
• Stefano Petrucciani, University of Rome, La Sapienza
• Francesco Saverio Trincia, University of Rome, La Sapienza

If you are interested in presenting a paper, please submit a 1-2 page abstract by January 15, 2008 (including name, institutional affiliation if any, and mailing address). Abstracts should be submitted by email. Decisions regarding the program will be made by February, 2008. The presented papers will be published in a volume dedicated to the conference. To submit an abstract, or for more information, contact: Prof. Stefano Giacchetti Ludovisi – sgiacchetti@johncabot.eduTel: (+39) 06-81905467.

Click here for last year's conference program.

Worrell, Mark P. "The Other Frankfurt School." FAST CAPITALISM 2.1 (2006)

During the 1960s and 1970s the work of the ISR was rediscovered by the New Left and campus radicals. But what was recovered as the 'Frankfurt School' was but a one-sided caricature of the Institute. . . . More here: http://www.uta.edu/huma/agger/fastcapitalism/2_1/worrell.html.