Horkheimer rejected pure philosophical work in favor of expert-assisted collaborative research

Evidence

This sketched out a conception which followed on from the line taken by the gloomy' or black’ writers of the bourgeois period whom Horkheimer admired. The conception also corresponded to one of Horkheimer’s dreams. But it would exclude interdisciplinary collaboration and the realization of a theory, steeped in material evidence, of the general tendencies of society in that era; and it would have implied an open breach between narrow philosophical work and the work of an Institute of Social Research. Horkheimer recoiled from this. In practice, a third method of working was therefore arrived at which was partly based on assistance from experts and partly on the philosophers occasionally making themselves into experts. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 1329

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to Horkheimer’s admiration for ‘black writers’ (de Sade, Mandeville etc.) and the Institute’s interdisciplinary method championed throughout this institutional history. — connects to: Horkheimer’s plan for interdisciplinary economic collaboration failed for lack of capable collaborators — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 1318; Horkheimer rejected formal epistemology for material evidence about life’s meaning — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 177; The Institut rejected Weber’s formal rationality in favor of substantive rationalism — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 400 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Horkheimer rejected formal epistemology for material evidence about life’s meaning #expands (0.85) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 177
• The Institut rejected Weber’s formal rationality in favor of substantive rationalism #expands (0.80) — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 400