Analysis_of_Critcal_Theorists_in_Sociology

QEUSTION: DISSCUSS THE VIEW THAT CRITICAL THEORISTS ARE NOISE MAKERS WHO STRADDLE ON MANY THEORIES IN A BID TO GAIN PROMINNENCE. This essay is to discuss the view that critical theorists are noise makers who straddle on many theories in a bid to gain prominence. The essay will analyse the theories, comments and criticisms made by critical theorists and access if they offer solutions or just try to gain prominence. Various critical theorists which include Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, Habermas and Lukacs among others will be discussed to expose whether they offer solutions or they are just after noise making and seeking prominence. Marxism and Feminism will also be identified as forms of critical theory and will be discussed as well. The essay will discuss the comments of the above mentioned theorists on Marxism, Positivism, Modernity, Culture, Technology and Globalization among other factors. The essay will then conclude by summing up all the discussed points thereby coming up with a stand point. Critical theory can be said to have its roots from the Frankfurt School in Germany back in 1923. In other words, the fore fathers of critical theory were the ones who initiated the Frankfurt School in 1923. According to Ritzer (1992) can be defined as a theory which can provide the analytical and ethical foundation needed to uncover the structure of underlying social structures and practices as well as to review the possible decisions embodied in them. Critical theory can also be defined as a self conscious social critique aimed at change and emancipation through enlightenment. Thus from the above definition, critical theory is mainly into opposition of various theories so as to emancipate the society mainly through enlightenment. Hence in as much as critical theorists straddle on many theories, they in way try to offer solutions. In other words, critical theorists indeed straddle on many theories but to purely argue that they are noise makers who are in a bid to gain prominence might be an overstatement. According to Lewis (2008) Marxism is the point of departure for critical theorists. However, unlike orthodox Marxism which analyses the economy or the political economy, critical theorists shift their attention from the economy to the realm or aspect of culture. As a result, culture according to critical theory is a crutial part of modern capitalist society. Lewis (2008) adds that Adorno’s principal contribution to critical theory was cultural criticism. As a classical interpreter of Marxism, Adorno took issues of alienation and reification and developed them into critical theory and applied into diverse cultural genres. His interests lay in the field of culture particularly music and psychoanalysis hence, he also borrows from Freud’s psychoanalytic theory. Adorno argues that the modern scientific consciousness is held to be the main source of cultural decline and as a result humanity is sinking into a kind of barbarism. Given such a fact, Adorno’s critic of modern Scientifics can be linked to the critical theorists’ critique on technology and globalization. Thus, as Adorno borrows from Marxism, Psychoanalysis and Weber’s rationality, he straddles on many theories. However, according to Bottomore (1984) Adorno’s contribution to the formation of critical theory is much more ambiguous and obscure. As a result, critical theorists are noise makers who straddle on many theories in order to gain prominence when arguing from Adorno’s point of view. According to Joseph (2005), following the notion of Weber’s sociology, critical theorists also focus on Rationality as a critical aspect of modern societies. Horkheimer one of the founding fathers of the Frankfurt school defines true reason as rationality which can only be fostered in an environment of free and critical thinking. Horkheimer attempted to revitalize radical and classical criticisms and discussed authoritarianism, militarism, economic disruption, environmental crises and poverty of mass culture. He helped to create critical theory through a mix of radical and conservative’s lenses that stem from radical Marxism and end up in pessimistic Jewish transcendentalism. Horkheimer developed his critical theory by examining his own wealth while witnessing the juxtaposition of the bourgeoisies and the impoverished. He was convinced of the need to examine the entire material and spiritual culture mankind in order to transform society as a whole. He sorts to enable the working class to reclaim their power in order to resist fascism. Horkheimer therefore argues that rationality regulates the society and its existence satisfies the common needs of the people. Thus, Horkheimer criticizes authoritarianism and culture but offers rationality as a solution to social problems. As a result critical theorists do straddle on many theories but also offer rationality as a solution. However, the question that must be answered is on how rationality acts as a panacea to social problems. In support of the above, Marcuse also offers his form of rationality which is the rationality of technology. Marcuse in Marcuse (1964) calls for a revolution which would make technology subservient to the needs and goals of free men and women. Like Marx , Marcuse believed technology can be used to better men’s life conditions but generally critical theory sees modern society as full of irrationality. He argues that a comfortable, smooth, reasonable democratic and freedom prevails in advanced industrial civilization, a taken of technical progress. Marcuse further argues that today, political power asserts itself through its power over the technical organization of the apparatus. The government of advanced and advancing industrial societies can maintain and secure itself only when it succeeds in mobilizing, organizing and exploiting the technical, and mechanical productivity mobilizes society as a whole, above and beyond any particular individual or group interests. In advanced capitalism, technical rationality is embodied in spite of its