The Marquis Returns

Yes it is true, Le Marquis de Sade retourne encore une fois, une douce philosophe en effet. Ah bien, in the book that I have read, Mimesis on the Move: Theodor W. Adorno's Concept of Imitation by Karla L. Schultz, the author includes her adaptation of Adorno's theory of mimesus, and in chapter two of the book, brings about the relationship between mimesis and Le Marquis de Sade's book: Justine.

In Sade's book, the protagonist (a woman) is a "pseudo-subject historically without power. As such she is ideal material for education. Trained in the image of a real [male] subject, whose identity has hardened and little left to learn, she functions as the brilliant reflection of his success. While his mimesis has become limited by his subjectivity, hers is still free to repeat the process of his 'progress' albeit with an important distinction: where he once learned by identifying with the 'power' of nature, she now learns by identifying with the power of his reason" (Mimesis on the Move p.83). With the formation of this character, we begin to see her attachment to Sade directly, she begins to become similar to him in real life, becoming a sadist in every way, she becomes Sades image of the opposite sex in the novel, becoming enveloped in taking pleasure in tormenting others. Such is perverse, but it is also notable that the protagonist in this case mimics her tutor, and goes above his capacities in life, and her surrounding nature.

McCall, you said that if we blogged on another blog we could get credit for it on our blog. Well, while procrastinating I commented on someone's status on Facebook and because it was very relevant, I think it should count too. Here it is:


Subat K.: at what point did everything in life become a money making scheme?
12 hours ago

Maleeh E. likes this.

Jeremiah D.:
Declaration of "Independance"
11 hours ago

Jamal K.
when we discovered fire
8 hours ago


Maleeh E.:
Amen to that yo.

Usman N.:
when they had to pay the hospital bills before they brought us back after we were born
7 hours ago


Annie Abbate:
That is my entire Contemporary Philosophy class in a nutshell.......Which I'm currently procrastinating on doing homework for.

They (the Frankfurt School) would tell you that it came about with the rise of capitalism and the development of the culture industry. They'll also tell you all about how everything in your life has become a commodity and a lie and make you really depressed.

So will your blog grade.



Jamal K.
Annie, don't worry about it. There's no such thing as the rise of capitalism or a culture industry. There is only fear, greed, and manipulation. Everything else stems from that.

The Art of Loving by Erich Fromm

It seems like there was a lot of confusion regarding my chosen book. Some misunderstood a FLAWED secondhand account of my presentation and believed my book to be a Chicken Soup for the Soul Book. Others sat through the entire presentation (no names of course) and for some reason thought that my entire presentation was on sex. Just to clarify that my book was neither a Chicken Soup book or the Kama Sutra, I have edited my slides and added material to give an overview of my book and my presentation.


Theory
• Man has emancipated himself from nature
• Separation causes anxiety
• Must find a new harmony, a new union, uniquely human.
• Alternative Unions

Alternative forms of Union
• Orgiastic union
o Many primitive tribes attempt to maintain their ties to nature through
religion and ritual
o When these ties weaken they are often replaced by orgiastic experiences (drugs and/or orgies)
o Inhibits uniquely human cognitive thought
o When practiced within a group creates unity
• Problems with Orgiastic Unity
o Only acceptable in select societies
o In our society cause shame which then causes further alienation
o Regardless of the society in which orgiastic unity is practiced it is only a transitory form of unity.
• Conformity
o Dominant solution to separation anxiety has been conformity
• Problems with Conformity
o Sameness v.s. Oneness
o Loss of the individual
o It is pseudo-unity
• Creative unity
o Unites man with his work (artist, musician, writer, etc)
• Problem with Creative Unity
o Lacks an intrapersonal aspect which is the goal of unity


Fromm’s Solution…
LOVE

Intro: Love as Art
• Problems with Love
o Commodities
o Delusions about “falling in love” (First love)
• Love as an Art (Love must be practiced as an art)
o Mastery of theory
o Mastery of practice
o Ultimate concern

Immature forms of Love
• Symbiotic Union (Ex: mother and child)
• Passive Union
o Attempts to escape separateness by making oneself a part of another
• Active Union
o Attempts to escape separateness by making another a part of oneself.

“If we say love is an activity, we face a difficulty which lies in the ambiguous meaning of the word “activity”….One concept of activity, the modern one, refers to the use of energy for the achievement of external aims. Love is an activity, not a passive affect; it is a “standing in,” not a “falling for.” In the most general way the active character of love can be described by stating that love is primarily giving, not receiving,” (Fromm 20).

Aspects of Love
• Care
o Ex: Jonah and the Whale
o God explains to Jonah that the essence of love is to “labor” for something and “to make something grow,” that love and labor are inseparable. One loves that for which one labors, and one labors that for which one loves,” (Fromm 25)

• Responsibility
o Ex: Cain
o Am I my brother’s keeper? The loving person responds. The life of his brother is not his brother’s alone, but his own. He feels responsible for fellow man, as he feels responsible for himself,” (Fromm 25).

