Mazhab Frankfurt: Perbedaan antara revisi
Konten dihapus Konten ditambahkan
Tidak ada ringkasan suntingan |
Fitur saranan suntingan: 2 pranala ditambahkan. Tag: VisualEditor Suntingan perangkat seluler Suntingan peramban seluler Tugas pengguna baru Disarankan: tambahkan pranala |
||
| (63 revisi perantara oleh 40 pengguna tidak ditampilkan) | |||
Baris 1:
{{terjemah|Inggris}}
{{stub}}[[Image:Adornohorkhab1.png|frame|[[Max Horkheimer]] (depan kiri), [[Theodor Adorno]] (depan kanan), dan [[Jürgen Habermas]] di belakang, kanan, pada [[1965]] di [[Heidelberg]]]]▼
{{kegunaanlain|Frankfurt}}
▲
'''Mazhab Frankfurt'''
Ketertarikan Mazhab Frankfurt terhadap pemikiran [[Karl Marx]] disebabkan antara lain oleh ketidakpuasan mereka terhadap penggunaan teori-teori [[Marxisme]] oleh kebanyakan orang lain, yang mereka anggap merupakan pandangan sempit terhadap pandangan asli [[Karl Marx]]. Menurut mereka, pandangan sempit ini tidak mampu memberikan 'jawaban' terhadap situasi mereka pada saat itu di Jerman. Setelah [[Perang Dunia Pertama]] dan meningkatnya kekuatan politik [[
Patut dicatat bahwa beberapa pemikir utama
Contoh karya-karya terkenal yang dihasilkan para pemikir Mazhab Frankfurt antara lain ''Dialectic of Enlightenment'', ''Minima Moralia'', ''Illuminations''.
== Sejarah
Mazhab Frankfurt mengumpulkan para pembangkang [[Marxisme|Marxis]], para kritikus keras [[kapitalisme]] yang percaya bahwa beberapa orang yang dianggap sebagai pengikut [[Karl Marx|Marx]] telah membeo, menirukan beberapa cuplikan sempit dari gagasan-gagasan Marx, biasanya dalam membela partai-partai [[Partai Komunis|komunis]] atau [[Sosial-Demokrat]] ortodoks. Mereka khususnya dipengaruhi oleh kegagalan revolusi kaum pekerja di [[Eropa Barat]] setelah [[Perang Dunia I]] dan oleh bangkitnya [[Nazisme]] di negara yang secara ekonomi, teknologi, dan budaya maju (Jerman). Karena itu mereka merasa harus memilih bagian-bagian mana dari pemikiran-pemikiran Marx yang dapat menolong untuk memperjelas kondisi-kondisi yang Marx sendiri tidak pernah lihat. Mereka meminjam dari mazhab-mazhab pemikiran lain yang mengisi apa yang dianggap kurang dari Marx. [[Max Weber]] memberikan pengaruh yang besar, seperti halnya juga [[Sigmund Freud]] (seperti dalam kasus sintesis [[Freudo-Marxisme|Freudo-Marxis]] oleh [[Herbert Marcuse]] dalam karyanya tahun [[1954]], ''Eros and Civilization''). Penekanan mereka terhadap komponen "Kritis" dari teori sangat banyak meminjam dari upaya mereka untuk mengatasi batas-batas dari [[positivisme]], [[materialisme]] yang kasar, dan [[fenomenologi]] dengan kembali kepada [[filsafat kritis]] [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]] dan penerus-penerusnya dalam [[idealisme]] Jerman, khususnya filsafat [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegel]], dengan penekanannya pada [[negasi]] dan [[kontradiksi]] sebagai bagian yang inheren dari [[realitas]]. Sebuah pengaruh penting juga dating dari penerbitan ''[[Manuskrip Ekonomi dan Filsafat tahun 1844|Manuskrip Ekonomi-Filsafat]]'' dan ''[[Ideologi Jerman]]'' karya Marx tahun [[1930-an]] yang memperlihatkan kesinambungan dengan Hegelianisme yang mendasari pemikiran-pemikiran Marx: Marcuse adalah salah satu orang yang pertama mengartikulasikan signifikansi teoretis dari teks-teks ini.
