[FRA:] theology/critical theory

[Ralph Dumain]

Are you kidding me?  Jewishness has little to do with religion. This 
reminds me of an experience attending a disappointing panel 
discussion featuring an author who wrote a book about intermarriage 
between Jews and non-Jews. I couldn't stand the author, who was more 
preoccupied with the specifically religious dimension than probably 
95% of American Jews. During the Q&A one senior citizen got up and 
complained:  "Sure, I'm Jewish, but do you people have to keep 
talking about religion?"

Benjamin was in a class by himself, but the connection of the other 
Frankfurters, to my knowledge, with Judaism, with the outstanding 
exception of Fromm, was, to say the least, tenuous.  I get the 
impression Fromm was too Jewish for the others, and that's one reason 
they disliked him.

But theological concerns have to be excluded in the sense of 
validating them, because ideology critique is inherently antagonistic 
to ideology, in this case, religion. For critical thought, myth has 
to be converted into history.

But I'm getting the impression that critical theory now is just petty 
bourgeois ideological masturbation. It's like the Democratic Party, 
more and more reactionary, more conservative, reduced to hollow 
rhetoric about what it allegedly stands for.  Discussions like this 
make me physically ill.

At 10:45 AM 8/26/2008, Philip Anthony O'Hanlon wrote:
>I agree with last lister about the influence of Jewishness and don't 
>see why thological concerns have to be excluded from a critical 
>theory of society.  Another often overlooked critical theory 
>philosopher I think about in this regard is the late Gillian Rose - 
>(Jewish then Anglican) a deeply spiritual thinker for whom 
>theological concerns were quite central.  She reminds us that the 
>separation of state and religion is itself a spiritual act.  That is 
>what I read in "Mind the Gap", by Nigel Tubbs: 
>http://the.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/60/1/42
>
>________________________________________
>From: theory-frankfurt-school-bounces at srcf.ucam.org 
>[theory-frankfurt-school-bounces at srcf.ucam.org] On Behalf Of 
>theory-frankfurt-school-request at srcf.ucam.org 
>[theory-frankfurt-school-request at srcf.ucam.org]
>Sent: 24 August 2008 12:00
>To: theory-frankfurt-school at srcf.ucam.org
>Subject: theory-frankfurt-school Digest, Vol 38, Issue 7
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: [Adorno-Hegel] Something about Kant from ND
>       (matthew piscioneri)
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:07:25 +0000
>From: matthew piscioneri <mpiscioneri at hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [FRA:] [Adorno-Hegel] Something about Kant from ND
>To: Discussion of Frankfurt School Critical Theory
>         <theory-frankfurt-school at srcf.ucam.org>
>Message-ID: <BAY129-W488C25D9695F9B76B9FCA5BD640 at phx.gbl>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>To say themes of redemption in later Adorno (and Horkheimer) are 
>'just a metaphor' is to be in some sort of intellectual denial. 
>Certainly metaphor is there....but "just" a metaphor?
>
>Not sure why? Recognizing the ironic "suffusion" of theology in a 
>supposedly strictly post-metaphysical materialist critical 
>philosophy only adds to the richness IMO. Your 'denial' also 
>overlooks the exemplary Jewishness of so many extraordinary 
>contributors to the critical-emancipatory project - Marx among 
>others, of course. Let's face it, toward the end, Derrida went the 
>same way ;-). Anyway, c'est la vie.