Postmetaphysical Conundrums: The Problematic Return to Metaphysics in Horkheimer’s Critique of Instrumental Reason

Largely overshadowed by the renown of his colleagues Theodor W. Adorno, Walter Benjamin, and Herbert Marcuse, Max Horkheimer’s contributions to Frankfurt School are often downplayed as those mere director Institute for Social Research lesser coauthor Dialectic Enlightenment. Despite occupying this position marginality within corpus Critical Theory, work stands a significant sustained attempt develop an interdisciplinary materialist research program methodological alternative metaphysical philosophy. As J. C. Berendzen notes, one most philosophy is development materialism viable postmetaphysical critical social theory.1 Likewise, Hauke Brunkhorst lauds “materialist destruction philosophy” opening way “social-scientific transformation that takes leave problems philosophy.2 Even with such high praise strides early makes in establishing tenable materialist, philosophy, critics Georg Lohmann regard later critique instrumental reason engaging totalizing undermines its own foundations, which raises once again question precise role metaphysics plays not only but also generally. In essay “The Failure Self-Realization: An Interpretation Eclipse Reason,”3 written expressly 1993 collection essays, On Horkheimer: New Perspectives—which aimed rectify dearth attention is, however, composed essays concert Jürgen Habermas’s characterization failures Theory4—Lohmann argues narration rise presents end through indictment must itself some rest on foundation if it justify denunciatory claims. For Lohmann, leaves Horkheimer untenable bind: either rests basis thereby refutes very concomitant metaphysics, or without expresses little more than whimsical resistance surge increasingly rampant cultural nihilism. Either way, fraught aporia.5While states overall aim rereading Reason undertake magnanimous task rescuing “critical intent” at (FSR, 388), reading fails register level nuance vital argument. I contend indeed grounds forms truth reason. However, since locates he appeals nature nonidentity thinking, assumes has circumvented trappings both anticipates evades Lohmann’s dilemma. Yet evasion, maintain, no better situated, hypostasizes thinking so doing establishes antimetaphysical simply, another variant metaphysics. This conclusion though, itself, still us well-trod ground Habermasian post-Habermasian criticisms leveled against Thus further argue what about establishment case merely instance “totalizing critique” but, important, violates earlier parameters established disastrous Horkheimer, since, philosopher, committed obstacle alleviation human suffering instrument domination. By unwittingly lapsing into succumbs tyranny domination sought obviate original emancipatory purposes work. use foundering unintentional lapse signal perils lie wait any steer clear path between antipodes positions.I turn first 1930s sketches out conception of, objections to, well how offers transhistorical project Next, examine place elaborated Reason. revisit demonstrate hypostatization intends serve reason, runs counter aims. Lastly, articulate manner perilous move calls philosophies renounce conventional foundations—both ontologically normatively—if they avoid incoherencies contradictions positions.According classically conceived, concerned securing absolutely perfect understanding ultimate reality. Traditionally, understood terms inquiring subject trying discern clarity fundamentally unified universal structure reality underlies totality being. consequence, central component epistemological assumes, tendency pursue ideal correspondence knowledge known—or rather, identity concept object concept. knowing fundamental should perfectly coincide.More significantly, claims metaphysicians engage sake desire provide certain normativity. notes: The effort make personal life dependent every point insight things marks metaphysician.6The metaphysician thus believes that, being seeks discover, may be found shaping individual’s life. . Ultimate regarded normative, systems where religious origins dependence relationship show form precept takes, all cases harmony existence discovered valuable. (MM, 18–19)For hallmarks ethics normative reality.Horkheimer, two First, ascertain turns away from world focuses instead another, quite possibly illusory, world. This, effect, cultivates insensitivity wretchedness our time, distracts seeking causes altering conditions. Rather higher value changing immediate concrete material conditions world, relegates inferior relative absolute knowing. Consequently, devalues favor ignores plight humanity. Second, under guise universality, theories have been employed throughout history demand recognize particular interests individuals groups. states: “Ruling ruled classes alike satisfied present their simply expressions needs desires. They proclaimed them universally binding requirements grounded transcendent sources, principles accord eternal man” 22). other words, rarely content specific expression agenda laws nature. characterizes domination—that method imposing one’s others soliciting obedience process so.Critically suspicious casts doubt possibility procuring cognition unchanging reality, arguing claim there order made upon man always supposes know whole, things, infinite. But fact yet final, irreducible tension being, then proposition can dignity knowledge. Knowledge infinite infinite, admittedly imperfect absolute. 27)For problematically can, transcend particularities specificities space time access essential structure. understands aiming secure unconditioned. seems infeasible Horkheimer. Neither nor appears possess immutability attributed Instead, advancing operates deeply situated historical constituted conditions.The difference here worth emphasizing. Whereas advance advanced concerning timeless enduring explicitly held hypothetical provisional postulated moment guiding orienting inquiry. importance distinctly method, distinguish similarly emphasized Brunkhorst: limit historicity real subjects. Entirely sense historicism, contingent horizon “respective situation actor” insuperable given them. Everything historically conditioned. Nor meant transcendental philosophy: refutable supposition, taken Therefore essentially materialism. It decidedly scientistic streak. accepts distinction “is” “ought.” Fallibilistic oriented toward sciences experience, expose hopes disillusionment. Along Dilthey, regards hypothesis. resolute science specialized disciplines step Methodological primacy experience departure.7There primary reasons emphasizing involves potentially self-referential ultimately contradictory avoid. If