Kuhn vs Popper - About James H. Collier

that the Enlightenment has yet to be fully realised.Corresponding to this difference in perspective wasthe implication that each drew from the Weberiandictum that science is ‘value free’. For Adorno itmeant that science was an instrument of purepower, whereas for Popper it meant that sciencehad developed binding means for deciding betweentheories.What probably made the amount of agreementbetween Adorno and Popper seem so surprising –especially to younger listeners (Dahrendorf himselfwas only 32 in 1961) – was the vivid oppositionbetween Marxism and liberalism that characterisedthe Cold War political landscape. Here it is worthrecalling the free intercourse between Marxism andliberalism that transpired under the fluid rubric of‘social democracy’ in the Weimar Republic, theformative period for both Popper and Adorno.‘Social democracy’ in this sense was opposed to anypolitical position – from conservative religiousgroups to more reactionary monarchist and fascistparties – that upheld the need for a higher authoritythan the rule of law. In this respect, Popper’ssteadfast opposition to authoritarianism remainswell-known, but it is sometimes forgotten thatAdorno co-authored the landmark empiricalpsychological study, The Authoritarian Personality(1950) during his exile in the United States.149