The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Explanation needed Options
Atatürk
Posted: Monday, January 13, 2020 5:58:03 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/25/2018
Posts: 1,776
Neurons: 7,730
Location: İstoç, Istanbul, Turkey
Where Nietzsche saw domination as an essential feature of human society, Adorno argued that domination was contingent and potentially capable of being overcome. Obviously, [letting go of this particular aspiration would be intellectually cataclysmic to the emancipatory aims of critical theory]. Adorno uses Nietzsche in an attempt to bolster, not undermine, critical theory.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/adorno/

Would you please explain the bracketed part? How come is it cataclysmic to the emancipatory aims?

FounDit
Posted: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 3:34:47 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 13,730
Neurons: 65,608
Atatürk wrote:
Where Nietzsche saw domination as an essential feature of human society, Adorno argued that domination was contingent and potentially capable of being overcome. Obviously, [letting go of this particular aspiration would be intellectually cataclysmic to the emancipatory aims of critical theory]. Adorno uses Nietzsche in an attempt to bolster, not undermine, critical theory.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/adorno/

Would you please explain the bracketed part? How come is it cataclysmic to the emancipatory aims?



As I read it, Nietzsche said domination was an essential feature of society, but Adorno felt that domination could be overcome through conscious effort, which would result in freedom from such domination.

Therefore, such freedom could not occur if one didn't believe domination could be overcome. So "oviously", letting go of the idea you can overcome domination, would destroy the idea of achieving freedom.
Ashwin Vemuri
Posted: Sunday, May 10, 2020 1:10:09 AM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/14/2020
Posts: 220
Neurons: 120,560
Location: Hyderābād, Andhra Pradesh, India
FounDit is Correct
tautophile
Posted: Thursday, May 28, 2020 12:45:00 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/14/2018
Posts: 625
Neurons: 11,425
For what it's worth, I remember the saying, "Nietzsche is pietzsche but Sartre is smartre".

The key to this saying is that the philosopher's name ("nee-chuh" in German) is often pronounced "Nee-chee" in English, so that "pietzsche" would be pronounced "peachy" (an informal word for "fine, very satisfactory"). The French existentialist's name is often pronounced just /sart/ in English, so that "smartre" would be pronounced /smart/. But sometimes the -re in his name is pronounced in English (more or less /sar-tr/) so "smartre" would be /smarter/.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.