TY - JOUR A1 - Krüger, Hans-Peter T1 - Critical Anthropology? To the Relationship between Philosophical Anthropology and Critical Theory JF - Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie : Zweimonatsschrift der internationalen philosophischen Forschung N2 - 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. Jürgen 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. Schnädelbach). KW - negativity KW - bio-power KW - social critique KW - human condition KW - world and subject KW - human expressivity Y1 - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1515/dzph-2016-0041 SN - 0012-1045 SN - 2192-1482 VL - 64 SP - 553 EP - 580 PB - De Gruyter CY - Berlin ER - TY - GEN A1 - Krüger, Hans-Peter T1 - Kritische Anthropologie? T1 - Critical Anthropology? BT - Zum Verhältnis zwischen Philosophischer Anthropologie und Kritischer Theorie BT - To the Relationship between Philosophical Anthropology and Critical Theory T2 - Postprints der Universität Potsdam : Philosophische Reihe N2 - 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. Jürgen 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. Schnädelbach) T3 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Philosophische Reihe - 127 KW - negativity KW - bio-power KW - social critique KW - human condition KW - world and subject KW - human expressivity Y1 - 2017 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-398024 SN - 1866-8380 IS - 127 ER -