S. Freud's psychological theory implies a theory of society, which Freud later explicitly developed. The psychoanalytic therapy developed by Freud is actually equivalent to the critical theory of socialization, which focuses on the dialectic of assimilation & alienation. Freud's culture & society theory may be considered critical, since it refers to institutions on the basis of the problems that they cause for individuals. Class systems are able to function due to an acculturation process that block an individual's drives by cultural ideals. Thus, large groups may be dominated by smaller, elite groups. This crisis can only be removed by replacing a religious social morality with a rationalistic social morality. Psychoanalysis actually works against false awareness & illusion & attacks the status quo -- which then merges the therapy into a critique of socially necessary illusions. M. Migalski.
MANY OF J. P. SARTRE'S WORKS SHOW AN AMBIVALENCE: CALLING FOR AN ANTIINTELLECTUAL RADICALISM WHILE THEY ARE SCHOLARLY & SELF-INDULGENT. IN HIS CRITIQUE DE LA RAISON DIALECTIQUE (CRITIQUE OF DIALECTICAL REASON, PARIS, FRANCE: 1960), THE ENGAGED & POLITICAL SARTRE SURFACES, & THE BUILT-IN PROBLEMS OF HIS EXISTENTIALISM REVEAL THEMSELVES. HIS ADVENTURE INTO THE UNDERSTANDING OF MAN IN HIS WORLD IS A NOTABLE TRIUMPH. HOWEVER, SOME OF HIS BASIC CONCEPTS CAN BE QUESTIONED. IN THE DESCRIPTION OF SERIALITY MAN ACTS ALONE; HE ONLY APPEARS TO ACT TOGETHER WITH OTHERS. THIS ONTOLOGICAL POSITION IS CENTRAL TO MOST OF THE ASSERTIONS MADE IN THE CRITIQUE, & CONTINUES TO HAMPER THE TREATISE THROUGHOUT. MAN'S RELATIONSHIPS ARE SEEN AS BEING CONDITIONED BY SCARCITY; BECAUSE OF IT HE ACTS INDIVIDUALLY RATHER THAN IN UNISON. SARTRE FAILS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT SCARCITY IS DETERMINED BY EXISTING WAYS OF ARRANGING THE COMMON STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL & THE LEVEL OF PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY IN A SOCIETY. HE ASSERTS THAT SCARCITY IS PRIOR TO HUMAN ACTION, THUS RELEGATING MAN TO PASSIVITY. AS A MARXIST, HE FAILS TO POINT TO FLUIDITY, OR TO STRUCTURED INTENTIONAL ACTIVITY WHICH IS BEHIND ALL APPARENT GIVENS. IN HIS EXPLANATION OF THE PRACTICO-INERT, HE TAKES A TRANSHISTORICAL POINT OF VIEW. THE WORLD REMAINS FOREVER A POWER OVER MAN, A FORCE BEYOND HIS CONTROL. BY IGNORING THE CONCEPT OF 'SOCIETY', HIS SOCIAL THEORY IS BUILT ON ISOLATED, ABSTRACT INDIVIDUALS. THOUGH HE ATTEMPTS TO LOCATE THE INDIVIDUAL'S BASIC SR, ISOLATED INDIVIDUALS ARE CONTINUALLY ENCOUNTERED IN THE TEXT. THE GOAL--AN ANALYSIS OF HISTORICAL MAN--CONTINUALLY CONTRADICTS THE PREMISE, THE ISOLATED INDIVIDUAL. IF THE APPROACH WERE BASED ON THE NATURE OF THE DIALECTIC, HE WOULD RECOGNIZE PRAXIS AS SOCIAL, NOT AS INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITY. SARTRE'S MARXISM BECOMES A PHILOSOPHY OF DESPAIR BECAUSE THE INDIVIDUAL WILL ALWAYS BE OVERWHELMED BY THE PRACTICO-INERT, ISOLATED & THREATENED BY OTHERS EXCEPT FOR THE MOMENT WHEN THE GROUP COMES TOGETHER. A. KARMEN.
The aim of this essay is to contrast alternative, yet related, theories of historical development: historical materialism, Parsonian modernization theory, Habermasian social evolution. These theoretical alternatives are discussed in connection with the criteria they provide for evaluating social conflict and in relation to contemporary social movements. In this connection, an alternative `action' perspective is discussed. In addition, the role of intellectuals in formulating and periodizing historical development, and the claims they put forward regarding social movements, are related to the alternative theoretical positions outlined.
