[lit-ideas] Re: Giving Thanksgiving/Adorno and TAP
- From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 16:16:46 +0000 (GMT)
--- On Fri, 3/12/10, Veronica Caley <molleo1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Donal: Aside from its ethical
> and emotional appeal, it also appeals to something immature
> and child-like in us that does not want to accept the
> imperfect in the world or in ourselves or to take the kind
> of personal responsibility that might lead to genuinely
> improving things.>>
>
> This has been studied.
Granted, but what is "This"?
> The originator of the idea was Theodore Adorno.>
What "idea" exactly? That totalitarianism has ethical or emotional appeal? That
it appeals to something child-like in us? That it offers an escape from the
reality of an imperfect world? An escape from taking constructive personal
responsibility? Whichever of these, it is doubtful that Adorno is the
"originator" of any such "idea"; perhaps a contributor to its discussion? Or
perhaps the idea is this:-
> His theory was that there are
> authoritarian personalities that gravitate towards
> dictatorships.
If this is his "theory"/idea it is hardly original (or, so far, much of a
theory, being possibly circular and untestable as it stands - those who
"gravitate towards dictatorships" being defined as having "authoritarian
personalities" etc.; and in any case so far so vague one can imagine
circumstances in which any kind of personality might gravitate towards
dictatorships). As the book "The Authoritarian Personality"/TAP was
co-authored, with Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel Levinson, and Nevitt Sanford,
it seems Adorno is certainly not the sole originator of this 'concept' even
within that book, and also perhaps not even a major contributor: "Although
Adorno's name heads the alphabetical list of authors, he arrived late to the
project and made a relatively small contribution.[3] In fact, Adorno's name is
only credited in five of the 23 chapters in TAP."
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Authoritarian_Personality].
That entry also makes the following comment which indicates the "theory" has
not been corroborated by passing severe tests:-
"A central idea of TAP is that authoritarianism is the result of a Freudian
developmental model, in which excessively harsh and punitive parenting causes
children to identify with and idolize authority figures. This was consistent
with prevailing psychological theories of the time, and even though
Frenkel-Brunswik reported some preliminary support, empirical data have
generally not confirmed this prediction.[2]"
Veronica continues "Adorno based his idea on Freud", though it is unclear how
he based it on another's work while still being its originator. We might do
well also to remember Popper's views on the lack of testability of Freud's
theories. Insofar as the theory of TAP, as formulated, is "not confirmed" by
"empirical data", this means either the data falsifies the theory or the theory
as formulated is not falsifiable.
> Others have since studied it from other angles.
Granted. There are many angles. (One is Wason's, see below).
> Voting practices seem to verify this. People usually vote the way
> their parents do or did.>
It is unclear how voting practices can constitute a severe test of a theory of
an authoritarian personality. For one, we might think the "authoritarian
personality" (whatever that is) is fairly evenly spread in all populations. Yet
some populations vote regularly in the great majority for continued one-party
rule and some populations would in the vast majority not vote for any party
that sought a mandate for its one-party rule. The explanation for this
difference likely goes far beyond parental influence or child-rearing; and it
does not likely lie in the lap of the "authoritarian personality" either,
unless we assume such a personality is not at all evenly spread.
Of course, a scientist might accept that voting practices might seem to
"verify" such a theory of TAP, at least by being not inconsistent with such a
theory; but such verification is much too inadequate to render such a theory
scientific; to be scientific it must falsifiable, and that would involve here
formulating the theory of TAP so that actual voting practices could prove
inconsistent with the theory. Has this been done?
> What fascinates me is that a few people can actually switch
> their personalities. As in switching from
> one political party to another.
What fascinates me, among other things, is the authoritarian and mistaken
reliance of the 'uncritical' notion of verification. It appears, from the Wason
Selection Test for example, that our psychological propensity to rest our
laurels on some apparent confirmation of our theory (which is all too easy to
obtain) is stronger than our grasp of the logical point that our theory can
only be true if it is not false, and therefore we should search for what could
show it to be false. If nothing 'observable' could show it to be false, our
theory is not testable by observation, no matter how many observations might
appear to 'verify' our theory by being consistent with it. So how can the
theory of TAP be formulated so that observable "data" could falsify it? And, so
formulated, how has it performed in the relevant tests?
It does appear, fortunately, that even those disposed to a mistaken, uncritical
verificationist approach to theories can be educated - for example, by
understanding 'confirmationist bias' and the like - to switch to a more
critical, falsificationist approach.
Note to self: in another post address Adorno's connecting fascism with
Enlightenment reason [contra, Popper would argue fascism is better seen as one
of the many revolts against Enlightenment reason]; and address the point that
for Popper in 'TOSE' the key here is to bring personal authoritarian tendencies
under some kind of institutional control [as well as subject those tendencies
to a penetrating epistemic and political critique]- here Popper is with Jim
Madison et al, who did not advance their views so much in (somewhat dubious)
psychological terms as in institutional terms, as with the simple but brilliant
idea of the 'separation of powers'.
Donal
TTFN
LDN
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