• Respect
o “Respect means the concern that the other person should grow and unfold as he is. Respect therefore implies a lack of exploitation and is only possible if I have achieved independence,” (Fromm 26).

• Knowledge
o To fuse with another person and transcend all components that cause a separateness.

Brotherly Love
• The most fundamental type of love upon which all other forms of love are built.
• Love for each other as a member of the human race, as part of mankind.

Love Between Parent and Child
• Motherly love (passive): “I love you because you are.”
• Fatherly love (active): “I love you because you fulfill my expectations, because you do your duty, because you are like me.”
• As a child, the relationship with the mother gradually becomes less and less important.
• Mothers teach children to be secure, fathers teach children to cope with society

Self-Love
• Love “is not an ‘affect’ in the sense of being affected by somebody, but the an active striving for the growth and happiness of the loved person, rooted in one’s own capacity to love,” (Fromm 54).
• Cannot be achieved without first achieving self-love.
• Self-love is not narcissism and should not be confused with selfishness.
• “Selfishness and self-love, far from being identical are actually opposites. The selfish person does not love himself too much but too little; in fact he hates himself…It is true that the selfish person is incapable of loving others but he is not capable of loving himself either,” (From 55)
• Selfishness is an overcompensation for a lack of self-love.

Erotic Love
• Polarities (pg 31)
• Rejects Freud
• “Erotic love is the craving of complete fusion, complete union with another other person,” (Fromm 49).
• Often confused


Sex without Love
“If the desire for physical union is not stimulated by love, if erotic love is not also brotherly love, it never leads to union in more than an orgiastic, transitory sense. Sexual attraction creates, for the moment, the illusion of union, yet without love this “union” leaves strangers as far apart as they were before- sometimes it makes them ashamed of each other because when the illusion is gone they feel their estrangement even more markedly than before,” (Fromm 50).

Erotic Love without Love for Mankind
“The have experience of overcoming aloneness, yet, since they are separated from the rest of mankind, they remain separated from each other and alienated from themselves; their experience of union is an illusion. Erotic love is exclusive, but it loves the other person in all of mankind, all that is alive,” (Fromm 50)

Erotic Love as an Action (Non-Sexual)
“To love somebody is not just a strong feeling-it is a decision, it is a judgment, it is a promise. If love were only a feeling, there would be no basis for the promise to love each other forever. A feeling comes and it may go. How can I judge that it will stay forever, when my act does not involve judgment and decision,” (Fromm 57).

The Practice of Love
Requirements
1.Discipline
2.Concentration
3.Patience
4.Supreme concern
5.Practice

Conclusion
• Overall: Fromm believes that most human anxiety or conflict is the consequence of man’s separation from nature. In order for man to rectify this situation he must create a new union formed by love.
•
• “To analyze love is to discover its general absence today and to criticize the social institutions which are responsible for its absence.”

• “Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence, (and) any society which excludes, relatively, the development of love, must in the long run perish in its own contradiction with the basic necessities of human existence,” (Fromm 120).

Music

Spesh, I thought you might be interested in this post.

In Adorno's "On the Fetish Character of Music," Adorno discusses how music is no longer produced for the sake of listening but is driven by capitalism. He talks about how there is now a market for everyone and that because of this you can never escape it.

Until this class I didn't understand what many of my self-proclaimed "anticonformist" friends who are musicians really talked about when they talked about "selling out" when you made it big. I think Adorno would say that the "man" they would be selling out to would be the culture industry. The culture industry (as discussed in The D of E) would then warp the music and make it conform to a certain sound or image until it sounded exactly like everything else....or repeatedly expose or overplay a song until whatever made it unique has deteriorated and it is part of the status quo.

I guess my question is, is the only alternative now to escape this to just create your own music and not sell it? I, personally, don't think he would agree with this because even the music you would create would undoubtedly be heavily influenced by the popular music you are surrounded by.

Also what exactly makes popular music now much different from popular songs repeatedly sung before the development of the culture industry? I think, to an extent, they were likely repeated and equally as popular as music today but there are now more people to consume it. The only difference I see now is that music can be sold as a commodity because of the technology. But really how different is this than people paid to sing a song before recording technology? Didn't that make music a commodity then too?

Benjamin

I was beginning to reread through some Benjamin stuff, especially his essay, "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction," in which Benjamin discusses the loss of the aura. Benjamin describes photographs as lacking an aura unless it is of scenery or of a person.

What about a photograph of a photograph of a person? In this case the photograph is of an object (the photograph) not a person. But the photograph being photographed is of a person.

What do you think, Mike or Pat?

Just in case anyone was looking for another Frankfurt blog to join after this one has ended (sniffle), I found a really bad one here.

/www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=562295

It even has a video.

So I found one article of sorts that mentions that Adorno's wife wrote the book based on conversations between Horkheimer and Adorno. I'll look for more. Here's the limited bit I was able to get.

