Bill's Notes

Frankfurt School
Interesting articles here and here on the Frankfurt School, which generated Critical Theory. Some long-time readers of this blog may know that I came face-to-face with this theory in grad school, and was astonished that such bullshit could be accepted by so many intellectuals.

Then I poked into it, and discovered it was a hall of mirrors, that it seemed on the surface to have many compelling points. I came to recognize that Critical Theory was not so much "made up bullshit," but as a series of logical steps once you accept certain premises. That is, skepticism unmoored by humanistic values or Judaeo-Christian roots, naturally progresses to this state -- that is, power relations are all. (Secular humanists and Christians are despised and ridiculed by Critical Theoriests.)

At least four or five years of my intellectual life was concerned with responding to the challenge of Critical Theory (that is, without throwing up my hand in disgust and ignoring it because I wanted to believe my own point of view.) While I was fighting off Critical Theory, I did two things: (1) I used Critical Theory against itself, especially it's radical skepticism. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, and if you attack knowledge, then you don't, either, so STFU; (2) Moved toward mysticism, which simply blows materialism and Critical Theory out of the water.

Later, through the help of Ron McRae and others, I came to recognize that Critical Theory is pseudo-intellectual -- it uses intellectual language, but in fact conflates and twists categories of thought, relies on obscure language and sleight-of-hand, to basically declare one set of folks should be more powerful than others. It is not rational. It is an attack on reason.

Eventually, I came to believe that Critical Theory is almost purely abstract in its thinking -- that is, it's immaterial in its approach. It concerns thoughts about thoughts about thoughts about thoughts, intellectual castles in the air, which are then brought to earth and imposed, totalitarian-style, on the rest of us.

What surprised me, in the 15 years of grad school, as how effective it's been in the real world. The whole postmodern culture of narcissism and death is all rooted in Critical Theory.

My two cents.
Paul Burgess (www):
Yes, precisely. Thank you for summing up a good chunk of the reason why, after I finished my Ph.D. at Duke University, I turned around and walked away from academia for good.

And Duke, you know, was/is a world epicenter of Critical Theory bullshit.

I just didn't want to spend the rest of my career struggling against that sort of bullshit. (Well, I wasn't any too enamored of "publish or perish" either, but that's another story.) The thing I realized about the Critical Theory folks is that they are endlessly, bottomlessly, seamlessly mendacious; and that they don't want to discuss, they don't want to debate, they don't want to argue, they simply want to win. Any outward simulation of discussion, debate, or argument is to them nothing but an expedient means toward the end of winning. A tactic to be adopted, shifted, or discarded at will, according to the changing needs of the moment. And to the Critical Theory folks, scruples and conscience are for losers, i.e. the rest of us; they themselves had stripped away anything in heart, soul, or mind that might stand in the way of the utter ruthlessness required to win.

Some of the rest of us used to call their approach "conversational Stalinism." If the Critical Theory folks had any power in the real world, outside of the university, they'd be dangerous. Very, very dangerous. As dangerous as any of the 20th century ideologues who were responsible for precipitating megadeaths.

Pardon me, can you tell this issue still exercises me, 15 years and more after I left the academic world behind?
6.13.2007 10:50am
Bill (mail) (www):
The thing I realized about the Critical Theory folks is that they are endlessly, bottomlessly, seamlessly mendacious; and that they don't want to discuss, they don't want to debate, they don't want to argue, they simply want to win. Any outward simulation of discussion, debate, or argument is to them nothing but an expedient means toward the end of winning.

LOL. Yes, I had this experience, but I was in denial that they were doing just that ... and that's because they believe that everyone else is doing the same thing. It's funny -- I intuited that this dishonesty should be a hallmark of critical theory -- but I simply couldn't believe that anyone would seriously believe it and apply it to their life. And then my funding was cut-off because I wouldn't get with the CT program.

BTW, I did see one or two professors who were into CT change their minds after someone stabbed them in the back ... one in particular completely turned around and began to teach classes in literature. Amazing!
6.13.2007 11:15am
Bill (mail) (www):
And yeah, Duke was CT central, from what I heard ... at Temple, it was seen as more of a party line, ignored by many but parroted by a few, believed by even fewer. Unfortunately, the true believers took over the department, and well, I no longer had any interest in what they were teaching.
6.13.2007 11:16am

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?
Thank you for choosing to comment on IndustrialBlog. Our commenting policy is pretty simple: Be civil. If you are mean-spirited, tendentious, vexatious, quarrelsome and/or annoying, you just may get deleted. If you are charming, sophisticated and/or funny, on the other hand, you may get a free rein no matter what you say. It depends. Also, please note that commenting is for this post ONLY. Do not comment on other posts here. If I closed comments for a post, I did so for a reason. Thank you. Please enjoy your stay at IndustrialBlog, and remember the Blogosphere can be dangerous place -- be careful out there. The Management.