Empirical appendices served to prove the Institute’s claims were research-based, not intuitive

Evidence

The fact that the theoretical drafts did not refer at any point to the questionnaire material or to the reports on research and literature dramatically illustrated the limited extent to which a fusion of constructive and empirical procedures' could be spoken of. At the same time, the letters of Horkheimer and Fromm showed that empirical research, and keeping themselves well-informed about the various scientific disciplines, served the Institute's two chief theoreticians as a kind of protective screen. Behind this screen, a form of theory was being pursued which, on the one hand, was attempting to distinguish itself from pure philosophy, but which was also, on the other hand, sceptical about the various branches of science and about empirical research, and uncertain of its own status. — <cite>Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 171</cite> (#contradicts`, via linked claim)

The research project on the effect of unemployment on the authority structure in American families was conceived of by the Horkheimer Institute mainly as a means of demonstrating that it had some knowledge of the country in which it was a guest. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 688 (#complicates, via linked claim)

The final result was a work of nearly 1000 pages, the main part consisting of three essays (the projected economics essay was not in the end written). Instead of the appendices which had been planned at first, two further sections had been included. The first of these contained the questionnaire material, and the second the reports on research and literature, and each of them was longer than the theoretical section. The fact that the theoretical drafts did not refer at any point to the questionnaire material or to the reports on research and literature dramatically illustrated the limited extent to which a fusion of constructive and empirical procedures' could be spoken of. At the same time, the letters of Horkheimer and Fromm showed that empirical research, and keeping themselves well-informed about the various scientific disciplines, served the Institute's two chief theoreticians as a kind of protective screen. Behind this screen, a form of theory was being pursued which, on the one hand, was attempting to distinguish itself from pure philosophy, but which was also, on the other hand, sceptical about the various branches of science and about empirical research, and uncertain of its own status. — <cite>Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 605</cite> (#complicates`, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: The Institute’s famed fusion of theory and empirical research was largely rhetorical, not actual. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 171; Institute research projects often served tactical legitimacy-building aims rather than pure science — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 688; The Institute’s flagship study juxtaposed vast empirical material with theory that never engaged it — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 605

Broader Connections

• The Institute’s famed fusion of theory and empirical research was largely rhetorical, not actual. #contradicts (0.95) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 171
• Institute research projects often served tactical legitimacy-building aims rather than pure science #complicates (0.85) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 688
• The Institute’s flagship study juxtaposed vast empirical material with theory that never engaged it #complicates (0.80) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 605