In general terms, the “Critical Theory” characterizes the rejection of the justification of the present socio-historical reality because it considers it unjust and oppressive (“irrational”), postulating instead, the search for a new, more rational and humane reality.
Horkheimer, Adorno and Marcuse defined “Critical Theory” as the opposite of “Traditional Theory}”. To understand this approach it is necessary to go back in time to Plato. From a platonic perspective, the traditional theory can be conceived as:
1.Pure contemplation (separated from all praxis)
2.Selfless
3.Operates by derivation based on general and final principles
4.Assumes identity and immediacy (subject-object) and adequacy (concept-thing)
These forms were rejected by the Frankfurt School, and even rejected Hegel as regards his identification of subject-object, rational-real, concept-reality (identity theory). In part they accepted a certain irrationalism in history, but not to the point of Kierkegaard, or Nietzscheor Bergson: in short, they never deviated from rational procedures of access to reality. Critical rationality thus rises at an intermediate point between the idealism of Hegelian reason and irrationalism. It is a theory that aims to denounce irrationality in history and society.
Positivismwill also be in the sights of critical theorists: they will not share the idea of identifying knowledge with science, nor consider it as all objective knowledge. Because it simply means sticking to the facts by discarding any form of assessment, whether positive or negative.
In order to approach reality from a critical perspective, it is necessary to set aside both the Hegelian position that seeks to identify the rational with the real, and positivism, which considers facts as the only aspect of reality. In any of these cases, there is an absolutization of the facts, which promotes their acceptance, dismissing the critical gaze.
Adorno denies that a complete conceptualization of reality is possible. Hegel regains identity in the final synthesis, even though denial is an essential part of his dialectic. In this way, identity is justified as long as it is rational. If the Hegelian dialectic is a postive dialectic, in contrast, Adorno proposes a negative dialectic, through which he will affirm that not everything real is totally rational.
For Adorno, the positive dialectic acquires the relevance of an ideology because its requires that the subject conform to reality and even submit to it in practice by making eternal instant present and inhibiting any transformative (revolutionary) action.
The possibility of building a positive utopia is rejected as long as it is not possible to determine what the future should look like. What is possible is to establish as “should not be”, which, in fact, is sufficient to criticize the present.
While in traditional theory the immediacy between the subject and the object is sought, in critical theory, it will be signed that all knowledge is determined by mediations, because theoretical production cannot exist independently of the socio-historical and economic processes within which they have arisen. This means that the historical context determines the object and purpose of any research in such a way that no theory can be “impartial” but is marked by different interests even when apparent objectivity conceals its inevitable ideological character. Moreover, the researcher, also cannot be radically removed, will always be part of the social object investigated.
According to this perspective, it could be said that the specialization of science transforms the object into something abstract that ultimately leads to concealing reality. But a totalizing vision (concept taken from Lukácks) will be able to transform the theory into criticism, revealing its ideological aspects.
Critical theory rejected the principle of “non-valuation” as a criterion of theoretical objectivity that Weber had defended. For Marcuse, the problem of historical objectivity requires value judgments, which implies being at the service of human emancipation and leading to a liberating praxis.
In short, the two poles of critical theory are reason and praxis.