Document Type
Article
Publication Version
Submitted Manuscript
Publication Date
2008
Journal or Book Title
New German Critique
Volume
35
Issue
2
First Page
103
Last Page
137
DOI
10.1215/0094033X-2008-005
Abstract
In his early writings Max Horkheimer explored the issues surrounding biological explanation in Kantian and neo-Kantian philosophy. After he became director of the Institut für Sozialforschung in 1930, he continued to explore the relationships between biology, materialism, philosophy, and social theory. This interest was reflected both in his editorial policy for the Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung and in his own scholarly development that led to the development of critical theory in the later 1930s and the anti-Semitism research of the 1940s. Horkheimer's interests and ambitions also generated resistance from other social scientists. The Berlin ethnologist Richard Thurnwald, along with his student and colleague Wilhelm Emil Mühlmann, came into direct conflict with Horkheimer—and with each other—over the significance of biology for social research. This conflict with Horkheimer further ignited a vigorous debate between Thurnwald and Mühlmann about a concept that also became a central issue in Horkheimer's thought and editorial practice: race. Thurnwald had begun his career as a founder of the German Society for Racial Hygiene, but by the 1920s he had developed into a vocal critic of what he saw as the reductive pseudo-Darwinism of racial hygiene and eugenics.
Copyright Owner
Duke University Press
Copyright Date
2008
Language
en
File Format
application/pdf
Recommended Citation
Amidon, Kevin S., "“Diesmal fehlt die Biologie!” Max Horkheimer, Richard Thurnwald, and the Biological Prehistory of German Sozialforschung" (2008). World Languages and Cultures Publications. 87.
https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/language_pubs/87
Included in
European History Commons, German Language and Literature Commons, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons, Medical Humanities Commons
Comments
This is a manuscript of an article from New German Critique 35 (2008): 103, doi:10.1215/0094033X-2008-005. Posted with permission. Not for quotation or distribution.