Following Max Horkheimer, I will first attempt to reconstruct an anthropology that essentially wants to be understood as critical social research. I will then pursue the question of humanism in critical theory. In doing so, I want to show that a reference to a normatively substantive humanism does actually exist in critical theory. On the other hand, I want to show that this humanism is anything but unambiguously and systematically formulated but has been reflected and articulated differently by different representatives of critical theory. The two examples I will refer to here are Theodor W. Adorno and Erich Fromm. I will define Adorno’s humanism as ‘dialectical humanism’, whereas Fromm’s humanism could be described as ‘emphatic humanism’. My reading, however, attempts to interrogate the two positions as to their complementarity. Not ‘Adorno or Fromm’, but ‘Adorno and Fromm’ is the motto that guides me. Finally, I will relate this complementary reading of both approaches in such a way that the possibility of a ‘Critical Humanism’ can be derived from it, which above all also wants to be understood as a sociological research program.

继马克斯·霍克海默（Max Horkheimer）之后，我将首先尝试重建人类学，其本质上希望被理解为关键的社会研究。然后，我将探讨批判理论中的人本主义问题。通过这样做，我想表明，批判理论中确实存在对规范实质性人本主义的提及。另一方面，我想表明，这种人文主义只是明确而系统地表述的，但却被批评理论的不同代表以不同的方式反映和表达。我将在此处引用的两个示例是Theodor W. Adorno和Erich Fromm。我将阿多诺的人本主义定义为“辩证性人本主义”，而弗洛姆的人本主义可以描述为“强调人本主义”。但是，我的阅读试图就两个位置的互补性提出质疑。不是“ Adorno或Fromm”，而是“ Adorno和Fromm”是指导我的座右铭。最后，我将对两种方法的互补读物进行关联，从而可以从中得出“批判性人本主义”的可能性，最重要的是，这也希望被理解为一个社会学研究计划。