Abstract

It seems natural to suppose that the burgeoning field of critical phenomenology would come to bear at least some affinities or resemblances (whether implicitly or explicitly) to critical theory, insofar as both are deeply concerned with directing a rigorous critical eye towards the most pressing political, economic, cultural, and social issues of our time. Yet critical theory has also had its share of critics of phenomenology itself, not least of which was the foremost member of the first-generation Frankfurt School critical theorists, Theodor W. Adorno. Adorno’s critique of phenomenology was, for historical reasons, confined to Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger, and might be concisely put as follows: for Adorno, classical phenomenology is insufficiently critical towards contemporary realities of oppression and domination (an insufficiency variously attributed to an alleged pernicious idealism, solipsism, methodological individualism, descriptivism, or ahistoricism in classical phenomenology). On this count, critical phenomenologists today may very well agree—at least to the point of affirming that phenomenology’s critical potential remained largely “untapped” in its classical formulations. However, in a twist of historical fate, Adorno failed to engage with a contemporaneous phenomenologist with whom he perhaps had more in common than anyone else: Emmanuel Levinas. Levinas himself was also notably critical of Husserl and Heidegger (while of course also being enormously indebted to them), for reasons not altogether dissimilar to Adorno’s. For Levinas, phenomenology had hitherto neglected the fundamental ethical or moral dimensions of experience—in particular our ethical responsibility towards the Other in the face of the manifold evils and injustices of the world. What might Adorno have thought of Levinas’s work, and Levinas of Adorno’s? What might they have learned from one another? And how might this exchange have affected the trajectories of critical theory, phenomenology, or critical phenomenology?

Highlights

  • It seems natural to suppose that the burgeoning field of critical phenomenology would come to bear at least some affinities or resemblances to critical theory, insofar as both are deeply concerned with directing a rigorous critical eye towards the most pressing political, economic, cultural, and social issues of our time.1 Yet critical theory has had its share of critics of phenomenology itself, not least of which was the foremost member of the first-generation Frankfurt School critical theorists, Theodor W

  • What might Adorno have thought of Levinas’s work, and Levinas of Adorno’s? What might they have learned from one another? And how might this exchange have affected the trajectories of critical theory, phenomenology, or critical phenomenology?

  • This article is motivated by the possibility that bringing Levinas’s phenomenology and Adorno’s critical theory into a mutually illuminating and enriching conversation can meaningfully contribute to the ongoing development of critical phenomenology

Read more

Summary

LEVINAS AND ADORNO’S NEGATIVE ETHICS

In this section, I examine and compare Levinas’s account of our fundamental ethical responsibilities to the Other in Totality and Infinity with Adorno’s account of our fundamental ethical responsibilities towards the non-identical in Negative Dialectics.5 Both exhibit what I will call—for reasons that will become clear—a “negative ethics,” which comes to serve as the ethical basis for a critical eschatology.

I.I LEVINAS
I.II ADORNO
LEVINAS AND ADORNO CONTRA THEODICY
II.I LEVINAS AGAINST “USELESS SUFFERING”
II.II ADORNO AGAINST “RECONCILIATION”
LEVINAS AND ADORNO ON THE LIGHT OF REDEMPTION
III.I LEVINAS’S MESSIANIC PEACE
III.II ADORNO’S LIGHT OF REDEMPTION
CONCLUSION
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call