Max Horkheimer: Dialektik der Aufklärung. Philosophische Fragmente (1944) [Dialectic of Enlightenment] By Andrew Edgar (University of Cardiff) Indexing Data: Domain: Philosophy. Genre: Treatise. Country: Germany, Continental Europe.

Life, Works and Times Horkheimer's Life Horkheimer's Works Works and Events 1944-1974 Related Articles Culture Industry (Topics) Related Groups Critical Theory Reader Actions Add to Bookshelves Print this (2760 words) Report an Error

In Dialectic of Enlightenment Horkheimer and Adorno brought together a collection of more or less fragmentary reflections on the cultural and political crises that had culminated in the rise of authoritarianism, and the systematic persecution of Jews and other minority groups. The book was completed in 1944 (being distributed first as a mimeograph, and formally published in 1947), while the authors were in exile in the United States, with the first draft having reputedly been taken down by Adorno’s wife, Gretel, from conversations between Adorno and Horkheimer. The style of the book perhaps reflects its origins. Following the shifting and unpredictable logic of a conversation, rather than the deductive logic of a philosophi

This article in full comprises 2726 words but only the first 150 or so words are available to non-members.

All our articles have been written recently by experts in their field, more than 95% of them university professors. To read about membership, please click here.

Published 14 August 2006

Citation: Edgar, Andrew. "Dialektik der Aufklärung [Dialectic of Enlightenment]". The Literary Encyclopedia. 14 August 2006.
[http://www.litencyc.com/php/sworks.php?rec=true&UID=16366, accessed 3 December 2009.]

Examined Life

Here's a link to more information on the film I mentioned in class yesterday:

http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/examinedlife/

It looks like an interesting film; I'm going to see whether I can get the library to order a copy.

Franz Kafka

Since we're starting Franz Kafka some time this semester, I thought I'd put up some background info about him. Most of this information came from a bunch of different sources including Wiki and kafka-franz.com/kafka-Biography.htm


Franz Kafka was born July 3, 1883 to a upper middle class Jewish family in Prague. Both his parents worked full time at their family store and Franz and his three sisters (who were later killed at concentration camps) were raised by governesses. "Franz's relationship with his father was severely troubled as explained in the Letter to His Father in which he complained of being profoundly affected by father's authoritative and demanding character,"(wiki). We read a lot of negative depictions of fathers in Benjamin's essay on Kafka, likely from this relationship.

Franz went to a private German school growing up and then went to the Charles-Ferdinand University in Prague. He began studying chemistry but after two weeks switched to law. After graduating, he worked for insurance agencies for the rest of his life. These had flexible hours that enabled him to write but most of his work was published after his death.

The most interesting biography I found was on kafka-franz.com. According to this, Franz was a playboy and out of his mind most of his life.

"Throughout his college days and well into adulthood, Franz was definitely not living the life of a monk. He had numerous affairs and one-night stands with barmaids, waitresses, and shopgirls, not to mention his visits to the whorehouses, activities that most men in Prague at the time also indulged in. However, these relations with women were entirely sexual. They didn't mean anything to him beyond immediate sexual gratification. The most bizarre aspect of his sex life, though, was that sex was absolutely repulsive and disgusting to him. Hence, the very idea of "normal married life" with a respectable woman was too much for him. "Coitus as the punishment for the happiness of being together," he wrote in his diary, when faced with the prospect of marriage and what that would entail. He would time and again break off engagements, sometimes nearly at the last minute, in order to escape it. Franz seems to have suffered from the malady common to many at that place and time: namely, the virgin/whore complex, where every woman is either a "nice girl" or a slut, with no room in between. So a normal, adult affair with a woman he liked and respected would prove all but impossible, as Felice Bauer soon found out. Felice On the evening of August 13, 1912, Franz met Felice Bauer, born November 18, 1887 and living in Berlin, at Brod's house and soon became enamored of her?at least of the image of her he had in his mind. He began writing her long letters about everything, although mostly about himself and his feelings of inadequacy. In this first flush of love he wrote "The Judgment" on the night of 22-23 September, which he dedicated to her. He considered it his first mature work, and proudly read it to his family and friends. In November and December he wrote "The Metamorphosis." He also worked at Amerika, or Der Verschollene (The Stoker, the first chapter, appeared separately in book form in 1913); work on it continued sporadically until 1914. During this time, in September 1913 he went to a sanatorium in Riva, Italy for his health, which had never been extrordinarily good, and there met an 18-year-old Swiss girl, Gerti Wasner, whom he liked very much. He would do cute things like knock on the ceiling (their rooms were directly on top of each other) and go to the window to talk to her at night, or write fairy tales to read her over breakfast. Although this affair only lasted the ten days they were there together, it seems to have made a deep impression on him. Meanwhile the courship by letter of Felice continued. He would write her every day, sometimes even more often, frequently complaining about how bad or dirty he was, but confident that she would listen to it all. Eventually he proposed to her in 1913, and she accepted, although in the same letter Franz wrote asking her he also went on and on as to why he would be bad for her.

