The Frankfurt School disguised critical theory as traditional social science to secure funding.

Evidence

Since Horkheimer and Adorno were sceptical about the importance to the AJC of explicit theory, the theoretical work on the anti-Semitism project was carried out partly in a grey area between the dialectics project and the anti-Semitism project and partly under the label `Psychology of Anti-Semitism’, so that they would be able to offer as much of their own material as possible under the protection of traditional terminology. Although Horkheimer and Adorno had declared the specialized disciplines to be unfruitful in the preface to the Dialectic of Enlightenment, they did nevertheless deal with them, and kept themselves up to date on the most recent developments. These were represented above all by cultural anthropology, whose best-known figure, Margaret Mead, had been known to the Institute through Fromm since the 1930s, and was later brought on to the advisory board by Horkheimer when the anti-Semitism project was extended. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 1510

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the broader pattern in critical theory of instrumental translation of critique into institutionally acceptable forms, and to Horkheimer/Adorno’s own rejection of specialized disciplines in Dialectic of Enlightenment. — connects to: Modernization theory masked empire despite claiming objective social science
• DEFINE: Shows how ‘traditional terminology’ functioned as a protective cover for dialectical critique in funded research.

Broader Connections

• Modernization theory masked empire despite claiming objective social science #corroborates (0.72)