Frank Juhasz, Rekonstruktion einer Kontroverse zwischen Fabian Freyenhagen und Stefan Müller-Doohm/Roman Yos über die Kritische Theorie: Orthodoxie oder Begründung

In this paper a controversy is reconstructed, which is based on an essay of Fabian Freyenhagen, Was ist orthodoxe Kritische Theorie? (2017). He proceeds from Horkheimers’ essay Traditionelle und Kritische Theorie (1937a/1988).  By distancing himself from Habermas and his request for a “program stating reasons” he pleads at the same time for a specific research program to actualise Critical Theory. Stefan Müller-Doohm and Roman Yos’ reply, with the essay Fatale Orthodoxie (2018) refers in particular to the requested waiver of a program stating reasons. Freyenhagen’s counter-reply, entitled Dogmatischer Dogmatismusvorwurf (2019) reinforces his intention to again and again refer to Horkheimer’s basic idea critical of society. The counterparts’ arguments are supplemented by additional citations by Horkheimer. The method in this controversy is that citations are always to be read in the respective context and may not be interpreted unfoundedly in a competitive manner. Two results: primarily, Horkheimer has created the theoretical and practical foundations for the fact that orthodoxy and actualisation of Critical Theory do not contradict each other and secondarily that actualisation does not constitute a one-way road, however, provides diverse approaches not only in the past but also in the future.

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download [278.27 KB]

Scroll to Top