Skip to main content
Log in

Work and authority in Marcuse and Habermas

  • Published:
Human Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Conclusion

I have argued that Marcuse's notions of the merger of work and play and of the possibility of nondominating organizational rationality and authority fly in the face of the mainstream Weberian tradition which venerates the labor-leisure dualism and the bureaucratic coordination of labor. I have further argued that this Weberian current is reappropriated by Jürgen Habermas in his own recent work on the epistemological foundations of social science. The counterpoint between Marcuse and Habermas reveals a split within modern critical theory. This split could be characterized as the split between radicalism and incrementalism. Marcuse takes the more radical viewpoint, arguing that if work and leisure are dialectically merged and if that work is organized democratically through workers' control, then social labor will be experienced, in Marx's early sense, as creative praxis—a type of self-externalizing activity which is both productive and recreative. Habermas, in his reformulation of Weberian sociology, endorses an incrementalist position (contra Marcuse's radicalization and deepening of early Marx's theory of praxis) which rejects the possibility of transforming labor into praxis, arguing instead for greater communicative democracy as a way of redirecting (what Habermas contends is categorically immutable) social labor toward more constructive ends such as the economic levelling of the capitalist welfare state.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agger, B.Western Marxism, Chapter 6, “Individualized Marxism: class-radicalism in the 1960s.” Santa Monica, Calif.: Goodyear, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agger, B. Marcuse and Habermas on new science.Polity, Winter 1976,IX, 2, 158–181. (a)

    Google Scholar 

  • Agger, B. On happiness and the damaged life. In J. O'Neill, (Ed.),On critical theory. New York: Seabury, 1976. (b)

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, P., Berger, B., & Kellner, H.The homeless mind. New York: Randon House, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromm, E. (Ed.)Socialist humanism. New York: Doubleday, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.Legitimation crisis, Boston: Beacon, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.Knowledge and human interests. Boston: Beacon, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leiss, W.The limits to satisfaction. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, H.The aesthetic dimension. Boston: Beacon, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, H.Counterrevolution and revolt. Boston: Beacon, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, H.An essay on liberation. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, H.Eros and civilization. New York: Vintage, 1955.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markovic, M.From affluence to praxis. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Neill, J. (Ed.)On critical theory. New York: Seabury, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaff, A.Marxism and the human individual. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroyer, T.American Journal of Sociology, January 1978,83, 4, 1033–1035.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sher, G. S.Praxis. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Agger, B. Work and authority in Marcuse and Habermas. Hum Stud 2, 191–208 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02127225

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02127225

Keywords

Navigation