Attitude toward psychology divided generations of Institute members

Evidence

The Institut fur Sozialforschung’s attempt to introduce psychoanalysis into its neo-Marxist Critical Theory was thus a bold and unconventional step. It was also a mark of the Institut’s desire to leave the traditional Marxist straitjacket behind. In fact, one of the basic divisions between the GrUnberg-Grossmann generation of Institut members and their successors, led by Horkheimer, was the contrast in their respective attitudes towards psychology. And in later years, as we shall see, Franz Neumann’s general indifference towards psychology was one of the factors preventing his being fully accepted by the Institut’s inner circle. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 316

Categorization

• XREF: This generational split over psychology foreshadows the larger empirical versus theoretical turn within the Institute — a central thread of the book. — connects to: Generational cultural differences can bond families rather than divide them — Neda Maghbouleh, The Limits of Whiteness: Iranian…, 227; The message-in-the-bottle stance separated institute insiders from academic-careerists — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 1153
• SHARE: A colleague studying critical theory’s institutional politics would enjoy the detail that Neumann’s indifference to psychology kept him outside the inner circle.

Broader Connections

• Generational cultural differences can bond families rather than divide them #qualifies (0.78) — Neda Maghbouleh, The Limits of Whiteness, 227