@article{Jay, author = {Jay, Martin}, title = {The Institut f{\"u}r Sozialforschung and the Origins of Critical Sociology}, series = {The Human Factor, Vol. 8 (No. 2, SPR 1969), pp. 6-18.}, journal = {The Human Factor, Vol. 8 (No. 2, SPR 1969), pp. 6-18.}, language = {en} } @article{Jay, author = {Jay, Martin}, title = {How Utopian is Marcuse?}, series = {Fischer, G. (Ed.): The Revival of American Socialism, New York (Oxford University Press) 1971, pp. 244-256.}, journal = {Fischer, G. (Ed.): The Revival of American Socialism, New York (Oxford University Press) 1971, pp. 244-256.}, language = {en} } @article{Jay, author = {Jay, Martin}, title = {The Franfurt School's Critique of Marxist Humanism}, series = {Social Research, New York, Vol. 39 (1972), pp. 285-305.}, journal = {Social Research, New York, Vol. 39 (1972), pp. 285-305.}, abstract = {The prevalent interpretation of the work of the Frankfurt Sch has been that it can be placed squarely in the camp of the Marxist Humanists. This view is challenged in an examination of the views of H. Marcuse, E. FROMM, T. W. Adorno, and M. Horkheimer, some of whom might classify as humanist Marxists, others not. By refusing to rest its entire theoretical position on the foundation stone of labor and by rejecting the total soc'ization of the world as a desideratum, the Frankfurt Sch expressed perhaps its key anti-metaphysical insight: the rejection of identity theory, whether idealistic or materialist. By identity theory is meant the belief that the ultimate oneness of subject and object, essence and appearance, particular and universal underlies the contradictions of the apparent world either inherently or potentially. Critical theory's rejection of this assumption was the primary reason why it could not be included among the variants of Marxist Humanism. Horkheimer and Adorno were hostile to the identity theory from the beginning, while Marcuse was far less so. It was this rejection of identity theory which underlay their hesitation about reducing culture to a function of the priority of labor. Psychoanalytic theory, particularly Freudianism, may have contributed to the Frankfurt Sch's distance from Marxist Humanism. The Sch came increasingly to see S. Freud as a bulwark against the false identity which threatened man in the post-World War II period. To Horkheimer and Adorno, writing in the 1960's, contingent man, not species man, was the real locus of human freedom. But absolute isolation and absolute solidarity were equally anathema. The individual was always to be understood as mediated through the non-identical totality, never as an end-point in himself. The Frankfurt Sch preserved the hope of a more truly humane society inhabited by concrete men rather than by the abstract subjects of the humanists, with whom they have so often been confused.}, language = {en} } @article{Jay, author = {Jay, Martin}, title = {The Frankfurt School and the Genesis of Critical Theory}, series = {Howard, D., Klare, K. E. (Eds.): The Unknown Dimension. European Marxism since Lenin, New York/London (Basic Books) 1972, pp. 225-248.}, journal = {Howard, D., Klare, K. E. (Eds.): The Unknown Dimension. European Marxism since Lenin, New York/London (Basic Books) 1972, pp. 225-248.}, language = {en} } @article{Jay, author = {Jay, Martin}, title = {The Dialectical Imagination. A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research 1923-1950, London (Heinemann Educational Books) 1973, pp. 86-112.}, language = {en} } @article{Jay, author = {Jay, Martin}, title = {Positive und negative Totalit{\"a}t. Adornos Alternativentwurf zur interdisziplin{\"a}ren Forschung}, series = {W. Bonss and N. Schindler (Eds.), Sozialforschung als Kritik. Zum sozialwissenschaftlichen Potential der Kritischen Theorie, Frankfurt (Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft, stw 400) 1982, pp. 67-86.}, journal = {W. Bonss and N. Schindler (Eds.), Sozialforschung als Kritik. Zum sozialwissenschaftlichen Potential der Kritischen Theorie, Frankfurt (Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft, stw 400) 1982, pp. 67-86.}, language = {de} } @article{Jay, author = {Jay, Martin}, title = {Onko kokemus edelleen kriisiss{\"a}? Ajatuksia Frankfurtin koulun kaihosta}, series = {O.-P. Moisio (Ed.), Kritiikin Lupaus. Nakokulmia Frankfurtin koulun kriittiseen teoriaan, Jyvaeskylaen (SoPhi Publisher) 1999, pp. 177-196.}, journal = {O.-P. Moisio (Ed.), Kritiikin Lupaus. Nakokulmia Frankfurtin koulun kriittiseen teoriaan, Jyvaeskylaen (SoPhi Publisher) 1999, pp. 177-196.}, language = {fi} } @article{Jay, author = {Jay, Martin}, title = {Die Antisemitismusanalyse der Kritischen Theorie,}, series = {M. Boll und R. Gross (Ed.), Die Frankfurter Schule und Frankfurt. Eine R{\"u}ckkehr nach Deutschland, Frankfurt (Wallstein) 2009, pp. 136-149,}, journal = {M. Boll und R. Gross (Ed.), Die Frankfurter Schule und Frankfurt. Eine R{\"u}ckkehr nach Deutschland, Frankfurt (Wallstein) 2009, pp. 136-149,}, language = {de} } @article{Jay, author = {Jay, Martin}, title = {Dialektische Phantasie. Die Geschichte der Frankfurter Schule und des Instituts f{\"u}r Sozialforschung 1923-1950, Frankfurt (S. Fischer Verlag) 1976, pp. 113-142. [= JAY, M., 1973.]}, number = {translation / {\"U}bersetzung}, language = {de} } @book{Jay, author = {Jay, Martin}, title = {Dialektische Phantasie. Die Geschichte der Frankfurter Schule und des Instituts f{\"u}r Sozialforschung 1923-1950, Frankfurt (S. Fischer Verlag) 1976.}, number = {translation / {\"U}bersetzung}, language = {de} }