Description
In Dialectic of Enlightenment Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno present a critique of modern society in relation to the ostensible principals of the Enlightenment. Society has dramatically increased its powers of control and domination over Nature. This, they argue, has not given rise to higher degrees of freedom, democracy, or reason either for society or for individual human beings. Rather, it has created a world in which individuals suffer from increasing manipulation, repression, and dehumanization at the hands of rationality practiced for its own sake. Specifically, the increasing knowledge and application of science has failed to broaden the scope of what Marx referred to as the 'realm of freedom.' Technological advances frequently chain humans to an artificially growing realm of necessity. This thesis seeks to address the problems outlined above while discussing whether such negative outcomes are a necessary paradoxical consequence of modern scientific epistemologies and technological capabilities. Are the ideals of the Enlightenment, specifically the notions of greater human freedom and happiness, philosophically compatible with an increasingly scientific understanding of the world? My argument is two pronged. The first argument centers on a critique of positivistic science and its roots in early capitalistic constructions of reality. The second thread centers upon an analysis of two competing strands in Marxist scholarship -- the Frankfurt School's 'Hegelian' conception of the realm of freedom contrasted with the 'Kantian' conceptualization of the realm of freedom. I suggest that greater scientific control over Nature, when practiced outside of traditional positivistic constructions, has a significant potential to create the conditions whereby modern humans can enjoy a genuine realm of freedom through shorter working hours, increased leisure time, and a generally higher quality of material and psychological life.