Although Franz proposed again to Felice in July 1917 after actually spending a week with her at Marienbad, and later taking a trip with her to Budapest, he began coughing up blood and in August was diagnosed with tuberculosis. Always fearful of marriage and sex, this spelled the end of his relationship with Felice, who had had about enough of his crap. She married another man in 1919 but kept his letters " (kafka-franz.com)

He died June 3, 1928 of TB.

Adorno and the Significance of Metaphysics Today

Here's how I put the point of Adorno's metaphysics in the conference paper I wrote earlier this term:

To live today is to live in a state of guilt (that one survives at the expense of another) or forgetfulness (which Adorno argues is based in this feeling of guilt) (M, 114). The impossibility of philosophy can be seen at this point, for reflection takes us away from the sting of the world, and thereby serves as an agent to this very forgetfulness of self, others, and world. Although Adorno doesn’t say this, what he is describing is the problem of skepticism, for skepticism presupposes a distance from the world of nature and of other humans (think of Descartes in his stove-heated room). This is one aspect of metaphysics, and it is the aspect emphasized by the philosophical tradition. The joy of metaphysical speculation elevates us above the merely existent, above those facts so beloved by positivists. Without metaphysics--even the shadow of metaphysics—there can be no conception of truth, but experience teaches us that this truth is ultimately a materialist one. The indifference of the Stoics or the smugness of the relativist Sophists are not live options for Adorno. We are left with a self-critical experience of metaphysics with only one practical postulate: acknowledge suffering, for metaphysics can no longer simply be founded upon logic or structures of thought (provided it ever was); rather, metaphysics is founded upon the material and moral injunction to acknowledge suffering, pain, and death (what Adorno calls the “zone of the carcass and the knacker”) (M, 117). Only in this way can we remain true both to the experience of life and the metaphysical tradition. In a society premised upon control of nature, Adorno’s “emphatic conception of truth” would amount to the acknowledgement of those aspects of existence which resist our efforts to control them. Metaphysics must serve as a reminder that the timeless values which were once upheld as the pinnacle of culture have been replaced by a concrete experience of suffering. Rather than adhering to an epistemological imperative (to comprehend the world as it truly is), the emphatic truth of metaphysics is prompted by a moral one (to acknowledge suffering in the face of indifference).

Heidegger, Adorno, and Nazism

An interesting controversy during the past 30 years or so has been the extent to which Martin Heidegger's thought is tied to National Socialism. The biographical facts are clear: at the behest of Nazi government authorities, Heidegger became Rektor (essentially the President) of the University of Freiburg, a post that he resigned approximately a year later. Heidegger defenders will claim that this shows he had a change of heart. Opponents such as Adorno will claim that his thought is "Fascist through and through." Well, the controversy is back, and this blog post by Margaret Soltan nicely captures the state of the debate.

How We Die Now

Interesting op/ed that relates to the claims about the changed experience of death in modernity (cf. Benjamin's "The Storyteller, Illuminations, Section X, pp. 93-94):

Thomas G. Long, "Chronicle of a Death We Can't Accept, New York Times, November 1, 2009.

More on Leskov

Good summary of life and work here:

http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/leskov.htm

Since we ran out of time when class ended, I thought I'd continue class discussion and answer McCall's question.

"What is the relationship between appearance and reality within the culture industry and in the context of Adorno's essay, "On the Fetish Character of Music...?"

The mass production of music for capitalistic purposes has reduced music from it's previous state as an art form (often used in rituals) to commodities which can be bought and sold in the form of records, tapes, cds, mp3s, etc. A commodity fetish is the compulsion to buy commodities in order to satisfy a need. These needs are usually false and used as a temporary replacement for a larger need which must be met. Music as a commodity, gives the illusion or appearance of satisfying a need in that it offers a mindless escape. In reality this "escape" is not only just temporary but actually not an escape at all because it does nothing to liberate the listener from their present condition. It suspends them in a type of limbo where they are still physically immersed in their situation but not mentally present.

Additionally, music gives the appearance of allowing for a person to assert their individuality but in reality (as discussed in the Dialectic of Enlightenment) as soon as a unique quality or individual pops up "talent scouts" quickly mass produce it thus destroying their uniqueness. To answer Mike's question in class I think that this is how Adorno would discuss an individual such as Kurt Cobain or revolutionary bands such as the Beatles. Every pop boy/girl band since is in some way a replication of the Beatles style and the Beatle's uniqueness can now only be observed in a historic sense.

Walter Benjamin a Jewish Mystic?

Has the Kabballah, or book of Jewish mysticism influenced Walter Benjamin's philosophy? During his life, one of Benjamin's closes friend by the name of Gershom Scholem, was an avid Jewish mystic who researched the Kabballah, and obviously, through his relationship with Scholem, Benjamin himself could also be a possible mystic or at least an academic scholar of this form of mysticism. As a sociological and cultural critic, Benjamin combined ideas drawn from historical materialism, German idealism, and Jewish mysticism in a body of work which was a novel contribution to western philosophy, Marxism and the aesthetic philosophy. Influenced by Bachofen, Benjamin gave the name "auratic perception" to the aesthetic faculty through which civilization would recover a lost appreciation of myth. This is in relation to his work: "The work of Art in the age of mechanical reproduction". Did Jewish mysticism have an impact on the views of Benjamin and attributed to his theories of aesthetics and idealism?

