@article{Krueger2016,
  author    = {Kr{\"u}ger, Hans-Peter},
  title     = {Critical Anthropology? To the Relationship between Philosophical Anthropology and Critical Theory},
  series = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\~A}¼r Philosophie : Zweimonatsschrift der internationalen philosophischen Forschung},
  volume    = {64},
  journal   = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\~A}¼r Philosophie : Zweimonatsschrift der internationalen philosophischen Forschung},
  publisher = {De Gruyter},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {0012-1045},
  doi       = {10.1515/dzph-2016-0041},
  pages     = {553 -- 580},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {This article compares Max Horkheimer's and Theodor W. Adorno's foundation of the Frankfurt Critical Theory with Helmuth Plessner's foundation of Philosophical Anthropology. While Horkheimer's and Plessner's paradigms are mutually incompatible, Adorno's „negative dialectics" and Plessner's „negative anthropology" (G. Gamm) can be seen as complementing one another. J{\"u}rgen Habermas at one point sketched a complementary relationship between his own publicly communicative theory of modern society and Plessner's philosophy of nature and human expressivity, and though he then came to doubt this, he later reaffirmed it. Faced with the „life power" in „high capitalism" (Plessner), the ambitions for a public democracy in a pluralistic society have to be broadened from an argumentative focus (Habermas) to include the human condition and the expressive modes of our experience as essentially embodied persons. The article discusses some possible aspects of this complementarity under the title of a „critical anthropology" (H. Schn{\"a}delbach).},
  language  = {de}
}
@misc{Krueger2016,
  author    = {Kr{\"u}ger, Hans-Peter},
  title     = {Kritische Anthropologie?},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Philosophische Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Philosophische Reihe},
  number    = {127},
  issn      = {1866-8380},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-398024},
  pages     = {28},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {This article compares Max Horkheimer's and Theodor W. Adorno's foundation of the Frankfurt Critical Theory with Helmuth Plessner's foundation of Philosophical Anthropology. While Horkheimer's and Plessner's paradigms are mutually incompatible, Adorno's „negative dialectics" and Plessner's „negative anthropology" (G. Gamm) can be seen as complementing one another. J{\"u}rgen Habermas at one point sketched a complementary relationship between his own publicly communicative theory of modern society and Plessner's philosophy of nature and human expressivity, and though he then came to doubt this, he later reaffirmed it. Faced with the „life power" in „high capitalism" (Plessner), the ambitions for a public democracy in a pluralistic society have to be broadened from an argumentative focus (Habermas) to include the human condition and the expressive modes of our experience as essentially embodied persons. The article discusses some possible aspects of this complementarity under the title of a „critical anthropology" (H. Schn{\"a}delbach)},
  language  = {de}
}