Genealogy and Critical Historicism: Two Models of Enlightenment in Horkheimer and Adorno’s Writings

IF 0.4 Q1 HISTORY Critical Historical Studies Pub Date : 2016-11-01 DOI:10.1086/688404
John Abromeit
{"title":"Genealogy and Critical Historicism: Two Models of Enlightenment in Horkheimer and Adorno’s Writings","authors":"John Abromeit","doi":"10.1086/688404","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that two distinct concepts of Enlightenment coexist uneasily in Horkheimer and Adorno’s Dialectic of Enlightenment. According to the first, genealogical concept, Enlightenment is a bewildered form of self-preservation that has existed since the dawn of Western civilization. The second, critical historicist concept views Enlightenment as the critical and anti-authoritarian ideals articulated—most radically in eighteenth-century France—during the uneven development of modern bourgeois society. After examining the origins of these two concepts in Adorno and Horkheimer’s early writings, the article demonstrates why the former became dominant in Dialectic of Enlightenment, while at the same time pointing to significant traces of the latter that remained. The article contends that a reconsideration of the latter concept reveals of a model of early Critical Theory that can still provide a compelling alternative not only to Dialectic of Enlightenment, but also to more recent attempts to place Critical Theory on normative foundations.","PeriodicalId":43410,"journal":{"name":"Critical Historical Studies","volume":"3 1","pages":"283 - 308"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/688404","citationCount":"212","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Historical Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/688404","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 212

Abstract

This article argues that two distinct concepts of Enlightenment coexist uneasily in Horkheimer and Adorno’s Dialectic of Enlightenment. According to the first, genealogical concept, Enlightenment is a bewildered form of self-preservation that has existed since the dawn of Western civilization. The second, critical historicist concept views Enlightenment as the critical and anti-authoritarian ideals articulated—most radically in eighteenth-century France—during the uneven development of modern bourgeois society. After examining the origins of these two concepts in Adorno and Horkheimer’s early writings, the article demonstrates why the former became dominant in Dialectic of Enlightenment, while at the same time pointing to significant traces of the latter that remained. The article contends that a reconsideration of the latter concept reveals of a model of early Critical Theory that can still provide a compelling alternative not only to Dialectic of Enlightenment, but also to more recent attempts to place Critical Theory on normative foundations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
谱系学与批判历史主义:霍克海默与阿多诺著作中的两种启蒙模式
本文认为,在霍克海默和阿多诺的《启蒙辩证法》中,两种截然不同的启蒙概念难以共存。根据第一种谱系概念,启蒙运动是一种自我保护的困惑形式,自西方文明开始以来就存在。第二种是批判的历史决定论,认为启蒙运动是在现代资产阶级社会发展不平衡的时期,以18世纪的法国最为激进地表达出来的批判和反专制的理想。在考察了阿多诺和霍克海默早期著作中这两个概念的起源之后,本文论证了为什么前者在《启蒙辩证法》中占据主导地位,同时指出后者的重要痕迹仍然存在。文章认为,对后一个概念的重新思考揭示了早期批判理论的一个模型,它仍然可以提供一个令人信服的替代方案,不仅是启蒙辩证法,而且是最近将批判理论置于规范基础上的尝试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
Colonialism, Surplus Population, and the Marxian Critique of Political Economy Hayek against Malthus: Julian Simon’s Neoliberal Critique of Environmentalism Temporalities of Emancipation: Women, Work, and Time in 1970s America Reactionaries Marching Forward: On Worldmaking and Its Enemies Enclosed Futures: Oil Extraction in the Republic of Congo
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1