[FRA:] [Adorno-Hegel] Something about Kant from ND

[matthew piscioneri]

and another reading of Adorno on Kant and thinking the [A]bsolute might just have something to do the increasingly theological elements in his and in Horkheimer's work (not Marcuse's...or at least not as discernible).
 
Recently attended a very enjoyable seminar given by Howard Caygill (Goldsmiths College, UK) on Walter Benjamin and Benjamin's "political theology". Itwas clear that similar themes are present also in Adorno and Horkheimer.....and increasingly so (amusingly enough) in Habermas who after all wrote in _PostMetaphysical Thinking_ said it all...the tradition of critical philosophy (almost by necessity!) from Kant onwards is an extension of Judaeo-Christian eschatology,
 
mp
 
 
> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:44:02 -0400> From: jamesrovira at gmail.com> To: theory-frankfurt-school at srcf.ucam.org> Subject: Re: [FRA:] [Adorno-Hegel] Something about Kant from ND> > Ralph -- just a preliminary idea:> > The "block" in the first paragraph = "ban on thinking the absolute."> > The "block" in the second paragraph = "bar erected against the absolute."> > So I think the "block" Adorno refers to is nothing more than the> subject/object distinction in Kant. We can know the mind knowing the> object, but we can't directly know the object, the thing in itself> that exists independently of mind, or in other words the absolute. We> can only make inferences about the the object known from the> characteristics of the mind knowing it.> > So that is what I think Adorno means by a "ban on thinking the> absolute" or a "bar erected against the absolute" -- that is the> "block," that subject/object distinction.> > That means the subject/object distinction, according to Adorno in the> first paragraph, "drifts toward a ban on all thinking" -- if we can't> know any object but those produced by our own minds, what can we know?> > Adorno also calls this the "mutilation of reason," presumably because> he believes reason most naturally works by drawing conclusions about> external realities based upon a generally reliable sense perception> that gives us real knowledge about the world outside our minds.> > The second paragraph is a bit more of a leap, but I think Adorno is> arguing that since we can't know any object, and certainly not the> "absolute" that might constitute knowledge of all objects, we're> "trapped in immanence" -- trapped "within" something. Adorno's use of> the word "immanence" here sounds borrowed from Kierkegaard, esp. as> Adorno uses it to refer to social categories later in the paragraph.> I think the "within" is our own subjective need for self-preservation,> which manifests itself in labor. So Adorno argues that because we> can't think "outside of" our own immediate minds and its concern for> self-preservation, we're stuck with what society hands to us as our> means of survival (existing divisions of labor), and what it tells us> is truth, etc.> > While he may have a point, I don't think Adorno is being completely> fair to Kant here, as in Kant's philosophy there are absolutes such as> cause and effect, time, space, etc. (in COPR), without which our sense> perceptions would make no sense, and which he believed were common to> all rational agents. So while the world as we know it is constructed> by our minds, it is necessarily constructed in this way -- which means> we do have some absolute upon which our thinking can hinge.> > But, I haven't read the entire essay by Adorno, and he may address this.> > Jim> > >>"The authority of the Kantian concept of truth turned terroristic> >>with the ban on thinking the absolute. Irresistibly, it drifts toward> >>a ban on all thinking. What the Kantian block projects on truth is> >>the self-maiming of reason, the mutilation reason inflicted upon> >>itself as a rite of initiation into its own scientific character."> >>(page 388)> >>> >>"Socially there is good reason to suspect that the block, the bar> >>erected against the absolute, of being one with the necessity to> >>labor, which in reality keeps mankind under the same spell that Kant> >>transfigured into philosophy. The imprisonment in immanence to which> >>he honestly and brutally condemns the mind is the imprisonment in> >>self-preservation, as it is imposed on men by a society that> >>conserves nothing but the denials that would not be necessary any> >>more."> > _______________________________________________> theory-frankfurt-school mailing list> theory-frankfurt-school at srcf.ucam.org> http://www.srcf.ucam.org/mailman/listinfo/theory-frankfurt-school
_________________________________________________________________
Meet singles near you. Try ninemsn dating now!
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fdating%2Eninemsn%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fchannel%2Findex%2Easpx%3Ftrackingid%3D1046247&_t=773166080&_r=WL_TAGLINE&_m=EXT