In the present paper, I analyze the complex relationship of tension between Critical Theory and phenomenology from a sociological-theoretical perspective. I start from two theses. The first one is that one of the primary reasons for the antagonism between these two paradigms lies in their ideal-typically opposed assessments of the role of ‘meaning-adequacy’ in social research. The second one is that in recent years, there has been a strong rapprochement of Critical Theory with (social) phenomenology. This shift, fundamentally embodied in Hartmut Rosa’s work, can be understood as the culminating point of a progressive turn towards meaning-adequacy within the Frankfurt School. In order to unfold these two theses, I will proceed in three steps. First (1), I will present the main outlines of the relationship of tension between the two traditions from both a historico-intellectual and a systematic perspective. Second (2), I will focus on the contemporary readings of the Schutzian notion of ‘meaning-adequacy’ and discuss their value for better understanding the historical opposition between the two paradigms, as well as their recent rapprochement. Third (3), I will sketch the key features of Rosa’s sociology of world-relations, understood as a phenomenological Critical Theory that shows a strong commitment to a radicalized version of the meaning-adequacy postulate.

在本文中，我从社会学理论的角度分析了批判理论与现象学之间复杂的张力关系。我从两篇论文开始。第一个是，这两种范式之间对立的主要原因之一在于它们对社会研究中“意义充分性”作用的理想的、典型的相反的评估。第二个是，近年来，批判理论与（社会）现象学之间出现了强烈的和解。这种转变从根本上体现在哈特穆特·罗莎的作品中，可以被理解为法兰克福学派内向意义充分性逐步转向的顶点。为了展开这两个论点，我将分三步进行。首先（一），我将从历史知识和系统的角度来概述两种传统之间的紧张关系。第二（2），我将重点关注舒茨“意义充分性”概念的当代解读，并讨论它们对于更好地理解两种范式之间的历史对立以及它们最近的和解的价值。第三（3），我将概述罗莎的世界关系社会学的主要特征，将其理解为一种现象学批判理论，表明对意义充分假设的激进版本的坚定承诺。