irrational use of technological change which tends to do away with the machine as individual instrument of production as absolute unit seems to cancel the Marxian notion of the organic composition of capital with the theory of creation of surplus value removing the result of the exploitation of living labour. According to Marcuse the domination of nature through science and technology necessarily gives rise to a new form of domination of human beings society reproduced itself inn a growing technical utilization of men and nature became ever more scientific and rational and finally the technological rationality thus protects rather than cancels the legitimacy of domination. Hence Marcuse like other theorists has Marxism as his point of departure and also borrows from Weber’s ideas on rationality arguing that if technology is not rationally used it becomes harmful for example, the use of nuclear plants in Japan has now resulted into a detriment as far as human health is concerned. Due to the recent earthquake the nuclear plants were disturbed and they started to radiate causing a number of effects and abnormalities on people. The Japan example shows the irrational use of technology that Marcuse alluded to. Another example is of wars and the misuse of artillery in countries such as Somali, Rwanda (during the Rwandan genocide) and in Hiroshima and Nagasak where the effects of guns and nuclear powder are still felt today. Thus from these examples, Marcuse’s critical theorizing is still applicable in modern societies as a result, Marcuse among other critical theorists do straddle on many theories but has managed to enlighten people on the irrational use of technology and was in a bid to liberate them from the bondages irrationality not to seek prominence. Thus, critical theorists do straddle on many theories but are not in a bid to seek prominence but rather to emancipate people. Edwards (2007) agues that Adorno and Horkheimer jointly took the Dialectic of Enlightenment in explaining the sicio-psychological status quo. Adorno and Horkheimer argue that the development towards total integration produced a culture industry as a mechanism of totalitarian administration. In the era of full developed capitalism, cultural institutions and mass media have become absorbed by multinational corporations and local or national governments that generously subsidize them. This can be linked to Globalization in the sense that, globalization has absorbed various cultures and that there is a gradual movement to a global culture. As a result, Adorno and Horkheimer argue that economic operations can not effectively function unless they are preceded by cultural efforts. The two also criticize the aspect of positivism. Marcuse (1964) views positivism as an attempt to equate the understanding of social reality with the scientific explanation, prediction and control of natural reality as practiced by the hard sciences of physics, physiology, chemistry or biology. The criticism of positivism is related to the criticism of economic determinism since some of those who were determinists accepted part or all of the positivistic theory. Habermas (1971) also supports that positivism closes sight of the actors thereby reducing them to passive entities, determined by natural forces. Such an assertion was borrowed from Goffman’s theory on dramaturgical theory. However, such critical theorists do not offer any solution to the critic of positivism this therefore supports the assertion that, critical theorists are noise makers who straddle on many theories in a bid to gain prominence. Habermas is the most contemporary critical theorist whose major works are on Communicative action and Legitimation crisis Habermas’ works are largely indebted to Talcott Parsons and Karl Marx. Like Parsons, Habermas believes societies require integration but like Marx he believed societies are also in a crisis. By legitimation, Habermas means citizens sense that the institutions within which they live are just benevolent in their best interest and deserving of their support, loyalty and adherence. In other words legitimation crisis can be defined as the lack of sufficient commitment on the part of social members to a particular social institution for it to function effectively. As a result governments that lack legitimacy rely on repression to continue their rule. Hence Habermas was against authoritarianism and like Parsons argues that legitimation is linked to social order. However, Habermas is aware of the fact that since class societies are the ones in which the fundamental material interests of different groups are in position social order in such cases can not be secured purely through normative integration. Habermas gives the selection of force or coercion as the alternative in keeping the underlying conflicts latent. Thus, from this view Habermas do straddle on many theories but is not after prominence since he gives the alternative as a solution. Habermas further asserts that, the basic argument of legitimation crisis is that as the state increasingly intervenes in the economy, it also seeks to translate political issues into technical problems. As a result, there is a depoliticization of practical issues by redefining them as technical problems. Above par, Habermas argues that the organization of the society is still irrationally geared to capital accumulation and hence to the private interests of the few rather than rationally geared to the general and collective interests. Habermas therefore suggests that rational communication where there is free communication is necessary for legitimacy. Apart from communication and interaction, Habermas asserts that for legitimation to prevail, the state must shape business policy that ensures growth for example tax concessions, steered education and the improvement of infrastructure. The state must also influence production in a way which compensates the disadvantaged and serve collective needs through protection, wage and subsides. Finally, Habermas argues that the state must also correct the pattern of inequality and the un