were posit conditioned absolutes reflecting inherent would immediately metaphysics—that guilty same charges would, necessity, undermine itself.8 demonstrate, considerable pains second method—as self-reflexively provisional—similarly helps guard dogmatic tendencies interested avoiding. connection, “Throughout theory [relying experience], serves weapon dogmatism” 42). concepts refrain transforming absolutist dogma, maintain status.Given, rejects subjects objects, seem risk skepticism relativism. we cannot absolutely, truth, appear unmoored means determine validity concepts. Yet, anticipating criticisms, asks, “Is really choice acceptance final idealistic schools view thesis ‘subjective,’ i.e., true valid person group beings species, lacking objective validity?”9 dilemma, false one. Explicitly rejecting relativism, naivete absurdities academic, relativistic, skepticism.First, estimation, G. F. Hegel satisfactorily addresses philosophical via notion “determinate negation” (OPT, 184). A skeptic because series never represent accurately, inherently flawed ill-fated inception. Hegel, accurate depictions failures. When element invalidates object, do abandon tout court; negation disjunction book shelf shelf. Rather, specific, playing determinate part construction new concept.10 Hegel’s militates skepticism.Yet, past remains caged idealistic, dogmatic, goal necessarily fixed serial progression; longer go beyond finds Notion corresponds Notion.”11 according just Kant’s critique, Kant Karl Marx’s: [In] contemplating system, forgets definite side empirical situation. belief system completion hides him significance temporally interest details dialectical presentation direction thought, content, names diverts conscious unconscious partisanship effect constituent 187)In disregards character thought Marx’s 186).Consequently, whereas advocates closed dialectic will day resolve knowing, open dialectic: open-ended materialistic does “rational” completed expect bring resolution tensions, historic dynamic, full ideas simple consequences. lacks aspect described “speculative” “mystical,” namely, idea ostensibly unconditioned oneself 209–10)Instead, “materialism maintains defense infinity mind” 28).Second, materialism’s rejection entail measure therefore sciences, generally accepted criteria—or, “available cognition” 192, 203)—are determining propositions. example medicine. might say while cancer change over eventually become meaningless currently understand it, meaning present, conflicting presence patient correct. states, “Truth decided beliefs opinions, relation reality” 194). body rigorous correctly incorrectly applies these. “From follows principle connection whole theory, hence conceptually formulation structural practical governing preserved” 204). instances cancer, diagnoses incorrectly; when called question, greater context theoretical framework framework. Here accounting today call “paradigm shift” discipline12 discursive rupture.13 Concepts brought play entire heretofore discipline—for example, Einsteinian reframing Newtonian mechanics disease. these debates themselves take framework, methods aims superseded directed debates.Quite clearly, affirming combination coherence holding staving off difficulties relativism.14 rather naively reaches unconditioned, emphasizes knower, her tasks, she understand. related sociohistorical practice, even surface, theoretically abstract. “absolute knowing” equally valid. Within criteria distinguishing claims, prove refined newly understanding. So confidently claim: Recognition conditional isolated destroy knowledge; incorporated conditional, one-sided, view. Through nothing continuous delimitation correction partial truths, evolves proper limited insights limits connection. 184)In return School’s Marxist roots. clearly distinguishes skepticism, deliberately current arise capitalist mode production “need comprehend contemporary society” “economic 45). narrow reductive sense, has, inception, drawn psychoanalysis “the economic society, psychical individuals, changes realm culture sense.”15 Since inquiry highly mobile fluid—society multifaceted, complex, dynamic phenomenon—an necessity account fluidity remaining adaptable says elsewhere, various doctrines, therefore, examples stable permanent idea” opts mutability produced dialectic. Stating benefit dialectic, claims: ceasing lose stamp truth. fact, disclosure one-sided aspects others’ constitutes important intellectual process. followers correct stressing relativizing characteristic necessary cognition. conviction acting require assertion now one, rest. To degree gained perception inference, methodical events, daily political struggle, meets test available cognition, abstract justified standpoint materialists liberality opposing views skeptical indecision, alertness errors flexibility thought. 191–92)As evident, wholly outside confines occupies abandons old paradigm measuring knowing: “Since extra-historical exaggerated impossible, stems pure mind last analysis God, orient impossibility relative” 192). noted above, moves closer practices reducing them.16 Hence uses hypotheses formulated best rigorously accumulated holds revision continual scrutiny, guided concern ameliorate society.17 general materialists—constitution-theoretical, ontological-sounding theses ‘all exists material’—have status, fallible experience.”18 Again, suggest retreat relativism adequate condition objects requirement remain flexible need adjust theory. Unlike philosophies, inquiry, employs vigilant dogmatism amending conceptual formulations.Even significant, traditional metaphysically action critique. elaborates “Materialism Morality.” There moral principles: “As distinctive Leibniz, Spinoza, Enlightenment be, bear constitution individual conduct appropriate time. unconditional validity.”19 He attempts: “Morality admit grounding—neither intuition argument.”20 conception, reveal reflect arise. sees morality emergence passing, forces.”21 Kantian emphasis disinterested duty, reflects relations capitalism. Significantly, bars methodologically providing itself. openly admits position: “This negative morality” 44). Nonetheless, quietism: “It man’s striving happiness recognized natural requiring justification” At core, materialism, then, refuses postpone theorizing another. And, keeping contends: Politics [the ideals freedom, equality, justice] demands, realize them—not, clinging utopian definitions conditioned, accordance meaning. eternal, change—surely “Spirit” capriciously infringes identity, impulses something different work.Again, alter people suffer effectively aim. More precisely, find least start twentieth century disproportionate amount suffe