Mazhab Frankfurt: Perbedaan antara revisi
Konten dihapus Konten ditambahkan
k Mahzab Frankfurt dipindahkan ke Mazhab Frankfurt |
Tidak ada ringkasan suntingan |
||
Baris 1:
[[Image:Adornohorkhab1.png|frame|[[Max Horkheimer]] (depan kiri), [[Theodor Adorno]] (depan kanan), dan [[Jürgen Habermas]] di belakang, kanan, pada [[1965]] di [[Heidelberg]]]]
'''Mazhab Frankfurt''' ialah sebuah aliran [[sosiologi|teori sosial]], [[penelitian sosial]], dan [[filsafat]] [[neo-Marxisme|neo-Marxis]].
Kelompok ini muncul di [[Institut Penelitian Sosial]] (''Institut für Sozialforschung'') dari [[Universitas Johann Wolfgang Goethe Frankfurt am Main|Universitas Frankfurt am Main]] di [[Jerman]] ketika [[Max Horkheimer]] menjadi direktur Institut tersebut pada [[1930]]. Istilah "Mazhab Frankfurt" adalah sebuah istilah informal yang digunakan untuk merujuk kepada para pemikir yang berafiliasi dengan Institut Penelitian Sosial atau yang terpengaruh oleh mereka. Ini bukanlah nama lembaga manapun, dan para pemikir utama dari Mazhab Frankfurt tidak menggunakan istilah ini untuk menyebut diri mereka.
<!--The Frankfurt School gathered together dissident [[Marxism|Marxists]], severe critics of [[capitalism]] who believed that some of [[Karl Marx|Marx]]'s alleged followers had come to parrot a narrow selection of Marx's ideas, usually in defense of orthodox [[Communist party|Communist]] or [[Social-Democratic]] parties. Influenced especially by the failure of working-class revolutions in Western Europe after [[World War I]] and by the rise of [[Nazism]] in an economically, technologically, and culturally advanced nation (Germany), they took up the task of choosing what parts of Marx's thought might serve to clarify social conditions which Marx himself had never seen. They drew on other schools of thought to fill in Marx's perceived omissions. [[Max Weber]] exerted a major influence, as did [[Sigmund Freud]] (as in [[Herbert Marcuse]]'s [[Freudo-Marxism|Freudo-Marxist]] synthesis in the [[1954]] work ''Eros and Civilization''). Their emphasis on the "critical" component of theory was derived significantly from their attempt to overcome the limits of [[positivism]], crude [[materialism]], and [[phenomenology]] by returning to [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]]'s [[critical philosophy]] and its successors in German [[idealism]], principally [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegel]]'s philosophy, with its emphasis on [[negation]] and [[contradiction]] as inherent properties of [[reality]]. A key influence also came from the publication in the [[1930s]] of Marx's ''[[Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844|Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts]]'' and ''[[The German Ideology]]'', which showed the continuity with Hegelianism that underlay Marx's thought: Marcuse was one of the first to articulate the theoretical significance of these texts.
==The First Phase==
The intellectual influences on and theoretical focus of the first generation of Frankfurt School critical theorists appear in the following diagram:
[[Image:Crittheory1.png|Critical theory ideas]]
The Institute made major contributions in two areas relating to the possibility of rational human [[subject]]s, i.e. individuals who could act rationally to take charge of their own [[society]] and their own [[history]]. The first consisted of social phenomena previously considered in Marxism as part of the "[[superstructure]]" or as [[ideology]]: [[personality]], [[family]] and [[authority]] structures (its first book publication bore the title ''Studies of Authority and the Family''), and the realm of [[aesthetics]] and [[popular culture|mass culture]]. Studies saw a common concern here in the ability of [[capitalism]] to destroy the preconditions of critical, revolutionary [[consciousness]]. This meant arriving at a sophisticated awareness of the depth dimension in which social oppression sustains itself. It also meant the beginning of [[critical theory]]'s recognition of ideology as part of the foundations of social structure. The Institute and various collaborators had a gigantic effect on (especially [[United States|American]]) [[social science]] through their work ''The Authoritarian Personality'', which conducted extensive [[empirical research]], using sociological and [[psychoanalysis|psychoanalytic]] categories, in order to characterize the forces that led individuals to affiliate with or support [[fascism|fascist]] movements or parties. 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.
