Critical Theory lacked grounds independent of both nature and rationality.

Evidence

Were Horkheimer and Adorno, through their caution, not merely avoiding an open confrontation with the dilemma that faced them? On the one hand, there was a need for a yardstick that was independent of a possibly deceptive sense of what was right and wrong, in order to distinguish between the good' and bad’ versions of nature. On the other, there was an equal need for a yardstick that was independent of a form of rationality that was also possibly deceptive, in order to permit rational judgement by someone who had a clear vision of the dialectic of enlightenment and of the fusion of basic repression and surplus repression within civilization. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 2146

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: The double-bind of needing a foundation immune to both deceptive nature and deceptive reason is a dense formulation of Critical Theory’s foundational problem.
• XREF: connects to: Critical Theory faced a double dilemma needing two independent yardsticks. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2146; Critical theory that identifies reason with domination cannot justify its own critique — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism: A Marxist…, 380; Horkheimer’s critique of egoism lacked clear causal grounding in economic and social tendencies. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 740

Broader Connections

• Critical Theory faced a double dilemma needing two independent yardsticks. #expands (0.85) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 2146
• Critical theory that identifies reason with domination cannot justify its own critique #corroborates (0.80) — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism, 380
• Horkheimer’s critique of egoism lacked clear causal grounding in economic and social tendencies. #exemplifies (0.75) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 740