Obviously this would be a good research paper topic, and further research is needed in order to address this issue.

source: http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Walter_Benjamin

Aesthetics: Here we go again...

Walter Benjamin's publications of "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" brings us back to last year's Aesthetic's class. Oh boy. In relation to Horkheimer and Adorno's works that we have since gone over since the beginning of the semester, we are dealing with the notion of the aura, and the idea that "art will conform to Marxist theory but be immune from Fascist ideology". This notion directly relates to the Dialectic of Enlightenment by the connection of philosophically and ethically disproving the fascist ideology in 20th century Germany.

The idea that Benjamin is playing with here is that with the modern age of industry coming into its prime, the works of art, that have been hence forth a tool of pleasure used solely by the elite and intellectuals, is now being put out into the public on mass scales through reproduction. The essence that makes an unique work of art, its "aura" is being diminished through reproduction on a mass scale. The Mona Lisa for example, has been reproduced time and time again, make the uniqueness of the painting obsolete in its entirety. Classical art has an aura, since it dealt with a means of transcendentalism and mystique, but with modern art, it has has no aura and loses authenticity due to mass reproduction. What would Horkheimer and Adorno have to say about mr. Benjamin's views, and his connection of art conforming to Marxist theory?

Horkeimer, Adorno, and Benjamin, on Tatlin's Tower

Link to photo and description: http://purplemotes.net/2007/07/01/cob-12-the-art-of-bureaucracy/

What would have become known as The Monument to the Third International, Tatlin’s Tower, which never made it passed the stage of a model, epitomizes the work of the constructivists in the first half of the twentieth century. In brief, this art form strived to deny the idea (which I believe stems from Kant) of art for arts sake. Moreover, it replaced it with that the goal of celebrating the machine construction and use of materials prominent in the industrial revolution, both of which can clearly be seen in the models structure. Furthermore, noting the name of the piece, which references the subsequent communist regime after the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, this art form worked to celebrate and further that political ideology.

It is hard to establish what Horkeimer and Adorno would say about this piece in light of the culture industry that they despised. Since constructivism as a whole worked to gain support for communism, would they celebrate it as inspiring this form of socialism? Or, having communism already established in Russia, would they condemn it for serving the status quo? On accord of its being a symbol of the achievement of the communist government (once again, consider its name), I personally argue the latter for Tatlin’s piece.

Consider, also, Benjamin’s final line in The Work of Art in The Age of Mechanical Reproduction, which prescribes the appropriate reaction to fascism, via futurism, making politics aesthetic: “Communism responds by politicizing art” (Benjamin 242). It appears that Tatlin’s tower is a prime example of this. Consequently, unlike Horkeimer and Adorno, Benjamin would look extremely favorable upon the piece.

Monad Cont.

I posted a comment on McCall's original monad post. However, this goes in a bit of a different, perhaps mildly less relevant, direction.

Over break I was camping, and sitting around the fire one night found myself in a very strange game involving word association and spelling. Don’t ask. Anyhow, to get to my point, I decided to try to stump everyone by using the word monad. This resulted in a rather intense debate over the meaning of the word, which somehow led to a discussion of scientology.

Though most of us there were less than well educated on the subject, a few among us (including myself) had known someone that had been involved with that “religion.” The important aspects can be summarized as follows: scientology works by establishing places or times in your life when you have hit a road block – perhaps when you were four and bullied, or forty and fired. What the religion can do about this is to “clear” you, and allow you to move on and succeed at whatever you are doing. Furthermore, it performs this action for only a few thousand dollars a session.

I think that this would epitomize what Horkeimer and Adorno feel like the effect of the culture industry has been on religion. Would you agree? It seems that scientology has bent the purpose of religion from guiding people to live their life in accordance with an afterlife or moral god, to a purpose of economic success. A stranger thought, perhaps they would say that this is the religion not for the laymen or factory workers, but for the bourgeois in the modern period. Look at the primary advocates (i.e. Tom Cruise). Does this mean that even the people in charge have become merely subjects to the culture industry? Simply to the machine of industry itself?

It’s taking over the world…

Mark Twain complements art?

This is for Pat or Mike.

"Amusement, free of all restraint, would be not only the opposite of art but its complementary extreme. Absurdity in the manner of Mark Twain, with which the American culture industry flirts from time to time, would be a corrective to art," (pg113).

Did you guys learn anything in Aesthetics about Mark Twain that could help elaborate on this a little more? I've never heard of him or his work talked about in terms of art before.

Fear of Castration prompted a Genocide?

Is Freud's model which explains the projection of paranoia stemming from fear of castration (which is said to have stemmed from the ego's id urges repressed by the super ego) still accepted?

