Dialectical vs. Experimental Method: Marcuse's Review of Dewey's <em>Logic: The Theory of Inquiry</em>

Abstract

This introduction contextualizes and evaluates Herbert Marcuse's the accompanying, previously untranslated review of John Dewey's Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. Marcuse's critique of pragmatism is indebted to Max Horkheimer's claim that pragmatism is an example of "traditional" theory and reduces thought to mere instrument in service of external ends. Unlike Horkheimer, Marcuse concedes that Dewey, unlike the logical positivists, attempted to develop a material logic of ends. However, he concludes that the attempt was ultimately unsuccessful. I place this conclusion in the context of Marcuse's critique of technological reason. Lastly, I defend Dewey from the charge of crude instrumentalism and delineate Marcuse's and Dewey's critical disagreement on science's capacity for self-refl ection.

Pragmatism, Critical Theory and Business Ethics: Converging Lines

“…Dewey was optimistic that if people should become conscious of special class privileges and advantages, they would come to revaluate them. Marcuse, however, cognizant of earlier Frankfurt School research on authoritarian tendencies among the German working class (Fromm 1932(Fromm , 1936(Fromm , 1941(Fromm , 1984 and already foreshadowing later research on the authoritarian personality (Adorno et al 1950) was much more pessimistic (Deen 2011).…”

“…Conducive to this process is democracy, and Dewey favored extending the reach of democracy from the political arena to other parts of society, such as education and industrial organizations. In this way, individuals would be enabled to use inquiry to critique and redevelop these organizations in social and intelligent ways (Deen 2011;Dewey 1938;Ormerod 2006;Williams 1970).…”

Pluralism and Dialectic: On James's Relation to Hegel

“…Deen notes the tendency of these traditions to misunderstand each other; though he also cites articles attempting to establish common ground between them. See Deen 2010: 242-257.…”

Critical Pragmatism

“… 1. See Antonio and Kellner (1992), Shalin (1992), Bohman (1999), Festenstein (2001), Honneth (2001), Kadlec (2007), Hildreth (2009) and Deen (2010). …”