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.
==The Second Phase==
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."
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."
This view of modern art as producing truth only through the negation of traditional aesthetic form and traditional norms of beauty because they have become ideological is characteristic of Adorno and of the Frankfurt School generally. It has been criticized by those who do not share its conception of modern society as a false totality that renders obsolete traditional conceptions and images of beauty and harmony.
==The Third Phase==
From these thoughts only a short step remained to the third phase of the Frankfurt School, which coincided with the postwar period, particularly from the early [[1950s]] to the middle [[1960s]]. With the growth of advanced industrial society under [[Cold War]] conditions, the critical theorists recognized that the structure of capitalism and history had changed decisively, that the modes of oppression operated differently, and that the industrial [[working class]] no longer remained the determinate negation of capitalism. This led to the attempt to root the dialectic in an absolute method of negativity, as in Marcuse's ''[[One-Dimensional Man]]'' and Adorno's ''[[Negative Dialectics]]''. During this period the Institute of Social Research re-settled in [[Frankfurt]] (although many of its associates remained in the United States), with the task not merely of continuing its research but of becoming a leading force in the sociological education and [[democratization]] of [[West Germany]]. This led to a certain systematization of the Institute's entire accumulation of empirical research and theoretical analysis.
More importantly, however, the Frankfurt School attempted to define the fate of reason in the new historical period. While Marcuse did so through analysis of structural changes in the [[labour (economics)|labor]] process under capitalism and inherent features of the [[methodology]] of [[science]], Horkheimer and Adorno concentrated on a re-examination of the foundation of critical theory. This effort appears in systematized form in Adorno's ''Negative Dialectics'', which tries to redefine dialectics for an era in which "philosophy, which once seemed obsolete, lives on because the moment to realize it was missed". Negative dialectics expresses the idea of critical thought so conceived that the apparatus of domination cannot co-opt it. Its central notion, long a focal one for Horkheimer and Adorno, suggests that the [[original sin]] of thought lies in its attempt to eliminate all that is other than thought, the attempt by the subject to devour the object, the striving for [[identity (philosophy)|identity]]. This [[reduction (philosophy)|reduction]] makes thought the accomplice of domination. ''Negative Dialectics'' rescues the "preponderance of the object", not through a naive [[epistemology|epistemological]] or metaphysical [[realism]] but through a thought based on [[differentiation]], [[paradox]], and ruse: a "logic of disintegration". Adorno thoroughly criticizes [[Martin Heidegger|Heidegger]]'s fundamental [[ontology]], which reintroduces [[idealism|idealistic]] and identity-based concepts under the guise of having overcome the philosophical tradition.
''Negative Dialectics'' comprises a monument to the end of the tradition of the individual subject as the locus of criticism. Without a revolutionary working class, the Frankfurt School had no one to rely on but the individual subject. But, as the [[liberalism|liberal]] capitalist social basis of the autonomous individual receded into the past, the dialectic based on it became more and more abstract. This stance helped prepare the way for the fourth, current phase of the Frankfurt School, shaped by the [[communication theory]] of Habermas.
Habermas's work takes the Frankfurt School's abiding interests in rationality, the human subject, [[democratic socialism]], and the dialectical method and overcomes a set of contradictions that always weakened critical theory: the contradictions between the materialist and [[transcendence (philosophy)|transcendental]] methods, between Marxian social theory and the [[individualism|individualist]] assumptions of critical [[rationalism]] between technical and social rationalization, and between cultural and psychological phenomena on the one hand and the [[economics|economic]] structure of society on the other. The Frankfurt School avoided taking a stand on the precise relationship between the materialist and transcendental methods, which led to ambiguity in their writings and confusion among their readers. Habermas' epistemology synthesizes these two traditions by showing that phenomenological and transcendental analysis can be subsumed under a materialist theory of [[social evolution]], while the materialist theory makes sense only as part of a quasi-transcendental theory of emancipatory knowledge that is the self-reflection of cultural evolution. The simultaneously empirical and transcendental nature of emancipatory knowledge becomes the foundation stone of critical theory.