equal distribution of wealth with welfare assistance for disadvantaged ethnic, regimental and other groups. Thus Habermas like other critical theorists is a theorist who straddles on many theorists such as Weber, Marx and Parsons but unlike others he offers a vehement solution to the societal problem of legitimation crisis. As a result, the statement critical theorists are noise makers who straddle on many theorists in a bid to gain prominence is an overstatement is not applicable to every critical theorist. According to Worsely (1979) feminism can also be a form of critical theory because of its emancipatory behavior. Worsely (1979) takes into account that feminism as a body of knowledge is not homogeneous or a unified group but rather there are different strands of feminism which includes liberal, radical, Marxist and black feminism although they have the emancipation of women as their primary goal. The difference upon all forms of feminism is in their solutions. The liberal feminists opt for gender equality socially, economically and in all sectors of life. On the extreme side, the radical feminists opt for the total elimination of men (males) in all sectors of life. Marxist feminists opt for the economical empowerment of women whilst black feminism calls for the elimination of racial discrimination towards black women. Worsely (1979) argues that feminism especially Marxist feminism has Marxism as its reference point. However Marxism was further developed, modified, reinterpreted or revised to suit the feminist ideology. However, feminism as a form of critical theory tries to offer solutions that are applicable in modern life for example, the Zimbabwean education has been recently associated with affirmative action whereby girls are taken with lower qualifications that that of boys. This is an emulation of liberal feminist’s ideology of creating equal opportunities between boys and girls. Women’s University in Africa is another example of women emancipation as far as education is concerned. At international level, the Conversion on Elimination of All Forms of Abuses against Women (CEDAW) as well as the Women and development (WAD) and Women in development (WID) are all reflections of the solutions offered by liberal feminists. However, some of the solutions are rather idealistic and not realistic as a result they are not that easy to pursue although strides have been made in doing so. On the extreme side, radical feminism offers a utopian solution and that is of outdoing men in all sectors of life. Thus feminism as a body of knowledge differs in offering its solutions, however, as a form of critical theory it straddles on many theories but liberal feminism specifically offers a notable solution especially in African countries although such solutions are not yet fully practiced. Hence, although critical theorists are noise makers who straddle on many theories, they try as much to pursue their emancipatory role in the society. Marxism is also arguably another form of critical theory. O’Donnell (1999) suggests that, Marxism provided a platform for the critical theorists. As a theory, Marxism argues that, the Capitalists are the ones who own the means of production yet on the other hand the proletariats are those who provide the cheap labour and do not own any means of production. As a re result, Marxism suggests that, there continue to be a widening gap gap between the poor and the rich in the society resulting from the amassing of wealth by the capitalists at the expense of the poor. Habermas also supports this view by blaming capital amassing at the expense of the poor as the cause of legitimation crisis. Apart from Habermas, Adorno and Marcuse also comment on Marxism but however critic it of being centered on the economy and not on culture. Marxism goes on to offer Communism as a solution to the problem caused by Capitalism. However, Communism has been critiqued by O’ Donnell argues that Communism has been said to a failure by a number of theorists since most societies are even becoming more and more capitalistic. Thus from such a perspective, Marxism as a form of critical theory which straddles upon Rousseau, Montesquieu, Kant amoung other scholars is a theory that rather is in a bid to gain prominence since it does not offer a logical or practical solution. As a result, critical theorist are noise makers who straddle on many theories in a bid to gain prominence when looking at Marxism a form of critical theory.. In conclusion, critical theorists indeed straddle on many theorists but to totally argue that they are noise makers who are in a bid to gain prominence may be an overstatement as has been said before. This is because as much as they borrow from a number of theorists, some of them try to offer notable and practical solutions to their criticisms. Such solutions involve Rationality, Economical, Social and Political- Administration legitimacy through state intervention and enlightenment amoung other solutions. However, some solutions were not fully given hence; they were not practical but rather utopian. Thus, some critical theorists were indeed noise makers who straddle on many theories in a bid to gain prominence. In a nutshell, although all critical theorists did straddle on many theorists, not all of them were noise makers who were in a bid to gain prominence but some where in a bid to emancipate the society and these include Habermas, Marcuse, Liberal feminists amoung others as has been out shown in the preceding paragraphs. REFERENCES. Bottomore T, (1984), The Frankfurt School, Elis Press, New York EdwardsT, (2007), Cultural Theory, Classical And Contemporize Position, SAGE, Britain. Habremas J, (1979), Legitimation Crisis, Jonathan J, (2005), A Reader, University Press, New Delhi Lewis J, (2OO8), Cultural Studies, SAGE pub, London Macurse H (1974), One Dimension Man,, ABACUS that ACUS Pub, London O’Donnell, M, (1999), Introducing Sociology, Bath College,U.K Ritzer G, (1992), Modern Sociological Theoru, MacGraw Hill, Singapore Worsley P, (1979), Introducing sociology, Viney Ltd, Great Britain .