Articles / Artikel
Refine
Document Type
- Reviews (43) (remove)
[First page] Critical Theory as a philosophical orientation has provided a radical stimulus to a contemporary generation of thinkers by combining the Hegelian and Marxian dialectical methods with Marx's critique of ideology. This has given rise to a distinctively powerful lens of social analysis for the project of emancipation in the multifarious issues of power struggle, ideology, language, discourse, technology, instrumental reason, aesthetic industry, etc. in social, economic, political, and cultural spheres of contemporary society. The revolutionary insights of Hegel and Marx in Critical Theory however, do not imply a closed system of thought among its practitioners; in fact, at times, it has been discordant, however vibrant. In this collection of correspondence, for instance, Marcuse disagrees with Dunayevskaya on the latter's interpretation and application of Hegel's dialectics and absolute idea/mind, while Fromm accused Marcuse of callousness towards moral qualities in political figures similar to that of Lenin (xviii), and Marcuse likewise attacked Fromm on his Freudian revisionism and liberalism regarding interpretations on Freudian psychoanalysis versus Marxist social analysis.
References to the disagreements between the Frankfurt School's intellectual leaders Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno with Herbert Marcuse (xvii), on the one hand, and with Erich Fromm (xix), on the other hand, were also alluded to. Nonetheless, by and through persistent critical dialogue and exchange-truly a real practice of dialectics-the critical theorists in different perspectives of the Marxist-Humanist, Hegelian-Marxist, and Socialist Humanist standpoints, have preserved and has brought to greater heights. ...
In light of the recent emphasis on social and cultural factors in psychoanalytic theory and practice, this article will elaborate earlier attempts to bridge psychoanalysis and the study of culture. I begin by considering the disciplinary tension between the fields of psychoanalysis and anthropology and the emergence of a >psychoanalytic anthropology,< which began in the 1920s and lasted through the 1950s. I then turn to the works of Harry Stack Sullivan and Erich Fromm, who developed an approach known as >cultural psychoanalysis.< I suggest that Sullivan and Fromm anticipate today’s sociocultural turn in psychoanalysis and that their work on culture and its role in psychological development and experience continues to be relevant. Rather than embracing a social or cultural determinism, Sullivan and Fromm focus on the interaction between culture and the person, thus creating an >integrationist< approach. Sullivan and Fromm develop a broad conception of culture that encompasses a critique of social and cultural norms and values. I suggest that this is particularly valuable because much current discussion of culture focuses chiefly on diversity and difference, thus overlooking the implicit social and cultural values at work in all human experience. I build on Sullivan and Fromm’s insights to illustrate the significance of early interpersonal psychoanalysis for the sociocultural turn in contemporary psychoanalytic theory and practice.