Horkheimer left the fate of egoism theoretically undetermined.
Evidence
There is no definite answer to the question of what fate awaits egoism, that `urge for death and destruction’ now generally condemned, in a more rational form of reality. But there have been signs recently which all point to one and the same conclusion. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 202
Categorization
- DEFINE: Clarifies that Horkheimer’s essay refuses a determinate outcome for egoism, which matters for how the Institute’s later pessimism develops.
- XREF: connects to: Horkheimer defined good egoism as the unconditional, unjustified demand for happiness. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 201; Horkheimer’s critique of egoism lacked clear causal grounding in economic and social tendencies. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 740; Horkheimer defended egoism but insisted gratification flows through communal interaction — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 233 (+1 more)
- yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Horkheimer defined good egoism as the unconditional, unjustified demand for happiness. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 201; Horkheimer’s critique of egoism lacked clear causal grounding in economic and social tendencies. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 740; Horkheimer defended egoism but insisted gratification flows through communal interaction — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 233 (+1 more)
Broader Connections
- Horkheimer defended egoism but insisted gratification flows through communal interaction
#complicates(0.75) — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 233 - Horkheimer saw the ego’s self-preservation drive as ultimately self-destructive.
#complicates(0.74) — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 816