鄺明偉. / Thesis (M.A.)--香港中文大學, 1990. / Munuscript (computer printout) / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 26-39). / Kuang Mingwei. / Thesis (M.A.)--Xianggang Zhong wen da xue, 1990. / 導言 理性與自由 頁 --- p.1 / Chapter 第一章 --- 對現代性的批判 頁 --- p.7 / Chapter 1.1 --- 韋伯的理性化概念 頁 --- p.8 / Chapter 1.2 --- 馬克思的異化概念 頁 --- p.22 / Chapter 1.3 --- 哈伯瑪斯論現代性 頁 --- p.29 / Chapter 第二章 --- 溝通理性的建構 頁 --- p.36 / Chapter 2.1 --- 溝通行動與溝通能力 頁 --- p.37 / Chapter 2.2 --- 言辭行動的有效聲稱 頁 --- p.40 / Chapter 2.3 --- 論辯進行的形式 頁 --- p.47 / Chapter 2.4 --- 真理共識說與溝通倫理學 頁 --- p.52 / Chapter 2.5 --- 理想的言談情境 頁 --- p.57 / Chapter 2.6 --- 溝通理性的兩個面向 頁 --- p.59 / Chapter 第三章 --- 溝通理性與現代西方社會 頁 --- p.62 / Chapter 3.1 --- 社會的二重分析架構 頁 --- p.63 / Chapter 3.2 --- 糸統與生活世界 頁 --- p.68 / Chapter 3.3 --- 統現代社會的扭曲溝通 頁 --- p.79 / Chapter 3.4 --- 溝通理性與公共領域 頁 --- p.85 / Chapter 第四章 --- 對溝通理性論的評估 頁 --- p.87 / Chapter 4.1 --- 溝通理性的涵義 頁 --- p.87 / Chapter 4.2 --- 市場與論壇 頁 --- p.96 / Chapter 4.3 --- 語言與社會批判 頁 --- p.107 / 註釋 --- p.1 / 參考書目 --- p.26

Thesis (Ph. D.)--New York University, Graduate School of Arts and Science. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 332-337).

The central argument of this thesis is that, contrary to what is generally believed, Critical Theory (CT) – as understood by the Frankfurt School (FS) – does exist and is developed in Spain influenced by and parallel to the Frankfurt School’s own research during the second half of the twentieth century. Hence, the aim of this research is to provide evidence of the existence in Spain of thought developed in line with Frankfurtian CT. To this end, we shall explore the thought developed by three leading Spanish thinkers: José Luis López Aranguren, María Zambrano Alarcón, and Jesús Aguirre y Ortiz de Zárate. This will be done from the perspective of two pivotal currents of thought arising from Germany: neo- Marxism and Heideggerian thought. By doing so, not only will this research draw attention to the much overlooked issue of CT in Spain, but it will also help to re-contextualize Spanish thought of the second half of the twentieth century in the broader sociological and philosophical discussions which were taking place in post-war Europe and the United States. To this end, the thesis has been structured in two parts. The aim of the first part is to provide an introduction as well as a methodological and historical contextualization which will establish the framework for the rest of the thesis. In the second part, I will carry out an interdisciplinary comparative study analysing which aspects of the thought of these Spanish thinkers converge with the thought of the FS, and which differ from them. Attention will also be paid to the socio-political atmosphere they are immersed in, so as to find out how it contributes to shape their thought.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--York University, 2001. Graduate Programme in Political Science. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 444-465). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://wwwlib.umi.com/cr/yorku/fullcit?pNQ67912.