I understand and agree with Horkheimer and Adorno's argument that Jew's were the scapegoats of German society.... but have a hard time agreeing with the means by which they made this argument. It appears that they felt they could not say this without using sounding as if they were drawing from objective reasoning so they attempted to use a more authoritative basis such as psych to lay the groundwork.

Is this model of projection still used and accepted within the psychiatric community today? If not, is there one which continues to support Horheimer and Adorno's arguments.

Adorno's Negative Dialectics

Here's the link that I mentioned in class to Adorno's work:

http://www.efn.org/~dredmond/ndtrans.html

Also contains nice summary and reader's guide.

Adorno's Negative Dialectics

Excellent summary of Adorno's work and Negative Dialectics in particular can be found in the Stanford Encyclopedia's entry on Adorno:

Adorno says the book aims to complete what he considered his lifelong task as a philosopher: "to use the strength of the [epistemic] subject to break through the deception [Trug] of constitutive subjectivity" (ND xx).

This occurs in four stages. First, a long Introduction (ND 1-57) works out a concept of "philosophical experience" that both challenges Kant's distinction between "phenomena" and "noumena" and rejects Hegel's construction of "absolute spirit." Then Part One (ND 59-131) distinguishes Adorno's project from the "fundamental ontology" in Heidegger's Being and Time. Part Two (ND 133-207) works out Adorno's alternative with respect to the categories he reconfigures from German idealism. Part Three (ND 209-408), composing nearly half the book, elaborates philosophical "models." These present negative dialectics in action upon key concepts of moral philosophy ("freedom"), philosophy of history ("world spirit" and "natural history"), and metaphysics. Adorno says the final model, devoted to metaphysical questions, "tries by critical self reflection to give the Copernican revolution an axial turn" (ND xx). Alluding to Kant's self-proclaimed "second Copernican revolution," this description echoes Adorno's comment about breaking through the deception of constitutive subjectivity.

The Monad

The term itself was made famous by Leibniz in his Monadology (1714). Monads are simple substances, analogous to the soul. Each monad is dependent upon God for its continuous existence, so God can be thought of as the King Monad. Monads are "perpetual living mirrors of the universe." The Monadology was Leibniz' answer to Descartes' dualistic ontology, for each monad is a distinct substance and the universe is comprised only of these immaterial substances. As is the case for Plato, bodies have no real existence. Indeed, Leibniz can be read as attempting to synthesize ancient teleological metaphysical systems with modern rationalism.

Okay, with that brief background in place, we can turn to Adorno's discussion of the individual as monad in Minima Moralia (1948). Adorno begins by pointing out that the individual exists as a result of economic forces--the individual is a commodity like any other. He next points out that "what enables him to resist, that streak of independence in him, springs from monadological individual interest and its precipitate, character. The individual mirrors in his individuation the preordained social laws of exploitation, however mediated (Minima Moralia, p. 148). So, whereas Leibniz saw each monad as a dependent substance that mirrored God, Adorno sees each individual as a mirror of the exploitation of the market and the exploitation inherent within capitalism. At the same time, due to the shallowness of individualism (which cannot see the individual as a product, but simply as a cause), true individual identity as a critical wedge against the suffering imposed by society becomes impossible (since according to individualism, you are responsible for your suffering: not happy? Do something about it!).

It sounded better when Sean Connery read it.

I was so inspired by the reading by Sean Connery that I decided to track down the poem and take a closer look. I know Spesh missed out because driving to West Point and all so I threw in some notes especially for him about Hork and Adorno and how they might interpret this.

Ithaca

When you set out for Ithaka
ask that your way be long,
full of adventure, full of instruction.
The Laistrygonians and the Cyclops,
angry Poseidon - do not fear them:
such as these you will never find
as long as your thought is lofty, as long as a rare
emotion touch your spirit and your body.
The Laistrygonians and the Cyclops,
angry Poseidon - you will not meet them
unless you carry them in your soul,
unless your soul raise them up before you.

• "Do not fear them: such as these you will never find as long as your thought is lofty," Lofty thought would be enlightened thought, free from myth. If you are free from myth you no longer believe in these mythical beings and they cannot harm you. If you "carry them in your soul" they retain their power over you and you are not free.
  
• Hork would also mention that you shouldn't fear them because you also have some control over them (sacrifice and such)
  

Ask that your way be long.
At many a Summer dawn to enter
with what gratitude, what joy -
ports seen for the first time;
to stop at Phoenician trading centres,
and to buy good merchandise,
mother of pearl and coral, amber and ebony,
and sensuous perfumes of every kind,
sensuous perfumes as lavishly as you can;
to visit many Egyptian cities,
to gather stores of knowledge from the learned.

• Cavafy is saying here to live your live for means rather than ends. Focus on subjective rather than objective.
• Hork and Adorno would be critical of this and point how this entire section describes fulfilling the commodity fetish. Because people have allowed their lives to become governed by subjective reason rather than objective reason and live for means rather than ends, they must create false needs to temporarily satisfy (by shopping) to ignore the fact that their larger needs, such as purpose, are not being met.

