![]() ![]() ![]() Instead, his discussions expose elements of a negative dialectical anthropology. 6 Martin Jay (1973: 56) points towards these elements when he writes, “in Horkheimer’s work there a15Unlike Adorno, however, Horkheimer does not repudiate philosophical anthropology entirely. Broadly conceived, negative anthropology rests on this abstention from judgment it originates in Marx’s (1978: 145) understanding of human essence as “the ensemble of the social relations”, but as part of a critical social and cultural theory it is not limited to ex negativo determinations.īy understanding the human being as the ensemble of what it is not, or what it failed to make of itself, negative anthropology resists the demand of spelling out what man can or should be, while holding on to the possibility of realising happiness and abandoning suffering in history. Marquard (1973Despite their differences in detail, Horkheimer, Adorno and Sonnemann were unanimous in their refusal to ask or answer the question “What is man?” – and indeed to make any positive assumptions about the essence of man. 3 Several attempts were proposed to understand the historical change of human nature. #Arnold gehlen antropologia filosofica pdf pdf#Arnold Gehlen Antropologia Filosofica Pdf En EspanolĢ In his Lectures on logic, Kant (1992: 538) lists four questions of philosophy in a cosmopolitan sen. Max Horkheimer, for instance, explicitly granted philosophical anthropology an auxiliary role for Critical Theory in his essays from the mid-1930s, and he relied heavily on contemporary ethnology and anthropology in the first chapter of the Dialectic of Enlightenment. Although its members were by and large committed to the idea of the human being’s permanent self-realization in history, which led them to reject every doctrine of man’s invariant characteristics, they nevertheless differed significantly on their willingness to integrate anthropological assumptions into their individual work. 1From its inception, the Frankfurt School was sceptical of the new momentum anthropological thought gained during the Weimar Republic. What role does negative anthropology play as a component of critical social theory? To what extent can it count as a theoretical programme?ĭo certain historical situations demand anthropological assumptions more than others? To address these questions, this essay follows the early Frankfurt School’s altercations with anthropological philosophy. ![]() Adorno and Ulrich Sonnemann engage with the question “What is man?” Negative anthropology turns out to be more than the critique of philosophical anthropology: By understanding the human being as the ensemble of what it is not, negative anthropology avoids the predicament of spelling out what it could be, while holding on to the idea of man’s self-realization in history.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |