Critical Theory and Non-Ideal Theory

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The tradition of critical theory, broadly conceived, is skeptical towards the project of ideal theory on the basis of two specific arguments developed in that tradition. One argument questions whether we are epistemically capable of conceptualizing an ideal society, whereas another argument questions whether any “ideal” can be determined by reference to norms the intelligibility and justification of which remains unchanged throughout processes of social transformation. The author argues that the epistemic argument does not rule out the possibility that idealizations could theoretically serve a valuable function, and that it also leaves room for standpoint-theoretic optimism regarding ideals that emerge from the collective practices of subordinated groups. By contrast, the second “immanent critique” argument more fundamentally undermines the idea that there could be a final conception of an ideal society. This argument only leaves room for idealizations as revisable, transient reference points for political practice.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Routledge Handbook of Non-Ideal Theory
EditorsHilkje C. Hänel, Johanna M. Müller
PublisherRoutledge
Chapter12
Pages166-177
Number of pages13
ISBN (Electronic)9781003315032
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 15-Oct-2024

Keywords

  • critical theory
  • ideal theory
  • non-ideal theory

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Critical Theory and Non-Ideal Theory'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this