== Fase Pertama ==
Pengaruh intelektual dan fokus teoretis dari generasi perttama dari para theoretikus Kritis Mazhab Frankfurt muncul dalam diagram berikut:
Institut ini membuat sumbangan-sumbangan penting dalam dua bidang yang terkait dengan kemungkinan-kemungkinan [[subyek]] manusia yang rasional, yaitu individu-individu yang dapat bertindak secara rasional untuk bertanggung jawab atas [[masyarakat]] dan [[sejarah]] mereka sendiri. Yang pertama terdiri atas fenomena sosial yang sebelumnya dianggap dalam Marxisme sebagai bagian dari "[[superstruktur]]" atau sebagai [[ideologi]]: struktur-struktur [[kepribadian]], [[keluarga]] dan [[otoritas]] (penerbitan bukunya yang pertama diberi judul ''Studi tentang Otoritas dan Keluarga''), dan ranah [[estetika]] dan [[budaya populer|budaya massa]]. Studi-studi ini juga melihat kepedulian bersama di sini dalam kemampuan [[kapitalisme]] untuk menghancurkan prakondisi-prakondisi Kritis, [[kesadaran]] revolusioner. Ini berarti tiba pada kesadaran canggih tentang dimensi kedalaman di mana penindasan sosial mempertahankan dirinya sendiri. Ini juga merupakan awal dari pengakuan [[teori Kritis]] terhadap ideologi sebagai bagian dari dasar-dasar struktur sosial. Institut ini dan berbagai pihak yang ikut bekerja sama dengannya mempunyai dampak yang hebat terhadap [[ilmu sosial]] (khususnya [[Amerika Serikat|Amerika]]) melalui karya mereka ''The Authoritarian Personality'' (“Kepribadian yang [[Otoritarianisme|Otoriter]]), yang melakukan [[penelitian empiris]] yang luas, dengan menggunakan kategori-kategori sosiologis dan [[psikoanalisis]], untuk menggambarkan kekuatan-kekuatan yang mendorong individu untuk berafiliasi dengan atau mendukung gerakan-gerakan atau partai-partai [[fasisme|fasis]].<!--The study found the assertion of [[Universal (metaphysics)|universals]], or even [[truth]], to be a hallmark of fascism; by calling into question any notion of a higher ideal, or a shared mission for humanity, ''The Authoritarian Personality'' contributed greatly to the emergence of the [[counterculture]].
The nature of Marxism itself formed the second focus of the Institute, and in this context the concept of ''critical theory'' originated. The term served several purposes - first, it contrasted from traditional notions of theory, which were largely either positivist or scientific. Second, the term allowed them to escape the politically charged label of "Marxism." Third, it explicitly linked them with the "critical philosophy" of [[Immanuel Kant]], where the term "critique" meant philosophical reflection on the limits of claims made for certain kinds of knowledge and a direct connection between such critique and the emphasis on moral autonomy. In an intellectual context defined by dogmatic positivism and scientism on the one hand and dogmatic "scientific socialism" on the other, critical theory meant to rehabilitate through such a philosophically critical approach an orientation toward revolutionary agency, or at least its possibility, at a time when it seemed in decline.
▲[[Image:Crittheory1.png|Critical theory ideas]]
Finally, in the context of both Marxist-Leninist and Social-Democratic orthodoxy, which emphasized Marxism as a new kind of positive science, they were linking up with the implicit epistemology of [[Karl Marx]]'s work, which presented itself as critique, as in Marx's "Capital: a critique of political economy", wanting to emphasize that Marx was attempting to create a new kind of critical analysis oriented toward the unity of theory and revolutionary practice rather than a new kind of positive science. In the 1960s, [[Jürgen Habermas]] raised the epistemological discussion to a new level in his "Knowledge and Human Interests" (1968), by identifying critical knowledge as based on principles that differentiated it either from the natural sciences or the humanities, through its orientation to self-reflection and emancipation.