By locating the conditions of rationality in the social structure of [[language]] use, Habermas moves the locus of rationality from the autonomous subject to subjects in [[interaction]]. Rationality is a property not of individuals per se, but rather of structures of undistorted [[communication]]. In this notion Habermas has overcome the ambiguous plight of the subject in critical theory. If capitalistic technological society weakens the autonomy and rationality of the subject, it is not through the domination of the individual by the apparatus but through technological rationality supplanting a describable rationality of communication. And, in his sketch of communicative [[ethics]] as the highest stage in the internal logic of the evolution of ethical systems, Habermas hints at the source of a new [[politics|political]] practice that incorporates the imperatives of evolutionary rationality.
Frankfurt School [[critical theory]] has influenced some segments of the [[Left-wing politics|Left wing]] and leftist thought (particularly the [[New Left]]). Herbert Marcuse has occasionally been described as the theorist or intellectual progenitor of the [[New Left]]. Their work also heavily influenced intellectual discourse on [[popular culture]] and scholarly [[popular culture studies]]. -->
== Para pemikir dan pakar utama Mazhab Frankfurt ==
*[[Theodor W. Adorno]]
*[[Max Horkheimer]]
*[[Walter Benjamin]]
*[[Herbert Marcuse]]
*[[Alfred Sohn-Rethel]]
*[[Leo Löwenthal]]
*[[Franz Leopold Neumann|Franz Neumann]]
*[[Franz Oppenheimer]]
*[[Friedrich Pollock]]
*[[Erich Fromm]]
*[[Alfred Schmidt]]
*[[Jürgen Habermas]]
*[[Oskar Negt]]
*[[Karl A. Wittfogel]]
*[[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.
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. ISBN 0-520-20423-9.
*Rolf Wiggershaus. ''The Frankfurt School: Its History, Theories and Political Significance''. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1995. ISBN 0-262-73113-4.
*Jeremy J. Shapiro, "The Critical Theory of Frankfurt", ''Times Literary Supplement'', Oct. 4, 1974, No. 3,787. (Bahan-bahan untuk penerbitan ini telah digunakan atau diadaptasi untuk artikel ini, dengan izin.)
== Lihat pula ==
*[[Marxisme budaya]]
*[[Teori Kritis (Mazhab Frankfurt)]]
*[[Mazhab praxis]]
== Pranala luar ==
* {{en}} [http://www.ifs.uni-frankfurt.de/english/history.htm Sejarah Institute of Social Research]
* {{en}} [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]
* {{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]
[[Category:Mazhab Frankfurt]]
[[Category:Teori Marxis]]
[[Category:Paradigma sosial]]
[[Category:Filsafat sosial]]
[[Category:Teori sejarah]]
[[bg:Франкфуртското Училище]]
[[ca:Escola de Frankfurt]]
[[cs:Frankfurtská škola]]
[[da:Frankfurterskolen]]
[[de:Frankfurter Schule]]
[[en:Frankfurt School]]
[[es:Escuela de Frankfurt]]
[[fa:مکتب فرانکفورت]]
[[fi:Frankfurtin koulukunta]]
[[fr:École de Francfort]]
[[he:אסכולת פרנקפורט]]
[[it:Scuola di Francoforte]]
[[ja:フランクフルト学派]]
[[ko:프랑크푸르트 학파]]
[[lt:Frankfurto mokykla]]
[[nl:Frankfurter Schule]]
[[no:Frankfurtskolen]]
[[pl:Szkoła frankfurcka]]
[[pt:Escola de Frankfurt]]
[[ru:Франкфуртская школа]]
[[sv:Frankfurtskolan]]
[[tr:Frankfurt Okulu]]
[[zh:法蘭克福學派]]
[[zh-min-nan:Frankfurt Ha̍k-phài]]
| |||