Have Ithaka always in your mind.
Your arrival there is what you are destined for.
But don't in the least hurry the journey.
Better it last for years,
so that when you reach the island you are old,
rich with all you have gained on the way,
not expecting Ithaka to give you wealth.
Ithaka gave you a splendid journey.
Without her you would not have set out.
She hasn't anything else to give you.

And if you find her poor, Ithaka hasn't deceived you.
So wise you have become, of such experience,
that already you'll have understood what these Ithakas mean.

Constantine P Cavafy

• This last bit that Cavafy is saying is pretty interesting and coincides with what Horkheimer wrote about in the Eclipse of Reason. Cavafy is saying that in the end, your end should coincide and be complimented and enhanced by the means you took to achieve it. Horkheimer talks about in the Eclipse of Reason how ideally, subjective reason and the scientific method would compliment and "prove" the validity of objective reasoning. Unfortunately we're not quite there yet and it's all pretty hopeless and depressing right now.
  

2 Philosophy Classes in One Term, Who Can Live at That Speed?

In the Histroy of Philosophy; Ancient Philosophy class that I am also taking this term, we have just finished working with the Socratic dialogue Gorgias, in which Plato defends Socrates' way of life. Perhaps the most essential argument within this text is whether the life should be lived for the good of the soul or for the pleasure of the body. That is: should we use philosophy to better spirit, or spend our time gaining more worldly things through politics and rhetoric? Socrates, as you may have guessed, advocates the former - his friend Callicles sets out to prove the later.

Without delving too far into the specifics of this debate, do you see how this could relate to Horkeimer? Where does the rise of the bourgeoisie fit in? Objectivism vs. Subjectivism?

Patrick?

Totemism

While reading through the Dialectic of Enlightenment, on page 41, the content being discussed revolves around sacrifice by religion and the formation of relationships between nature and man, I came across this term: Totemism. Now at first hand glance, I didn't know what this word meant, and just by guessing, I suppose that this word has to deal with "totem poles" or some sort of ritual or Indian religion.

Odysseus's quest leads to subjugation of a class system in society?

Throughout the Dialectic of Enlightenment, both Adorno and Horkheimer refer back to the Odyssey , with the key protagonist in the story as Odysseus. When we come to the part in the book, towards the beginning, when Odysseus and his men were tempted by the harmonic and exotic signals of the Sirens, Horkheimer and Adorno expand on this excerpt to confirm that this ancient story relates to the rise of the bourgeoisie class in society. When tempted by the Sirens, Odysseus orders his men to plug their ears with cotton, as to block the Sirens' calling, and to continue to row. However he also orders that he be tied to the main post on the boat, so that he is restrained against the Siren's charm but can also enjoy the pleasure in hearing them call to him.

This action taken by Odysseus shows how the one in control (Odysseus) can oblige himself in pleasure at the expense of others, much like the rich and upper-class do in society today and in the past. He is the only one that can take pleasure from the Sirens, all the while, his men have their ears clogged to prevent them from hearing the pleasure, and they row and row the boat past the Sirens. There is a definite formation or authority and class represented in this excerpt of the Odyssey. Although looking at it in another way, Odysseus did save his men and himself from death, by plugging his crew's ears, which can show that yes, through this offhand class system, you will survive from dangers as a lower class, but you cannot have the right to experience pleasure.

What was Homer thinking?

Myth in Relation to Enlightenmnet

As discussed in our previous class the other day, we were talking about the effects of myth and how it can relate to the enlightenment of man. With regards to this, we began talking about myth and how it relates back to religion and primitive beliefs of the metaphysical world. No in enlightenment, it was man's goal to dominate nature. But in our discussion, we formed a cyclic narrative of how myth and enlightenment go hand in hand.
Now, religion derives from myth, we began to discuss how back in Ancient Greece during Plato's time, how people were subjugated to preform sacrifices to appease the Gods, for reason being, so that the God's would perform favors for those who appropriate sacrifice. We are looking, mind you, that the God's represent nature. So people sacrifice to the God's to appease them, in essence, the God's rely on these sacrifices from people. So in perspective, nature controls mankind, but when nature starts relying on mankind, there is an essence of control. It becomes cyclic. Man sacrifices to the God's so that the God's can do favors for them, but at the same time, the God's rely on these sacrifices in order to do their duties, in essence enlightenment has been reached. Man abstractly controls nature through myth.

Mr. Leslie, do you agree?