Max Horkheimer’s mature works on theology and Schopenhauerian metaphysics have been portrayed by subsequent critical theorists as an illicit regression from his earlier social theory in a two-fold sense. First, his concern to reflect on empirical experience is replaced with speculation regarding intelligible concepts, i.e. concepts that do not arise from observation on the basis of sense-intuition but are rather products of “pure” reason (God) or the imagination (Schopenhauer’s will). Second, his advocacy of the Enlightenment as an emancipatory political project is replaced by its skeptical critique. I argue that this consensus radically misunderstands the concerns animating the late Horkheimer insofar as his reflections on intelligible concepts are both intimately related to a continuing concern with empirical inquiry, as well as an outworking of his commitment to the realization of the Enlightenment. The argument is presented in three related movements. In the first, I interpret Horkheimer’s oeuvre in terms of his pervasive interest in developing a materialist logic. I begin by outlining his early understanding of thought as a form of inquiry for embodied social subjects (chapter 1), before noting how, in his mature theorizing, this account serves as a basis for a presentation of the relationship between various kinds of inquiry and the practice of social critique (chapter 2). In the second, I contend that Horkheimer’s critique of instrumental reason is best understood as congruent with this materialist logic, not as a speculative departure from an earlier concern with empirical inquiry. I begin by examining Horkheimer’s empirical analysis of how historical changes in the basic institutions defining political economy in modern life affect the reasoning habits of subjects (chapter 3). I then turn to his diagnosis of the way such changes affect the selfunderstanding of modern subjects, leading to a pervasive form of alienation (chapter 4). In the final movement, I present Horkheimer’s turn to theological concepts of the intelligible as a therapeutic response to this alienation. First, I examine his understanding of the content of theological concepts as well as how such concepts may be preserved in a form appropriate to modern life (chapter 5), and conclude by illustrating his own attempt at such a retrieval in his late reflections on the Jewish liturgy (chapter 6). In the conclusion, I note that this interpretation offers a constructive challenge to philosophers concerned with the tradition of critical theory. On the one hand, Horkheimer articulates what would be required for the fulfillment of the Enlightenment project in terms critical theorists will recognize as their own, by offering an account of the social practices that are necessary for the self-determination of the subject. Yet his presentation contests a fundamental axiom of such theorists regarding the role intelligible concepts ought to play in seeking this goal. Horkheimer defends an account of the significance of the liturgy for practices of reasoning that is quiet foreign to such theorists. Instead of setting liturgical reasoning over against a militantly “secular” Enlightenment, he demonstrates that such reasoning is integral to its fulfillment.

Why does mass-violence happen at all? This paper takes the first steps to establish a model to answer this question and explain extreme mass-violence as a phenomenon. This paper seeks to fill a gap in the field of research, in which models exist to explain the phenomenon of violence, with cases of genocide being seen as problems or exceptions, and as such researched as individual cases rather than as part of a wider phenomenon. This paper uses a selected part of the writings of Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer to establish the basis for a model to explain extreme-cases of mass-violence. The Five-Pillar Model includes 5 social elements - (1) Culture Industry (2) Mass-Media (3) Propaganda (4) Dehumanization (5) Ideological Awareness. When these pillars all reach a high enough level of severity, conditions enable elites to use scapegoating - to divert revolutionary attention to a specific puppet group, resulting in extreme mass-violence. The Five-Pillar Model is then used to analyze an empirical case - Cambodia 1975-1979 and shows how these pillars all existed in an extreme form in that case. This paper presents scapegoating as a possible explanation for the Cambodian case.

No presente trabalho tentamos reconstruir os principais lineamentos da teoria estética e da teoria da sociedade de Theodor Adorno. Com tal propósito, partimos de uma revisão critica da interpretação canônica efetuada tanto por Jürgen Habermas como por Axel Honneth do potencial explicativo contido em obras clássicas da primeira geração da Escola de Frankfurt. O objetivo central deste confronto procura demonstrar que o conceito de cultura de Adorno y Horkheimer tem um potencial explicativo e critico que nem Habermas, nem Honneth souberam destacar. Para reexaminar esse potencial teórico subterrâneo resulta imprescindível referir-se as duas grandes obras da maturidade de Adorno, a Teoria estética e a Dialética negativa. Realizamos-nos esse trabalho procurando explicitar um conceito de cultura alternativo ao de Habermas e Honneth, para tentar logo extrair conclusões referidas à lógica interna das ciências sociais. / The object of this thesis is to reconstruct the basic lines of Adorno\'s aesthetic and social theory. We discuss Jürgen Habermas and Axel Honneths canonic interpretation about the theoretic potential of the classic works of the first generation of the Frankfurt School. The central aim of this confrontation is to demonstrate that the concept of culture developed by Adorno and Horkheimer has a theoretic potential that had not been perceived by Habermas and Honneth. In order to reevaluate this potential it is necessary to discuss the last Adornos works, which means, to discuss once again the Aesthetic Theory and the Negative Dialectics. We pretend to find, finally, a different concept of culture in order to use it in the critical reexamination of the internal logic of social sciences.

