"Dialectic of Enlightenment" is undoubtedly the most influential publication of the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory. Written during the Second World War and circulated privately, it appeared in a printed edition in Amsterdam in 1947. "What we had set out to do," the authors write in the Preface, "was nothing less than to explain why humanity, instead of entering a truly human state, is sinking into a new kind of barbarism." Yet the work goes far beyond a mere critique of contemporary events. Historically remote developments, indeed, the birth of Western history and of subjectivity itself out of the struggle against natural forces, as represented in myths, are connected in a wide arch to the most threatening experiences of the present. The book consists in five chapters, at first glance unconnected, together with a number of shorter notes. The various analyses concern such phenomena as the detachment of science from practical life, formalized morality, the manipulative nature of entertainment culture, and a paranoid behavioral structure, expressed in aggressive anti-Semitism, that marks the limits of enlightenment. The authors perceive a common element in these phenomena, the tendency toward self-destruction of the guiding criteria inherent in enlightenment thought from the beginning. Using historical analyses to elucidate the present, they show, against the background of a prehistory of subjectivity, why the National Socialist terror was not an aberration of modern history but was rooted deeply in the fundamental characteristics of Western civilization. Adorno and Horkheimer see the self-destruction of Western reason as grounded in a historical and fateful dialectic between the domination of external nature and society. They trace enlightenment, which split these spheres apart, back to its mythical roots. Enlightenment and myth, therefore, are not irreconcilable opposites, but dialectically mediated qualities of both real and intellectual life. "Myth is already enlightenment, and enlightenment reverts to mythology." This paradox is the fundamental thesis of the book. This new translation, based on the text in the complete edition of the works of Max Horkheimer, contains textual variants, commentary upon them, and an editorial discussion of the position of this work in the development of Critical Theory.
Adorno and Horkheimer see the self-destruction of Western reason as grounded in a historical and fateful dialectic between the domination of external nature and society. They trace enlightenment, which split these spheres apart, back to its mythical roots. Enlightenment and myth, therefore, are not irreconcilable opposites, but dialectically mediated qualities of both real and intellectual life. "Myth is already enlightenment, and enlightenment reverts to mythology." This paradox is the fundamental thesis of the book.
《启蒙辩证法》中文化产业一章共分七个小节,这七个小节从现象到本质层层递进地剖析了晚期资本主义社会中文化产业作为大众欺骗的本质。 第一节中,霍格海默犀利地指出“利益群体总喜欢从技术角度来解释文化工业。……然而,却没有人提出,技术用来获得支配社会权力的基础,正是...
評分这是我十年前读到的第一本西方马克思主义文化批判作品。后来出了新版,阿多尔诺部分是曹卫东翻译的,虽然没读过这个版本,但看到有人说与原文对照的话能看出曹卫东翻译得不好,我不懂德文,无从判断。我看的这个版本(洪佩郁, 蔺月峰译)也是从德文译出的,但多用短句翻译(译...
評分阿多诺的启蒙或启蒙批判 [摘 要] 表面上看,启蒙运动的企图早已实现了。如果启蒙完成以前的世界在启蒙的推动者眼里是草率和嬗变的话,那么他们需要做的首要工作就是阻止这种草率和嬗变继续下去。启蒙开始前,世界的神话幻想没有连贯性,也不具有让它长期保持和谐一致的特性...
評分九零年左右出生的人成长于这样的一种文化氛围之下:先是日本动漫的风靡,再到平民偶像的崛起,最后是当今网络文化的全面普及。七八十年代的由知识分子主导的诗意生活与民主热情已在一次激昂而又成为禁忌的副歌中随风远去,取而代之的是一种渗透全社会的,从大学生到初中辍学者...
評分阿多诺的启蒙或启蒙批判 [摘 要] 表面上看,启蒙运动的企图早已实现了。如果启蒙完成以前的世界在启蒙的推动者眼里是草率和嬗变的话,那么他们需要做的首要工作就是阻止这种草率和嬗变继续下去。启蒙开始前,世界的神话幻想没有连贯性,也不具有让它长期保持和谐一致的特性...
Adorno果然夠刁鑽夠刻薄,跑到美國把人傢文化批判得渣都不剩。他說馬剋吐溫那種蠢到無可救藥的作品,卻總被美國文化産業用來調戲大眾。讀得真高興,我最討厭的就是美國錶麵歡快實則空洞的糙文化。adorno,手動贊!
评分前三章讀完第一遍。
评分有1944年校勘,做得很好。
评分用“不明覺厲”來形容這本極度艱澀的書中的某些理論實在是再適閤不過瞭,而且平心而論有些地方是比較牽強的……難道是我覺悟不夠……?
评分!!!
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息,本站不存儲任何數據與內容,任何內容與數據均與本站無關,如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美書屋 版权所有