ABSTRACT
The preceding chapters contain the suggestion that the transition from the second to the third generation of critical theorists harbours the possibility of compensating for a weakness from which Critical Theory has been suffering for years. It is the problem of an underspecified and underdeveloped methodological framework, which itself, moreover, is symptomatic of an inadequate connection with social reality. In Part I, it was argued that the establishment of the concept of immanent transcendence, marking as it does the transition in question and thus being characteristic of the new phase in the development of Critical Theory, provides a starting point for corrective action. This key concept represents a rich metatheoretical framework for the elaboration of an adequately specified and transparent methodology that could heighten Critical Theory’s relevance and appeal in the substantive social research context, where it is at present under pressure from its competitors and perhaps even outdone in certain respects.
