In the first essay of the collection Hegel: Three Studies, Adorno evaluates Hegel's philosophy in the following way: "Hegel, in many respects, [is] a Kant who came to himself"1. He justifies this verdict with the claim that Hegel succeeded in following the inner logic of the transcendental philosophy much more consistently than Kant himself. His idealism was not simply imposed on Kant's philosophy and thus using it as a shaky foundation for a foreign superstructure. Instead, Hegel had sensitively reacted to Kant's inherent contradictions and resentments and subsequently presented them coherently in his dialectics and made them usable for him – or one might even say, he ‘sublated’ it. In my examination of the negative dialectics, I have repeatedly come to a similar assessment towards Adorno. He too was able to react productively on the inconsistencies and gross misconceptions in Hegel’s philosophy in his critical approach to Hegel, by which he measured and instructed his own dialectical philosophy on the Hegelian. He was always aware of the danger that the productive reception of Hegelian motifs and dialectical methods would lead to a dull epigonism if it did not consistently align itself with the original contents of his philosophy. In the present work, I would like to prove that Adorno's assessment of the relationship between Hegel and Kant also applies to his relationship to Hegel, i.e. that Adorno can and should be called – in a certain polemic way – a Hegel who came to himself. His negative dialectics convert Hegel's speculative philosophy into the modern philosophical discourse without being guilty of cherry picking. It does so by clearing Hegelian philosophy of its imperfections and enriching it with the political experience of the twentieth century. It is my goal to show with a genealogy of negative dialectics, its reference points to Hegel and to prove that Adorno's dialectic is a legitimate heir of Hegelian philosophy. In addition to Adorno's work Negative Dialectics, I will pay special attention to his Lectures on Negative Dialectics, because, as Adorno states himself, not only the "methodical observation" and the "fundamental considerations" of his negative dialectics are presented there, but also the development process of Negative Dialectics is considered.
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. A Synopsis of Negative Dialectics
III. Hegel’s Heritage
IV. The Original Sin – Identity and non-identity of the Concept
V. The »Logic of Decay« and double Negation
VI. Negative Dialectics and Society
VII. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This work examines the genealogy of Theodor W. Adorno’s negative dialectics, aiming to establish his philosophical framework as a legitimate continuation of Hegelian thought while highlighting his critical departures. By focusing on Adorno’s critique of the "force of identity" and the principle of affirmation via double negation, the thesis investigates how Adorno adapted Hegelian motifs to address the historical and political realities of the twentieth century, particularly the challenges posed by Auschwitz and capitalist societal structures.
- Genealogy of Adorno’s negative dialectics
- Critique of Hegelian identity and speculative idealism
- The divergence of concept and thing in modern philosophy
- Social diagnosis and the "force of identity"
- The relationship between theory, practice, and non-identity
Excerpt from the Book
IV. The Original Sin – Identity and non-identity of the Concept
For Kant the concept stands in opposite to apperceptions, because the concept is a generalized idea of what is common to several objects. Its matter is the object, its form just the generality (Kant 1977, 1). Every concept is universal. Classifications into general, individual, abstract and concrete concepts always only concern their use, which is why every concept can be used abstractly and concretely in relation to others in various degrees. Only in connection with sensuality and reason do concepts refer to certain objects. Only where the concept corresponds to apperceptions is knowledge in relation to the objective reality possible (CPR B, 335). Based on Kant's conception of the concept, Hegel develops a speculative theory of concepts in which the conception of the concept becomes dynamic. Concepts are thought of as giving rise to reality or to put it in Hegel’s terms: “Things are what they are through the activity of their inherent and manifesting concept” (EPS, 313). Freedom, totality, determinacy, essence, substance, truth, and reality are among the determinations that characterize a self-evolving concept (cf. EPS, 313-317).
