Nova PhDs

Materialism...interesting. That could, of course, mean a few different things. It is, though, an issue that is dear to my heart--I am giving a paper titled "Horkheimer's Materialist Stance" at the Eastern APA this year. Allow me the rediculous indulgence of block-quoting the first paragraph:

For many, the word “materialism” refers to a metaphysical position, and represents the idea that “reality” is fundamentally made up of matter. This notion could fairly well apply to both the early modern materialists like La Mettrie and D’Holbach, and to various positions following them which seek to explain reality in terms of material objects that behave in the ways described by contemporary physics. Within other traditions, however, the word “materialism” seems to have a fairly different meaning. This is particularly the case with sub-disciplines like critical theory, which spring from the work of Marx. For Marx, materialism is related to social scientific methodology. Marx wants social research to begin from “real premises” derived from the investigation of “real individuals, their activity and the material conditions under which they live.” Following from Marx, Max Horkheimer’s critical theory is materialist in this sense. Unlike the materialism of contemporary metaphysics, this materialism is specifically anti-metaphysical. To crib Horkheimer’s polemic against the one-sidedness of “traditional theory,” such ontological theorizing only amounts to an aimless game or conceptual poetry.