▲The nature of Marxism itself formed the second focus of the Institute, and in this context the concept of ''critical theory'' originated. The term served several purposes - first, it contrasted from traditional notions of theory, which were largely either positivist or scientific. Second, the term allowed them to escape the politically charged label of "Marxism." Third, it explicitly linked them with the "critical philosophy" of [[Immanuel Kant]], where the term "critique" meant philosophical reflection on the limits of claims made for certain kinds of knowledge and a direct connection between such critique and the emphasis on moral autonomy. In an intellectual context defined by dogmatic positivism and scientism on the one hand and dogmatic "scientific socialism" on the other, critical theory meant to rehabilitate through such a philosophically critical approach an orientation toward revolutionary agency, or at least its possibility, at a time when it seemed in decline.
▲Finally, in the context of both Marxist-Leninist and Social-Democratic orthodoxy, which emphasized Marxism as a new kind of positive science, they were linking up with the implicit epistemology of [[Karl Marx]]'s work, which presented itself as critique, as in Marx's "Capital: a critique of political economy", wanting to emphasize that Marx was attempting to create a new kind of critical analysis oriented toward the unity of theory and revolutionary practice rather than a new kind of positive science. In the 1960s, [[Jürgen Habermas]] raised the epistemological discussion to a new level in his "Knowledge and Human Interests" (1968), by identifying critical knowledge as based on principles that differentiated it either from the natural sciences or the humanities, through its orientation to self-reflection and emancipation.
Although Horkheimer's distinction between traditional and critical theory in one sense merely repeated Marx's dictum that philosophers have always [[interpretation|interpreted]] the world and the point is to change it, the Institute, in its critique of ideology, took on such philosophical currents as [[positivism]], [[phenomenology]], [[existentialism]], and [[pragmatism]], with an implied [[critique]] of contemporary Marxism, which had turned [[dialectics]] into an alternate [[science]] or [[metaphysics]]. The Institute attempted to reformulate dialectics as a concrete [[scientific method|method]], continually aware of the specific social roots of thought and of the specific constellation of forces that affected the possibility of liberation. Accordingly, critical theory rejected the materialist metaphysics of [[orthodox Marxism]]. For Horkheimer and his associates, materialism meant the orientation of theory towards practice and towards the fulfillment of human needs, not a metaphysical statement about the nature of reality.
Baris 30:
The second phase of Frankfurt School critical theory centres principally on two works that rank as classics of twentieth-century thought: [[Max Horkheimer|Horkheimer]]'s and [[Theodor Adorno|Adorno]]'s ''[[Dialectic of Enlightenment]]'' (1944) and Adorno's ''[[Minima Moralia]]'' (1951). The authors wrote both works during the Institute's American [[exile]] in the Nazi period. While retaining much of the Marxian analysis, in these works critical theory has shifted its emphasis. The critique of capitalism has turned into a critique of [[Western civilization]] as a whole. Indeed, the ''Dialectic of Enlightenment'' uses the ''[[Odyssey]]'' as a paradigm for the analysis of [[bourgeoisie|bourgeois]] consciousness. Horkheimer and Adorno already present in these works many themes that have come to dominate the social thought of recent years: the domination of [[nature]] appears as central to Western civilization long before [[ecology]] had become a [[catchphrase]] of the day.
The analysis of [[reason]] now goes one stage further. The [[rationality]] of Western civilization appears as a fusion of domination and of [[technology|technological]] rationality, bringing all of external and internal nature under the power of the human subject. In the process, however, the subject itself gets swallowed up, and no social force analogous to the [[proletariat]] can be identified that will enable the subject to [[liberty|emancipate]] itself. Hence the subtitle of ''Minima Moralia'': "Reflections from Damaged Life". In Adorno's words,
::"For since the overwhelming [[objectivity]] of historical movement in its present phase consists so far only in the dissolution of the subject, without yet giving rise to a new one, individual [[experience]] necessarily bases itself on the old subject, now historically condemned, which is still for-itself, but no longer in-itself. The subject still feels sure of its [[Wiktionary:autonomy|autonomy]], but the nullity demonstrated to subjects by the [[concentration camp]] is already overtaking the form of [[subjectivity]] itself."
