Already a subscriber? Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Displaying: 61-70 of 468 documents


61. Radical Philosophy Review: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
Contributors
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
62. Radical Philosophy Review: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
Call for Papers: Political Theory and Philosophy in a Time of Mass Incarceration
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
63. Radical Philosophy Review: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Harry van der Linden, A Note from the Editor
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
64. Radical Philosophy Review: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Arnold L. Farr, Douglas Kellner, Andrew T. Lamas, Charles Reitz, Herbert Marcuse's Critical Refusals
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
archives
65. Radical Philosophy Review: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Jürgen Habermas, Charles Reitz, Herbert Marcuse: Critical Educator for a New Generation--A Personal Reminiscence
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Reflecting on the development of social theory in postwar Germany, Habermas asked, Who better than Germany’s expelled Jewish scholars had something to teach the new nation’s young intellectuals about the dark elements of the all-too-near Nazi past? Habermas’s respect for Adorno, Horkheimer, Löwith, Popper, and others who returned is enormous. Still, he makes clear in this personal letter to Marcuse that it was Marcuse whom he found more exhilarating than any of the others. This he says was due to Marcuse’s critical Marxism, the links he forged between Marx and Freud, and his ability to connect Frankfurt theory to radical praxis against militarism and colonialism.
66. Radical Philosophy Review: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Herbert Marcuse, Leo Löwenthal, Charles Reitz, The Dialectics of Liberation and Radical Activism: An Exchange of Letters between Herbert Marcuse and Leo Löwenthal
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Warm regards are exchanged between old friends who are seriously bent on changing the world, not merely analyzing it. Mutual appreciation is evident, as is some tension. Herbert Marcuse’s militant critique of US war-making, waste-making, and poverty is taking Europe by storm. Leo Löwenthal tips his hat with subtle irony and humor to Marcuse’s 1967 triumphs as a public intellectual and political theorist. Activist students give Marcuse great credit because other Frankfurt theorists like Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno have remained aloof from this protest. Löwenthal remains more skeptical than Marcuse about the goals of the student movement, which seem to him too ideological and insufficiently radical.
67. Radical Philosophy Review: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Herbert Marcuse, From Marx to Freud to Marx: Letter to Martin Jay; Remarks to Sidney Lipshires
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Sidney Lipshires, a Marxist scholar, considered Marcuse’s shift “from Marx to Freud” problematic. Marcuse’s legitimate criticism of the conformist/adjustment elements of psychoanalytical practice seemed to Lipshires to require a recognition of theoretical weakness in Freud’s philosophical metapsychology, but this is in fact what Marcuse admires most—as explained in Eros and Civilization. Marcuse responds that Freud’s mythological material serves to recall the possibility of a nonrepressive culture! The anthropological research of Margaret Mead operates likewise. Marcuse steadfastly regards practice as political praxis, aiming at changing society as a whole, and says that Mead’s work and Freud’s work has helped him bring social theory back to Marx.
eros and praxis
68. Radical Philosophy Review: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Stanley Aronowitz, Marcuse's Conception of Eros
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In his books Eros and Civilization and An Essay on Liberation, Herbert Marcuse offers a different, but complementary, theory of eros from that of Freud. While sexuality still occupies a central space in the pleasure principle, Marcuse extends the concept to embrace a wider understanding of eros. Now eros is termed the “new sensibility,” which, in his view, has been made possible by the end of scarcity’s rule over human life. In an epoch in which necessary labor can be sharply reduced, we would have time to develop our capacities: arts and crafts, friendships, noncommodified intellectual pursuits, and, of course, love beyond procreation. The new sensibility can be dismissed as a utopian hope in a period of retrenchment of pleasure, but Marcuse refuses the prevailing tendency to ratify repression.
69. Radical Philosophy Review: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Axel Honneth, Charles Reitz, Herbert Marcuse and the Frankfurt School
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This paper presents the distinctive qualities of Herbert Marcuse’s approach to critical theorizing. Marcuse’s early life in the German capital city of Berlin had lasting and contrasting impacts upon his political perspective and social activism when compared to the more provincial Frankfurt experiences of Horkheimer and Adorno. Marcuse was also more upbeat, resistant to defeatism, and conventionally thorough—in other words, less fragmentary or experimental—in his academic writing. I also offer a detailed description of the deep intellectual affinities linking the work of Horkheimer, Adorno, and Marcuse into a distinguished “school” of critical social thought.
70. Radical Philosophy Review: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Richard J. Bernstein, Marcuse's Critical Legacy
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
My aim in this paper is to engage in three interrelated tasks. First, I want to take a sweeping look at the historical vicissitudes of the concept of critique—in a style similar to the way in which Marcuse treated key concepts in the 1930s and 1940s, for example, in his famous essay “The Concept of Essence.” Second, my sketch of the history of critique is oriented to exploring Marcuse’s famous essay “Philosophy and Critical Theory.” I believe that in this 1937 essay, Marcuse put his finger on the central problem of critical theory—a problem that concerned him for the rest of this life. Third, I want to explore the critical legacy of Marcuse—a critical legacy that is revealed in the way in which it treated and constantly returned to this central problem.