Abstract

Herbert Marcuse’s early essays and reviews written while under the tutelage of Martin Heidegger continue to suffer a poor reception. Even the most sympathetic of his critics widely focus on either his deviations from existing Marxist orthodoxy, or his failure to demonstrate the commensurability of Marxism and existentialism. Although both these concerns highlight important problems in Marcuse’s work, this narrow focus of Marcuse scholarship neglects essential aspects of his early thought, particularly his concern with what types of truth claims inform political action, and how one might assess the validity of these claims. This article examines these overlooked facets of Marcuse’s early thought, with particular emphasis on the role of judgement.