Baris 36:
Consequently, at a time when it appears that reality itself has become ideology, the greatest contribution that critical theory can make is to explore the dialectical contradictions of individual subjective experience on the one hand, and to preserve the [[truth]] of theory on the other. Even the dialectic can become a means to domination: "Its truth or untruth, therefore, is not inherent in the method itself, but in its intention in the historical process." And this intention must be toward integral [[Freedom (political)|freedom]] and [[happiness]]: "the only philosophy which can be responsibly practised in face of despair is the attempt to contemplate all things as they would present themselves from the standpoint of redemption". How far from orthodox Marxism is Adorno's conclusion: "But beside the demand thus placed on thought, the question of the reality or unreality of redemption itself hardly matters."
Adorno, a trained musician, wrote ''The Philosophy of Modern Music'', in which he, in essence, polemicizes against [[beauty]] itself -- because it has become part of the ideology of advanced capitalist society and the false consciousness that contributes to domination by prettifying it. Avant-garde art and music preserve the truth by capturing the reality of human suffering. Hence:
::"What radical music perceives is the untransfigured suffering of man... The seismographic registration of traumatic shock becomes, at the same time, the technical structural law of music. It forbids continuity and development. Musical language is polarized according to its extreme; towards gestures of shock resembling bodily convulsions on the one hand, and on the other towards a crystalline standstill of a human being whom anxiety causes to freeze in her tracks... Modern music sees absolute oblivion as its goal. It is the surviving message of despair from the shipwrecked."
Baris 56:
== Para pemikir dan pakar utama Mazhab Frankfurt ==
[[Berkas:Alfredschmidt.jpg|jmpl|Alfred Schmidt, pada [[1980-an]] di [[Universitas Goethe Frankfurt|Universitas Frankfurt]].]]
* [[
* [[
* [[
* [[
* [[Alfred Sohn-Rethel]]
*[[Franz Leopold Neumann|Franz Neumann]]▼
* [[
▲* [[Franz Leopold Neumann|Franz Neumann]]
* [[
* [[
* [[
* [[
* [[
* [[
* [[
* [[Susan Buck-Morss]]
* [[Axel Honneth]]
<!--==Critics of the Frankfurt School==
Several camps of criticism of the Frankfurt School have emerged.
*One criticism is that the intellectual perspective of the Frankfurt School is really a romantic, [[academic elitism|elitist]] critique of mass culture dressed-up in [[neo-Marxism|neo-Marxist]] clothing: what really bothers the critical theorists in this view is not social oppression, but that the masses like [[Ian Fleming]] and [[The Beatles]] instead of [[Samuel Beckett]] and [[Anton Webern|Webern]].
*Another criticism, originating from the Left, is that critical theory is a form of bourgeois idealism that has no inherent relation to political practice and is totally isolated from any ongoing revolutionary movement.
▲*Another criticism, originating from the Left, is that critical theory is a form of bourgeois idealism that has no inherent relation to political practice and is totally isolated from any ongoing revolutionary movement.
Both of these criticisms were captured in [[Georg Lukács]]'s phrase "Grand Hotel Abyss" as a syndrome he imputed to the members of the Frankfurt School.-->
;Kritikus terkemuka terhadap Mazhab Frankfurt
:* [[Henryk Grossman]]
:* [[Georg Lukács]]
:* [[Umberto Eco]]
== Rujukan ==
* Martin Jay. ''The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute for Social Research 1923-1950''. Berkeley, [[University of California Press]], 1996.
* Rolf Wiggershaus. ''The Frankfurt School: Its History, Theories and Political Significance''.
* Jeremy J. Shapiro, "The Critical Theory of Frankfurt", ''Times Literary Supplement'', Oct. 4, 1974, No. 3,787.
==Bacaan
{{Refbegin|30em}}
* Arato, Andrew and Eike Gebhardt, Eds. ''The Essential Frankfurt School Reader''. New York: Continuum, 1982.
*[[Teori Kritis (Mazhab Frankfurt)]]▼
* Bernstein, Jay (ed.). ''The Frankfurt School: Critical Assessments'' I–VI. New York: Routledge, 1994.
