Adorno and Horkheimer on Religion
The different theoretical basis of the critical theory of Horkheimer and Adorno
results in a very different approach to the study of religion from that of ratio-
nal choice theory. Whereas Stark and his colleagues define religion exclu-
sively as being “concerned with the supernatural” (Stark and Finke 2000:89),
these two Frankfurt School theorists understand religion as being related to
the concern for objective truth. This is not to say that they are uncritical of
the frequent tendency of members of religious traditions to cling to super-
natural and otherworldly ideas and aspirations. Along with Marx, Horkheimer
and Adorno direct harsh criticisms against religion’s ideological function. But
unlike Stark and Iannaccone, they also aggressively oppose any appreciation
for “compensation,” or, in their language, “consolation.” Horkheimer insists
that such ideas are illusions, “the suffering of past generations receives no
compensation” (1995b:26).
On this point, then, their critique of religion surpasses that of the rational
choice theorists. Their scrutiny of religion’s connection to compensation and
suffering takes their analysis further than that of Stark and Iannaconne. As
Horkheimer phrases it, “religion as consolation means more than might occur”
to a religious leader or theorist. For, “it is not the truth of religion that dawns
on the person in need, it is the need that constitutes its truth, not only indi-
vidual, but social need as well” (1978:177). This perspective on religion has
deep roots in the Marxian tradition. Marx’s acknowledgment that religious
suffering is both an expression of real suffering and a protest against it points
in this direction. In “The Peasant War in Germany,” Friedrich Engels inter-
prets the religiosity of Thomas Münzer as a form of proto-communism, and
his text “On the History of Early Christianity” analyzes how this “movement
of oppressed people” shares similarities with the modern working class move-
ment (Marx and Engels 1975:275–300).
Horkheimer approaches religious traditions in a similar spirit. Religion is
for him a particular form of social expression that reveals in a unique way
the inherent tensions and contradictions among individuals and communi-
ties in their social context. He states that, “religion is the record of the wishes,
desires, and accusations of countless generations” (1995b:129). The argument
here is that the task of the study of religion is to seek to explain why people
require and depend on “compensators.” A critical theory of religion intends
to resist the temptation to conclude that the existence of these virtual-rewards
is itself an “explanation” for religious behavior. From the perspective of
From A Beautiful Mindto the Beautiful Soul • 173