Esta pesquisa tem por objetivo investigar a construção do discurso moderno envolvendo as mudanças climáticas globais. Tal discurso, que podemos observar em diversos tipos de publicações, eventos e atitudes, apregoa em geral a noção de que as mudanças climáticas globais já são uma realidade auto-evidente, com efeitos devastadores mundo afora, com um aquecimento progressivo e provocadas pelo homem, por meio do lançamento indiscriminado de poluentes na atmosfera. Sendo assim, fazem-se apelos apaixonados pela preservação da saúde do planeta, pela redução da emissão de poluentes, pois do contrário sofreremos graves conseqüências em nossas vidas, por exemplo, na agricultura, no abastecimento de água, no conforto térmico e na disseminação de doenças. Entretanto, no interior da comunidade científica, ao contrário do que possa parecer à primeira vista, não existe um consenso quanto às causas, conseqüências e mesmo quanto à realidade do aquecimento global. Constrói-se, dessa forma, um discurso que toma hipóteses por certezas, doutrinador pelo medo e, principalmente, que não rompe com as bases da concepção de mundo que gerou a degradação ambiental. Idealiza a possibilidade de uma harmonia entre a sociedade e natureza mas, ao mesmo tempo, conserva o mesmo tipo de racionalidade com relação a medidas mitigadoras e mantém seu utilitarismo - devemos proteger o meio ambiente porque o homem necessita dos recursos naturais para sobreviver. Enfim, faz o \"jogo do inimigo\", pois o apelo às graves conseqüências do aquecimento global é de forte impacto e tem maiores chances de agregar partidários e surtir algum efeito prático de mitigação. Acreditamos que, embora tal atitude possa até funcionar, não é o melhor caminho para a construção de uma autêntica consciência ecológica por manter fundamentalmente inalterada a mentalidade criticada. Sugerimos, assim, a construção de um argumento ético, a saber, o do valor intrínseco da vida e necessidade de respeito por ela, ao invés de insistir numa argumentação utilitarista e amedrontadora. A proteção à natureza não necessita de falsas premissas climáticas para sustentá-la, pois sua necessidade é auto-evidente. / This research aims to investigate the construction of the modern discourse involving global climate change. Such discourse, which we can observe in different kinds of publications, events and attitudes, generally proclaims the notion that global warming is already a self-evident reality, with its devastating effects worldwide, with a progressive warming and man-induced, via the indiscriminate launching of pollutants in the atmosphere. This way, passionate appeals for the planet\'s health preservation and the reduction of pollutants emission are made, otherwise we will suffer serious consequences in our lives, for example in agriculture, water supply, thermal comfort and dissemination of diseases. However, in the scientific community, instead of what we may think at first sight, there is no consensus about causes, consequences and even the reality of global warming. It is constructed, this way, a kind of discourse which takes hypothesis for certainties, indoctrinates by fear and, above all, does not break with the basis of the worldview that engendered environmental degradation. It idealizes the possibility of harmony between society and nature but, at the same time, conserves the same kind of rationality regarding mitigation measurements and keeps its utilitarianism - we must protect the environment because man needs natural resources to survive. In a word, it \"plays the enemy\'s game\", since the appeal to the serious consequences of global warming is powerful and has greater possibilities of aggregating partisans and producing some practical mitigation effect. We believe that, although this kind of attitude may work, this is not the best way to construct an authentic ecological consciousness because it keeps basically unchanged the criticized mentality. We suggest, thus, the construction of an ethical argument, to wit, the one about intrinsic value of life and the need of respecting it, instead of insisting on a utilitarian and frightening argument. The protection of nature does not need false climatic premises to support it, as its necessity is self-evident.