More on Nominalism

Michael Allen Gillespie has written an interesting book called The Theological Origins of Modernity (Amazon) in which he takes up the Realism/Nominalism controversy and traces its significance for early modern thought and culture. This is a passage from early in the book:

Drawing on the work of earlier proto-nominalist thinkers such as Roscelin and Abelard, and the work of Henry of Ghent and Scotus, [William of] Ockham laid out in great detail the foundations for a new metaphysics and theology that were radically at odds with scholasticism. Faith alone, Ockham argues, teaches us taht God is omnipotent and that he can do everything that is possible, that is to say, everything that is not contradictory. Thus, every being exits only as a result of his willing it and it exists as long as it does only because he so wills it. Creasion is thus an act of sheer gracee and is comprehensible only through revelation. God creates the world and continues to act within it, bound neither by its laws nor by his previous determinations. He acts simply and solely as he pleases, and as Ockham often repreats, he is no man's debtor. There is thus no immutable order of nature or reason that man can understand and no knowledge of God except through revelation. Ockham thus rejected the scholastic synthesis of reason and revelation and in this way undermined the metaphysical/theological foundation of the medieval world.

This notion of divine omnipotence was responsible for the demise of realism. God, Ockham argued, could not create universals because to do so would constrain his omnipotence. If a universal did exist, God would be unable to destroy any instance of it without destroying the universal itself. Thus, for example, God could not damn any one human being without damning all of humanity. If there are no real universals, every being must be radically individual, a unique creation of God himself, called forth out of nothing by his infinite power and sustained by that power alone. To be sure, God might compley secondary causes to produce or sustain an entity, but they were not necessary and were not ultimately responsible for the creation or the continued existence of the entity in question (22).

More Foucault on Mimesis

Foucault cites a concrete example by Crollius:

The stars are the matrix of all the plants and every star is only the spiritual prefiguration of a plant, such that it represents that plant, and just as each herb or plant is a terrestrial star looking up at the sky, so also each star is a celestial plant in spiritual form, which differs from the terrestrial plants in matter alone..., the celestial plants and herbs are turned toward the earth and look directly down upon the plants they have procreated, imbuing them with some virtue.

--Foucault, p. 20.

Michel Foucault on Mimesis

Here is how French philosopher Michel Foucault describes what the Horkheimer/Adorno see as a pre-modern age of mimesis (which Foucault calls resemblance):

Up to the end of the sixteenth century, resemblance played a constructive role in the knowledge of Western culture. It was resemblance that largely guided exegesis and the interpretation of texts; it was resemblance that organized the play of symbols, made possible knowledge of things visible and invisible, and controlled the art of representing them. The universe was folded in upon itself: the earth echoing the sky, faces seeing themselves reflected in the stars, and plants holding within their stems the secrets that were of use to man. Painting imitated space. And representation--whether in the service of pleasure or knowledge--was posited as a form of repetition: the theatre of life or the mirror of nature, that was the claim made by all language, its manner of declaring its existence and of formulating it right of speech.

--Michel Foucault, The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences (NY: Vintage, 1970), p. 17

Horkheimer in America

Intellectual historian James Schmidt (Boston University) provides background on the material difficulties that attended the publication of The Eclipse of Reason:


"The Eclipse of Reason and the End of the Frankfurt School in America"

Blog works.

Pythagorean Theory

I haven't posted anything yet so I'll start with a question from chapter 1 I just rediscovered.

On page 5 in Chapter 1, Horkheimer references Platonism's integration of the Pythagorean theory of numbers into a method of objective reasoning. My question is when and how did mathematics transition from a instrument of objective reasoning to subjective reasoning?

Or is the history of the Pythagorean theory as it relates to Philosophy different from how we learn about it in Geometry?

--Annie

Zizek

If you're interested in the question of tolerance, an interesting recent treatment of it can be found in Slovenian thinker Slavoj Zizek's Violence (Amazon). In many respects, Zizek can be considered a contemporary heir of Critical Theory. He combines reflections on pop culture (esp. film), Hegel, and psychoanalysis (particularly Lacan) in an entertaining and readable way. This book especially is meant for a more general audience than some of his other work. Ch. 4 is entitled "Antinomies of Tolerant Reason" and Ch. 5 "Tolerance as an Ideological Category." Let me know if you want to take a look at the book.

The more these artificial renaissances strive to keep intact the letter of the original doctrines, the more they distort the original meaning, for truth is forged in an evolution of changing and conflicting ideas.
- Hork 42

I found this an interesting line. Comments? Explanations?

A German term in a Horkheimer book? No way

Reading through the first chapter in Eclipse of Reason, on page 14, I came across the word: Volksgemeinschaft. When Horkheimer was explaining how liberalism can lead to terror and facisim (such as the post WWI German republic government, which lead the way to the rise of Hitler and the Nazi Party) this term arose. From my basic knowledge of the German language, and our class discussion of the term in class, the term basically means "an idea of national community"

Looking up the word, the broad definition is pretty much the same as it was discussed in class. Volksgemeinschaft means a peoples community, a term which was widely used by Hitler defining his Utopian Germany as such by racial means, with divisions of racial harmony and divisions of class parties. Hitler wanted to establish a national community within Germany, based on pseudo-scientific racial terms. It was generally used as a term by the National Socialist party during the 20th century Nazi reign in Germany (Britannica Encylcopedia Online. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/632308/Volksgemeinschaft).