Week 11 Critical Theory: The Frankfurt School (Nov 2024) PDF

Foundations of sociological thought Critical theory. The “Frankfurt School”  Readings  Eclipse of Reason (1947)  The Culture Industry Reconsidered (1975)  One-Dimensional Man (1964)  Critical theory  Frankfurt School – Establishe...

Foundations of sociological thought Critical theory. The “Frankfurt School”  Readings  Eclipse of Reason (1947)  The Culture Industry Reconsidered (1975)  One-Dimensional Man (1964)  Critical theory  Frankfurt School – Established through the collaboration of Max Horkheimer (1895 – 1973), Theodor Adorno (1903 – 69), and Herbert Marcuse (1898 – 1979), initially at the Institute of Social Research at the University of Frankfurt in Germany, est. in 1923 The critical theorists developed a framework that at once extends the social theory of Karl Marx Like Marx, the critical theorists saw in modern, industrial societies an oppressive, dehumanizing social order  an order desperate for change (ADE 2021)  Historical context  The rise of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes in Central and Eastern Europe, and in Germany  The triumph of Bolsheviks and Nazis in Russia and Germany, respectively  utopian Communist revolution failed to materialize, at least not with the desirable result anticipated by Marx  Marxist premise that violent removal of bourgeois government would result in equality for all was disproved by the establishment of an deadly totalitarian Communist dictatorship  Key premises of the Frankfurt School thought  A scathing critique of modern consumer society and of mass culture  Decline of individual reason  “The machine has dropped the driver”; reason no longer a measure of things  Culture and technology (not religion, ideology or economics,) as means of “distorting consciousness” and oppression  new ”opiate for the masses”  Conformism  people are pacified by trivial pursuits as they abandon the search for meaningful lives  Key influences  Hegel  The alienation of humanity and the obstacles to realizing a perfected social order lie in distorted consciousness.  Weber. Formal rationality  is based on establishing impersonal, calculable procedures  Bureaucratic mode of organization spills over into all areas of human life  Bureaucracy is the iron cage that has stifled individual freedom  Marxist roots of critical theory  Economic inequality alone will not cause a revolution  It is not as simple as bourgeoisie v. the proletariat  There exists a dominant ideology that legitimates the system  worship of technological “progress”  It’s not the economy that’s the issue  break with Marx’s historical materialism; reverted to Hegel’s idealism  consciousness determines being!  The working class will not revolutionize the system into which it has bought (ADE 2021)  Max Horkheimer. Subjective and objective reason  Horkheimer  drew a distinction between “subjective reason” and “objective reason.” parallel to Weber’s notion of formal rationality  subjective reason is “essentially concerned with means and ends, with the adequacy of procedures for purposes more or less taken for granted and supposedly self- explanatory (Horkheimer 1947:3)  utility (the “how”?)  objective reason speaks to the relative value of the ends of action  ethics, the “why?”  Max Horkheimer. Subjective and objective reason  The crisis of reason is manifested in the crisis of the individual. (…) The theme of this time is self- preservation while there is no self to preserve.  Individuality presupposes the voluntary sacrifice of immediate satisfaction for the sake of security, material and spiritual maintenance of one’s own existence. When the roads to such life are blocked, one has little incentive to deny oneself momentary pleasures. Hence, individuality among the masses is far less integrated than among the so-called elite (Horkheimer 1947 in ADE 2017/21) Subjective v. objective reason Subjective reason Objective reason  instrumental value (substantive) (formal) rationality rationality Focused on the Focused on human process itself, values. Is this thoughtless adherence right/useful/helpful to procedures, efficiency, calculability, and control How do I achieve Why am I doing this (even a senseless) goal? and is it just? Herbert Marcuse. Individualistic v. technological rationality  Individualistic rationality is “a critical and oppositional attitude that derived freedom of action from the unrestricted liberty of thought and conscience and measured all social standards and relations by the individual’s rational self-interest” (1941:433).  Technological rationality is marked by the scientific approach to all human affairs. Social relations as well as humanity’s relationship to nature are now understood as “problems” to be efficiently solved.  Technological rationality represented a worldview that had come to dominate all spheres of life.  Scientific-technological progress had become the god of modern society (ADE 2021)  The perils of technological rationality The question of what it means to be free needs to be answered by individuals themselves  but, Marcuse asks, how can they be expected to give that answer if they have been kept “unfree” by the heavily rationalized society? The more rational, productive, technical, and total the repressive administration of society becomes, the more unimaginable the means and ways by which the administered individuals might break their servitude (…) Marcuse 1964 in ADE 2021: 425) Types of rationality compared Weber Horkheimer Marcuse Formal Subjective Technological rationality reason rationality Substantive Objective Individual rationality reason rationality  Technology, mass culture, and convenience/comfort as the gods of modernity*  The promise of technocrats  we will solve all your problems, if only you let us control you more  Technological rationality has led to the decline of individuality (“eclipse of reason”, Horkheimer 1947)  we have lost the ability to constructively critique social reality  Mass culture reproduces us as ultimately “the same”, even as it tries to convince us that we are unique and special  objectivation and reification of culture  Culture industry  This ideology is disseminated primarily through the culture industry.  This “industry” encompasses all those sectors involved in the creation and distribution of mass-culture products:  television, film, radio, music, magazines, newspapers, books, and the advertisements that sell them  entertaining and pacifying the masses, the culture industry administers “mass deception”  mass- produced, standardized commodities that “aborts and silences criticism” (Bottomore 1984:19 in ADE 2017).  