The central argument of this thesis is that, contrary to what is generally believed, Critical Theory (CT) – as understood by the Frankfurt School (FS) – did exist and was developed in Spain influenced by and parallel to the FS’s own research during the second half of the twentieth century. Thus, the aim of this research is to provide evidence of and explore the CT developed by three leading Spanish thinkers: José Luis López Aranguren, Jesús Aguirre, and María Zambrano. This will be done from the perspective of two pivotal currents of thought emerging from Germany: neo-Marxism and Heideggerian thought. To this end, I will carry out an interdisciplinary comparative study analysing what aspects of the thought of these Spanish thinkers converge with the thought of the FS, and which differ from them. Attention will also be paid to the socio-political atmosphere they were immersed in, so as to find out how it may have contributed to shape their thought. This research is firmly rooted in the context and methodology of the history of ideas. Consequently, biography and intentionality play key role in the reconstruction and analysis of these three authors’s thought. As a result of this methodological choice, the thesis has been divided into two parts which are quite distinct in focus and style. The first part, more theoretical and historical in nature, comprises two chapters. Chapter One provides a brief introduction to the main argument of the thesis as well as to the authors that it focuses on. It also introduces the reader to what CT is and in the context of the FS. In addition, this chapter provides some background into the history of ideas and discusses in depth the methodology adopted throughout the thesis as well as the theory which supports it. Chapter Two constitutes a short introduction to twentieth-century Spain. It provides some initial background on Aranguren, Zambrano, and Aguirre and their political positions. It also provides a contextualization of the socio-historical period that they lived in. The second part of the thesis comprises a total of four chapters: a chapter for each individual author and the conclusion. This second part is more critical and focuses more closely on each one of the three authors which are the object of this thesis, so that their work and development can be studied acknowledging the singularity of their approach. It is for this reason that, the conclusion will underline the cohesiveness of their work and their achievements in relation to each other, as well as highlighting the key concepts explored throughout the thesis. Chapter Three explores Aranguren’s relationship to neo-Marxism and, more specifically, to Marcuse. Moreover, the fact that Aranguren explicitly takes up and develops some of the key topics first identified by the FS, which are central to the critique of instrumental reason, is brought to light, specifically, Aranguren’s criticism of consumerism and his denunciation of the manipulation citizens are subjected to from the mass media and the State. The implications of this critique and Aranguren’s defence of the role of faith and of democratic values are discussed at length. Chapter Four discusses the political nature of Zambrano’s thought. Because of the idiosyncrasies of her expression, the highly symbolic nature of her language, as well as its abstraction and dispersion, the analysis of her work requires a process of reconstruction. This is carried out in the light of Heideggerian thought, which proves to be an influential factor in her development. Finally, the value of poetic reason as a practical alternative to instrumental reason is considered, so that the significance and implications of poetic reason and of her political project can be re-evaluated. Chapter Five focuses on Aguirre, who, despite being a very well-known public figure, has not been the object of any previous scholarly work. This chapter evaluates the role and influence of the different positions that this charismatic intellectual held throughout his life, paying particular attention to his role as the introducer of the FS in Spain. Even more importantly, this chapter specifically aims to clarify his controversial relationship to CT. The sixth and final chapter focuses on pivotal aspects of CT, as argued throughout the these two volumes (the role of biography, fragmentation, exile, art, the subject, psychoanalysis, and spirituality) and it argues that all these elements are present in some form in the work of these three authors. Thus, it examines, by way of conclusion, the aspects of the approaches adopted by Aranguren, Zambrano, and Aguirre which account for their work to be considered CT. Furthermore, I argue that by introducing the elements of spirituality, faith, and the role of choice, transcendentality becomes a key aspect of their alternative to instrumental reason. As a result, not only do they establish the singularity of their approach, but they also by-pass the limitations associated with the FS.

What does emancipation mean today? In political theory, the idea of emancipation has typically been understood as a process of rationalization involving the promotion of human rights or the historical overcoming of capitalism. However, in contemporary social criticism the earlier antagonism between liberalism and Marxism has largely been replaced by the conflict between Enlightenment thinking and Enlightenment critique. The tension between Enlightenment philosophy and Enlightenment skepticism can be taken as emblematic of the two main tendencies within contemporary critical thought. However, a similar ambivalence can be found in the classical critical theory of the so-called Frankfurt School. Given that we have to distinguish between two types of critical theoretical thought, is it even possible to answer the question about emancipation in an unambiguous way? The overall aim of this study is to examine the meaning of emancipation in contemporary critical thought. More specifically, the principal aim is to demonstrate that Jürgen Habermas’s critical theory can be understood as an attempt to overcome the opposition between the early and the late Frankfurt School in order subsequently to evaluate this attempt and thereby judge whether Habermas’s approach can serve as a key for combining the concepts of emancipation corresponding to these two types of critique. My main objection to Habermas’s reformulation of critical theory is that it is characterized by a lack of emancipatory potential and a lack of critical force. In trying to pave the way for an alternative approach, my strategy for accommodating the tensions between the two models of critical theory is to show that emancipation can be viewed as a process involving three disparate yet interconnected stages: an initial break in the continuity of history; a collective political struggle in order to realize the utopian vision thereby opened up; and, a possible understanding among the participants in a discourse.