* Benhabib, Seyla. ''Critique, Norm, and Utopia: A Study of the Foundations of Critical Theory''. New York: Columbia University Press, 1986.
* Bottomore, Tom. ''The Frankfurt School and its Critics''. New York: Routledge, 2002.
* Bronner, Stephen Eric and Douglas MacKay Kellner (eds.). ''Critical Theory and Society: A Reader''. New York: Routledge, 1989.
* Brosio, Richard A. [http://libx.bsu.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/BSMngrph&CISOPTR=21&CISOBOX=1&REC=11 ''The Frankfurt School: An Analysis of the Contradictions and Crises of Liberal Capitalist Societies.''] 1980.
* Crone, Michael (ed.): ''Vertreter der Frankfurter Schule in den Hörfunkprogrammen 1950–1992.'' [[Hessischer Rundfunk]], Frankfurt am Main 1992. (Bibliography.)
* Friedman, George. ''The Political Philosophy of the Frankfurt School''. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1981.
* Held, David. ''Introduction to Critical Theory: Horkheimer to Habermas''. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.
* Gerhardt, Christina. "Frankfurt School". ''The International Encyclopedia of Revolution and Protest, 1500 to the Present''. 8 vols. Ed. Immanuel Ness. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2009. 12–13.
* {{cite book | author=Immanen, Mikko | title=A Promise of Concreteness: Martin Heidegger's Unacknowledged Role in the Formation of Frankfurt School in the Weimar Republic | publisher=University of Helsinki | type=PhD thesis | year=2017 | isbn=978-951-51-3205-5 }}
* Jay, Martin. ''The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute for Social Research 1923–1950''. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. 1996.
* {{Cite book| publisher = Verso| isbn = 978-1-78478-568-0| last = Jeffries| first = Stuart| title = Grand Hotel Abyss: The Lives of the Frankfurt School| url = https://archive.org/details/grandhotelabyssl0000jeff| location = London – Brooklyn, New York| date = 2016 }}
* Kompridis, Nikolas. ''Critique and Disclosure: Critical Theory between Past and Future''. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2006.
* Postone, Moishe. ''Time, Labor, and Social Domination: A Reinterpretation of Marx's Critical Theory''. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
* Schwartz, Frederic J. ''Blind Spots: Critical Theory and the History of Art in Twentieth-Century Germany''. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2005.
* Shapiro, Jeremy J. "The Critical Theory of Frankfurt". ''Times Literary Supplement'' 3 (4 October 1974) 787.
* Scheuerman, William E. ''Frankfurt School Perspectives on Globalization, Democracy, and the Law''. 3rd ed. New York: Routledge, 2008.
* Wiggershaus, Rolf. ''The Frankfurt School: Its History, Theories and Political Significance''. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1995.
* Wheatland, Thomas. ''The Frankfurt School in Exile''. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009.
{{Refend}}
== Pranala luar ==
* {{en}} [http://www.ifs.uni-frankfurt.de/english/history.htm Sejarah Institute of Social Research] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120902023351/http://www.ifs.uni-frankfurt.de/english/history.htm |date=2012-09-02 }}
* {{en}} [https://web.archive.org/web/20070310124255/http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/illumina%20Folder/ Illuminations - Proyek Teori Kritis]
* {{en}} [http://home.cwru.edu/~ngb2/Pages/Intro.html Pengantar ke dalam Mazhab Frankfurt] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060301110006/http://home.cwru.edu/~ngb2/Pages/Intro.html |date=2006-03-01 }}
* {{en}} [http://www.marxists.org/subject/frankfurt-school/ Mazhab Frankfurt (Arsip Internet Marxis)]
* {{en}} [http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/marcuse/works/eros-civilisation/ Cuplikan dari "Eros and Civilization"]
* {{es}} [http://www.boulesis.com/especial/escueladefrankfurt/ Escuela de Frankfurt]
{{Teori kritis}}
[[Category:Teori Marxis]]▼
[[Category:Paradigma sosial]]▼
[[Category:Filsafat sosial]]▼
[[Category:Teori sejarah]]▼
| |||