Culture industry  We are constantly brainwashed (advertising, celebrity culture, TV (and Netflix) shows, cheap, low level entertainment) into conformism and into accepting the status quo  Our needs are mostly fabricated by the same apparatus (Marcuse)  children bonded to brands, kid-fluence)  Culture, through an illusion of choice, is designed to lull us into a false sense of security, prosperity, and “progress”  so that we never rebel, as escape from reality is an “escape from the thought of ever resisting reality” in ADE 2021  Culture industry Products which are tailored for consumption by the masses, and which to a great extent determine the nature of that consumption, are manufactured more or less according to plan. The customer is not king, as the culture industry would have us believe, not its subject but its object/ (Adorno 1975 in ADE 2021: 421) The people recognize themselves in their commodities. They find their soul in their automobile, hi-fi, split level home, kitchen equipment… (Marcuse 1964 in ADE 2021: 426)  The real culture That which legitimately could be called culture attempted, as an expression of suffering and contradiction, to maintain a grasp on the idea of good life. The appeal to order alone, without concrete specificity, is futile (…) the idea of an objective order huckstered to people because it is so lacking for them, has no claim if it does not prove itself internally and in confrontation with human beings. But this is precisely what the product of culture industry would engage in (…) It proclaims: you shall conform (Ibid.)  Objectification of consumers The culture industry endlessly cheats out of what it endlessly promises… This principle requires that while all needs of individuals should be presented (…) as capable of fulfillment by the culture industry, they should be so set up in advance that individuals experience themselves through their needs only as eternal consumers, as the culture industry’s object (Horkheimer and Adorno 1944 in ADE 2021: 411)  The iron cage of consumption – a triumph of the culture industry Work, buy, consume, die, http://21130911.blogspot.com/2011/10/work-buy-consume-die.html, accessed March 11th, 2020.  The cult of utility above all else  The “giant loudspeaker of industrial culture, blaring through commercialized recreation and popular advertising, (…) endlessly reduplicates the surface of reality”  “A society has made usefulness its gospel”  “Thought that does not serve the interests of any established group [or] (…) of any industry, has no place, it is considered vain and superfluous” Horkheimer 1947 in ADE 2017: 419)  The cult of utility above all else As religious and moral ideologies fade, and political theory is abolished by the march of economic and political events, the ideas of the workers tend to be molded by the business ideology of their leaders. As for the idea of productivity (…) economic significance today is measured in terms of usefulness for the structure of power, not with respect to the needs of all. (Horkheimer 1947)  The cult of utility above all else Nor is efficiency, the modern criterion and sole justification for the very existence of any individual, to be confused with real technical or managerial skill. [Rather], it inheres the ability to be “one of the boys”, to hold one’s own, to impress others, to “sell” oneself [well], to cultivate the right connections. Technocratic thinking tends to ignore this because technocrats believe that efficiency and rational planning will solve all problems – only, human beings do not work in the same way as machines (Horkheimer 1947).  The cult of “work”  Work as alienating  don’t just stand there, do something! How about: don’t just do something, stand there! David Graeber and “bulls*it jobs”  More –and better – technology could mean less work, but we are actually working more than ever!  The cult of “work” – why ?  “The answer clearly isn't economic: it's moral and political. The ruling class has figured out that a happy and productive population with free time on their hands is a mortal danger (think of what started to happen when this even began to be approximated in the '60s). And, on the other hand, the feeling that work is a moral value in itself, and that anyone not willing to submit themselves to some kind of intense work discipline for most of their waking hours deserves nothing, is extraordinarily convenient for them” (Graeber 2013).  Brave new world. Aldous Huxley and the dystopia of “happiness” According to Marcuse, culture industry leads to a sort of silent totalitarianism, where everyone ultimately becomes alike, and any thought of resistance or change is considered absurd Aldous Huxley, in his celebrated novel Brave new world (orig. 1932), describes a dystopian society in which everything and everyone is controlled, human passions and emotions are banned, people take the drug soma, and are otherwise conditioned, to always remain happy with their state in life.  Brave new world. Aldous Huxley and the dystopia of “happiness”  The motto of this society is: Community, Identity, Stability  This society worships quantification and technology  elaborate description of “Central Hatchery” and conditioning processes  Huxley was acutely aware of totalitarian potentiality of culture, and, in that, he was well ahead of his time  Brave new world. Aldous Huxley and the dystopia of “happiness”  And this, said the director, is the Fertility room. (…) opening an insulated door, he showed them racks upon racks of test tubes. “This week’s supply of ova. Kept “he explained” at blood heat (…)  One egg, one embryo, one adult-normality. But a bokanvskified egg will bud, will proliferate, will divide. From eight to ninety six buds, and every bud will grow into a perfectly formed embryo, and every embryo into a full-sized adult. Making ninety six human beings where only one grew before. Progress. (Huxley 1934/2004)  Dictatorship without tears “There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution” (Huxley 1962).  Discussion questions 1. How does critical theory draw on Marxism and where does it depart from Marxist thought? 2. Explain why the first critical theorists were critical of “objective” scientific knowledge or scientific rationality. What are some of the issues with this approach to social life and issues? If the scientific method is rejected, what criteria can be used to assess a researcher’s findings? More generally, if not “hard” or empirical science, what other criteria might serve as a basis for accepting anyone’s claim to speak the “truth”? (Cf. ADE 2021)  Conclusion  The society is pacified by the entertainment and consumerism pushed onto people by the consumer- oriented and consumer-producing culture industry  This enables people in power to just go about their business as usual and precludes meaningful resistance  Culture, technology, and “progress” are objectivated and reified  Modern mass consumption society has the potential to become totalitarian  Communicative rationality of J. Habermas points to a more positive understanding of the role of citizens in society