Horkheimer and Adorno shared an open dialectics that no system could prescribe.

Evidence

The extreme unevenness of the external circumstances of the Institute’s history, if nothing else, makes it advisable not to take the term Frankfurt School' too seriously. Two other points underline this. First, the fact that Horkheimer, in spite of being a charismatic figure’, played an increasingly less decisive part in events, and one increasingly less suited to the formation of a school'. Secondly, the closely related fact that, looking at the four decades of the older Frankfurt School as a whole, it can be seen that there was neither a unified paradigm nor any paradigm change which would include all the elements now associated with the term Frankfurt School’. The two principal figures, Horkheimer and Adorno, were working in the same areas from two clearly distinct positions. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 12 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Horkheimer and Adorno never shared one unified school paradigm — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 12; Adorno and Horkheimer never gave their social theory a coherent systematic exposition.; Critical Theory’s two poles — Adorno’s anti-systematism and Horkheimer’s interdisciplinarity — persisted

Broader Connections

• Adorno and Horkheimer never gave their social theory a coherent systematic exposition. #corroborates (0.95)
• Critical Theory’s two poles — Adorno’s anti-systematism and Horkheimer’s interdisciplinarity — persisted #complicates (0.80)
• Horkheimer and Adorno never shared one unified school paradigm #corroborates (0.75) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 12