834707408

but the aforesaid practical intentionality of thought is deemed to be the most essential feature distinguishing the critical theory from all others.

The epistemological characteristics of the critical theory will be-come clearer as we view its relationship to social experience from some other angles. (1) The question arises what the relationship is be-tween the critical theory and the social-historical consciousness exist-ing in various sections of society? It would be naive to think that consciousness in any section of society arises quite spontaneously, and particularly not to realize that the consciousness of the opressed classes and strata is ceaselessly exposed to various forms of pressure and influence by the ruling social forces, as well as to social pressures of traditions carried over from the past. But, like the collective mentality of different sections of society, it is a fact with which the theory must reckon. (2) The next question is how to realize in society the interest engendering the critical theory by transforming its cognitive results into social practice? The critical theory answers these questions by stating that truth neither results direclty from society, or from the empirically given consciousness of any part thereof, nor does it di-rectly turn into social practice In his paper »Traditional and Critical Theory«, where the theory is much morę involved with the class di-vision of society than in his later writings, Horkheimer stressed the vital difference between critical theory and the scientific description of the social psychology of the classes. »If the essence of the critical theory consisted in formulating at a given moment the prevalent feel-ings and images of a class, there would be no structural difference between it and particular science; it would boil down to a description of psychical contents, typical for determined social groups, to social psychology.¹ A systematization of the content of the proletariats’ consciousness »could not provide a correct image of its life and in-terests«.² The situation of the proletariat in a capitalist society does not guarantee the correctness of its consciousness.³ Horkheimer also warns against tensions between thinkers, classes and their political organizations, pointing out that »hostility toward theory in generał, which is evident today in public life, is in fact levelled against transformatory activities connected with critical thought«, and that »wi-thout a continuation of theoretical efforts which for the sake of ra-tional organization of a futurę society throw a critical light upon what is ... there is no ground to hope for a substantial improvement

of human existence.⁴ However, while explaining the necessarily re-lative autonomy of theoretical thinking and the lack of a predetermin-ed harmony between theory and practice, Horkheimer remembers that theory and truth contained in it are ineffectual unless they are related to social aspirations of real historical forces, sińce »truth pro-gresses because men who posses it fight for it dauntlessly, apply it and enforce it, act in accordance with it, cause it to prevail against all

628

1

Ibid., p. 268.

2

* Ibid., p. 268.

3

   Ibid., p. 267.

4

   Ibid., pp. 269, 283-284.