{"id":7517,"date":"2014-12-15T04:16:25","date_gmt":"2014-12-15T04:16:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2014\/12\/15\/adorno-on-what-is-no-longer-believable-after-auschwitz\/"},"modified":"2014-12-15T04:16:25","modified_gmt":"2014-12-15T04:16:25","slug":"adorno-on-what-is-no-longer-believable-after-auschwitz","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2014\/12\/15\/adorno-on-what-is-no-longer-believable-after-auschwitz\/","title":{"rendered":"Against Historical Relativism: Adorno on What is No Longer Believable After Auschwitz"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno is exasperating but exciting. Although as sloppy as one expects Continental thinkers to be, he is nonetheless a force to be reckoned with, a serious man who is seriously grappling with ultimates at the outer limits of intelligibility. Derrida I dismiss as a bullshitter; indeed, to cop a line from John Searle, he is someone who "gives bullshit a bad name." But I can't dismiss Adorno. I confess to being partial to the Germans. They are nothing if not serious, and I'm a serious man. Among the French there is an excess of fa\u00e7ade<\/em> and frippery. But now let's get to work \u2014 like good Germans. <\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Suppose we focus on just part of one of Adorno's serpentine sentences. This is from Negative Dialektik<\/strong> (Suhrkamp, p. 354): <\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Dass das Unveraenderliche Wahrheit sei und das Bewegte, Vergaengliche Schein, die Gleichgueltigkeit von Zeitlichem und ewigen Ideen gegeneinander, ist nicht laenger zu behaupten . . . .<\/em> <\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Adorno is telling us that <\/span><\/p>\n

\n

It can no longer be asserted that the true is the unchangeable while the mobile and mutable is mere appearance, or that eternal Ideas and the temporal realm are indifferent to each other . . . . <\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\"Adorno<\/a>So what is our man saying? He is saying that after Auschwitz \u2014 where 'Auschwitz' collects all the genocidal and totalitarian horrors of the Third Reich \u2014 one can no longer take Platonism seriously, or the people's Platonism either, Christianity. And indeed most traditional philosophy, consisting as it does, in Whitehead's phrase, of a series of footnotes to Plato. The old metaphysics is dead, the metaphysics according to which Being itself has a positive and hence affirmable character. <\/span> An experience<\/em> has refuted the old metaphysics, the experience of Auschwitz.<\/span><\/p>\n

But if it can no longer<\/em> be asserted that that the true is the immutable, then it once<\/em> could be asserted. And indeed, by 'assert' is intended assert with truth<\/em> or at least justification. Note the ambiguity of 'assertible' as between capable of being asserted and worth of being asserted. And make a meta-note of how a broadly analytic thinker like me pedantically points out something like this whereas your typical Continental head would find my procedure boorish or somehow gauche. "How low class of you to be so careful and precise!"<\/span><\/p>\n

But I digress. My point, again, is that if a proposition can no longer<\/em> be asserted and believed, then it once<\/em> could be asserted and believed. But if a metaphysical proposition was once true or believed with justification, then it is now true or believable with justification. For a metaphysical assertion is necessarily true if true at all. The structure of being cannot be contingent upon our contingent experiences, even experiences as shattering as that of the Nazi horror. (It is telling of course that Adorno, good man of the Left that he is, does not mention the Stalinist horrors which were known since 1956 \u2014 but that is a separate post.)<\/span><\/p>\n

What I am objecting to is Adorno's apparent historical relativism. By this I mean the view that truth itself is historically conditioned and thus capable of being different in different historical epochs. Metaphysical conceptions are of course historically variable, but not their objects, the structures of being. Adorno is doing the the Continental Shuffle, sliding from the epistemic\/doxastic to the ontic and back again.  That views of truth are historically conditioned is trivial and scarcely in need of being pointed out; but that truth itself is historically conditioned is incoherent.<\/span><\/p>\n

More fundamentally, what I am objecting to is Adorno's lack of any argument for his view that historical experience can refute a metaphysical thesis and his lack of consideration of the sort of (obvious) objection I am now raising. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Continental 'trope' or 'move' \u2014 such-and-such can no longer be believed –ought to be defended or dropped. Why, for example, should it no longer be possible to believe in God after the horrendous events of the 20th century when people believed in God at the time of the Lisbon earthquake and the time of the Bubonic plague? What is so special about these 20th century horrors? The fact of evil may well rule out the existence of God, or more generally, the affirmability of Being. But if it does, this is surely no recent development. <\/span><\/p>\n

\nRelated articles<\/legend>\n
\n
\"\"<\/a>The Unlimited Obfuscation of Some Continental Writers<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/fieldset>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno is exasperating but exciting. Although as sloppy as one expects Continental thinkers to be, he is nonetheless a force to be reckoned with, a serious man who is seriously grappling with ultimates at the outer limits of intelligibility. Derrida I dismiss as a bullshitter; indeed, to cop a line from John Searle, … Continue reading “Against Historical Relativism: Adorno on What is No Longer Believable After Auschwitz”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[185,372,325,361],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7517","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-adorno","category-belief","category-continental-philosophy-criticized","category-relativism"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7517","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7517"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7517\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7517"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7517"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7517"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}