Weber’s neo-Kantianism barred him from hoping to restore substantive reason

Evidence

This was a hope that Weber, with his neo-Kantian skepticism about the irreconcilability of practical and theoretical reason, could not hold. Although recognizing the replacement of what he called “substantive” reason by its formal counterpart, Weber was unable to entertain the possibility of its restoration. The “rationalization” of the modern world was meant solely in a nonsubstantive sense. Weber, unlike some of his more romantic contemporaries, did not hope to turn the clock back, but it was clear that he greeted the world’s disenchantment with little enthusiasm. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 783

Categorization

• XREF: The stoic resignation of Weber contrasts with Horkheimer’s guarded optimism in the prior paragraph — these belong together as a paired contrast. — connects to: The Institut rejected Weber’s formal rationality in favor of substantive rationalism — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 400; The Institut rejected Weber’s value-free science and his defense of capitalism — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 401; The Frankfurt School’s residual faith in reason tempered its Weberian pessimism — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 782 (+7 more)

Broader Connections

• The Frankfurt School’s residual faith in reason tempered its Weberian pessimism #complicates (0.80) — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 782
• Weber treated rationality as a question, not a binary classification #expands (0.75) — Aris Komporozos-Athanasiou, Speculative Communities, 430
• Gramsci groups Kantianism, Aristotelian-Scholastic thought, and positivism in a shared transcendentalist matrix #qualifies (0.75)
• Kant separated understanding from reason so reason never touches experience #qualifies (0.72) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 893
• Value theory links Weber’s religious aestheticism to Nietzsche #qualifies (0.72) — Fredric Jameson, The Political Unconscious, 6123
• Kant’s categorical imperative is refuted by historical particularity #corroborates (0.70) — Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment, 234