Adorno Flashcards

1
Q

Why utopia can be addressed just negatively?

A
  • The social theorist can’t speak from outside society.
  • Any blueprint for the good or just society would be an ideological product.
  • If our consciousness is the product of historical apriori conditions, then its formulation of utopia would be stuck in its historical conditions & not the new.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

When Hitler came to power in Germany?

A

1933

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is metacritique?

A

Even the most abstract concepts in philosophical texts necessarily contain sedimented traces of the social experience which had made them possible.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

The thesis of metacritique about epistemology

A

Whereas epistemological critique asks what categories make the experience possible, metacritique asks what experiences make the epistemological categories possible.

(the social-critical content is extrapolated from Husserlian categories in Against Epistemology)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Dialectique of Enlightenment,
Date?
Main argument?

A

1947 - history of rationality

  • Reason has become irrational bs of its attempt to expel every non-rational moment.
    So reason cant understand what makes rationality possible (= non-rational element)
  • Rationality turns into a tool that is blindly applied wo any capacity to reflect on t ends. (instrumental reason)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Negative Dialectic,
Date?
How it differs from Hegel?

A

1966
Negative dialectic differs from Hegel in this sense that doesn’t claim to have access to absolute truth, But the possibility of such access lies in the possibility of a change in the social order.

ND aims to criticize the conceptual/real obstacles that impede our access to the absolute.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Dialectique of Enlightenment, Method

A

Not start from a distant hypothetical origin, But starts from where we are, our assumptions about t world, & asks how we got to these assumptions.

What should have happened for our thinking to have become what it is?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Dialectique of Enlightenment, 2 theses?

A
  1. Myth is already enlightenment

2. Enlightenment reverts to mythology

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

“Ancient” & “Modern” r not radically distinct categories but rely on each other.

What does it mean?

A

Modern society relies on the ancient - long history behind it.

Ancient society is explicated from a modern perspective. (W concepts/categories that belong to t modern society)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Why positivistic/rationalistic conceptions of enlightenment are not enlightened enough?

A

Because they offer a reason which is actually mythical (rather than fully rational) as it suppresses (rather than reflecting on) its own relation to myth & tradition.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Myth is already enlightenment.

Why?

A

Myth is a kind of rationality, a way of ordering, classifying & controlling the world.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is enlightenment, a historical period?

A

No. A series of intellectual/practical operations that demythologize, secularize, or disenchant the mythical, religious, or magical interpretations of the world.

  • protest against t anthropomorphic religions which project human qualities on God.
  • modern positivists protest that t notion of essence is mystical, a subjective fiction.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Why this radical rationalization (demythologization) reverts to mythology?

A

to escape t charge that it is subjective - thought replicates what exists w no hidden extras and expels any non-rational element.

It becomes unable to grasp that it is not self-sufficient.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

How Modern rationality has affected language?

A

Separation bw DISCURSIVE & MIMETIC language

  • Science — language as a system of signs must limit itself to calculation in order to know nature & must abstain from claiming to be like nature.
  • Art — language as image must limit itself to copy the nature, & must abstain from claiming to know nature.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is the practical counterpart to the intellectual process of Skeptical Demythologization?

A

Conversion of nature into manipulable material
Domination of nature

Nothing remains sacred —
everything can be consumed & exchanged. Nothing is to be beyond thought, nothing is beyond price.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

How domination of nature is related to other forms of domination?

A

Domination over nature goes together w self-domination (mastery over human nature, repression of impulse) & social domination (mastery over humans).

“Domination over nature is paid for w t naturalization of social domination.

Power over nature is paid for w impotent subjection to t social divisions & domination which grant that power.”

17
Q

Why

the history of civilization is the history of the internalization of sacrifice?

A

Commodity Fetishism, subsumptive thinking, constitution of subject
were anticipated in sacrificial substitution

18
Q

How the structure of sacrifice resembles commodity exchange, identity thinking & constitution of the subject?

A
  • Commodity exchange — in it one object or creature is substituted for another incommensurable w it.
  • Classificatory thinking: thinking which shows X come under what X is representative/example of — & therefore, what it is not itself.
  • Constitution of subject: in sacrifice t victim is promised immortality - t ego owes its existence to t sacrifice of t present moment to t future — self-sacrifice
    But both sacrifice & self-sacrifice r deceptive - self-sacrifice also promises immortality
19
Q

What is negative utopianism?

A

Social theorist cant’ provide an image of what the good life would look like but only can examine what our damaged life is like.
Analyzing this damaged life will allow a glimpse of possible, undamaged life.

20
Q

Weber vs Durkheim

Their merits & disadvantages for Adorno.

A

WEBER:

  • Social institutions & processes to be understood through the subjective self-understanding of individuals.
  • Without individuals social processes would be nothing.Merit (for Adorno)
  • Refuses to present social relations (historical & produced) as though they were simply objects given to study in t same way that data r given to natural science.Disadvantage
  • Underestimates to what extent social relations take on a life of their own (become autonomous & objective)
  • Autonomy of social relations is not a mistake, it is a ‘real illusion’

DURKHEIM:
- Social facts should be treated like things. Society impacts the individuals

Merit
- Testifies to t preponderance of petrified social relations over individuals.

Disadvantage
- pays insufficient attention to t illusory character of t objectivity of social relations.

21
Q

How to go beyond idealism wo lapsing into dogmatic invocation of an immediate access to transcendence? A fresh start that lays t foundations for a new certainty?

(idealism: thought constitutes, shapes, or is identical w its obj)

A

Such a new start will still depend on a tradition which comes before it & makes it possible - so will misunderstand itself as new.

A thought that doesn’t understand its relation to its own history repeats a ‘dialectic of enlightenment’

The idea that we can make a fresh start is itself IDEALISTIC — it has t illusion that t autonomous thinking subject produces or founds what it thinks of.

—> Whenever philo simply dismisses idealism by an act of will it is involved in an illusion that t thinking subj is self-sufficient (a kind of idealism)

“The problem of constitutive subjectivity cannot just be set aside” — it must be “broken using the strength of the subject itself.”