In a very interesting passage of his Lectures on Negative Dialectics, Adorno traces back Hegel’s verdict of the identity of concept and reality to a linguistic confusion that Hegel imposed on himself. In his Science of Logic, Hegel starts with the equation of being and nothingness, i.e. the initial spark of his dialectics. He defies being (as one of the abstract categories) as the ‘indeterminate’. However, in a paragraph shortly after that, the word ‘indeterminate’ is suddenly replaced by ‘indeterminateness’.
Summary of Chapters
I. Introduction: The introduction establishes the premise that Adorno acts as a "Hegel who came to himself," outlining the research goal of proving Adorno’s dialectics as a legitimate heir to Hegelian philosophy.
II. A Synopsis of Negative Dialectics: This chapter defines the core of negative dialectics as a philosophy that rejects the identity of being and thought, emphasizing the divergence between concepts and the objects they claim to represent.
III. Hegel’s Heritage: This section explores Adorno’s productive critique of Hegelian systematic philosophy, specifically focusing on his rejection of the "positive" and the claimed identity of being and thinking.
IV. The Original Sin – Identity and non-identity of the Concept: This chapter analyzes the "original sin" of Hegelian logic, identifying it as a linguistic confusion where the shift from "indeterminate" to "indeterminateness" forces a problematic identification of concept and reality.
V. The »Logic of Decay« and double Negation: This chapter investigates Adorno’s rejection of the Hegelian principle of double negation, arguing that negation does not necessarily lead to a higher positive state.
VI. Negative Dialectics and Society: This chapter connects Adorno’s abstract dialectical critique to social theory, examining how the "force of identity" in thought mirrors the domination structures in capitalist societies.
VII. Conclusion: The conclusion synthesizes the findings, asserting that Adorno’s negative dialectics represents a vital, materialistic transformation of Hegelian speculation rather than a total rejection of it.
Keywords
Adorno, Hegel, Negative Dialectics, Identity, Non-identity, Logic of Decay, Double Negation, Critical Theory, Speculation, Concept, Subject, Object, Rationality, Auschwitz, Modern Philosophy
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this work?
The work explores the philosophical genealogy of Theodor W. Adorno’s "negative dialectics," specifically how his theory relates to and critiques the Hegelian system.
What are the primary themes discussed?
Key themes include the critique of conceptual identity, the rejection of Hegelian affirmative double negation, the social implications of dialectics, and the non-identity between concepts and reality.
What is the primary research question?
The primary aim is to prove that Adorno’s negative dialectics is a legitimate heir to Hegelian philosophy, despite his rigorous critical confrontation with Hegel's idealistic assumptions.
Which scientific method is applied?
The author uses a genealogical approach and a critical textual analysis of Adorno’s primary works, including his "Negative Dialectics" and "Lectures on Negative Dialectics," to map the evolution of these ideas.
What topics are covered in the main section?
The main part addresses the original sin of Hegelian conceptualization, the logical failure of double negation, the role of dialectics in critiquing capitalist society, and the political necessity of maintaining a "negative" dialectic.
Which keywords best characterize this publication?
Keywords such as Adorno, Hegel, Negative Dialectics, Force of Identity, Non-identity, and Critical Theory define the scope of the study.
How does the author define the "Original Sin" in Hegel's philosophy?
The author identifies this as a linguistic slip in Hegel's work, where the transition from "indeterminate" to "indeterminateness" is used to falsely equate conceptual abstraction with real, objective existence.
What is the relationship between the "force of identity" and social critique?
Adorno argues that the "force of identity" in philosophy—the drive to force particulars into general concepts—is mirrored by the structures of social and class-based domination in capitalist society.
How does Adorno's dialectic relate to the historical event of Auschwitz?
Adorno views Auschwitz as a form of "absolute negativity," arguing that after such an event, philosophy must refrain from traditional affirmative "positive" conclusions and instead adopt a new, critical categorical imperative to prevent such occurrences from repeating.
- Citation du texte
- Linus Hellwig (Auteur), 2017, Hegel and the Logic of Decay. A Genealogy of Adorno's Negative Dialectics, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/437598
