Abstract. In this paper Adorno's critiques on Hegel's dialectics will be examined. Adorno states that Hegel's idea of negating the negation is finally based on an affirmation which targets a point of affirmative end. This means to tie up dialectics in the deep end of which lies progressive thought. However, neither a linear nor a helical development, which in fact improves on linear grounds, is a topic of debate in history. At this point, the history of mankind witnesses regressions as much as improvements. The 20th century provides us with enough information on that matter.
Adorno thinks that identicalness lies basically on Hegel's dialectics. According to him, this idea of identity is actually an ideological attitude. Identity exists as a primitive case of ideology and the ideology develops on that identity. In order to leave this behind one has to get rid off thought of identity and see the importance of contradiction. Thus, identity looks like something to be left behind as soon as it has been captured.
To break down the domination of universal on particular forms the beginning point of Adorno's thought. Adorno raises an objection against the idea of identity of particular and universal since he thinks that this idea is based on the correlation of concept and reality in logic. Adorno criticizes the thought indicating that the things expressed logically should be interpreted in the same way in reality. According to Adorno, concept not fully gets reality; and this means the resistance of object to subject and particular to universal. By the help of this resistance, particular gathers a solid ground for itself against universal. In this context, in reality, everything, every individual is in some sense in a particular formation and cannot be identical with another individual. Adorno states that Hegel finally sacrifices contradiction to identicalness. For him what important is to provide the contradiction to be forever. In this way, negative dialectics will always seem like negating.
On the other hand, the idea of ceasing/ending dialectics (the struggle to finalize dialectics at the point of reaching the predetermined target) at an upper maturity or synthesis level is a betrayal to the dialectics itself. Thus, Adorno improves negative dialectics. Both the beginning and the end of negative dialectics is not known and does not accept the idea of identicalness. Negative dialectics is based on a continuous negation; thus, the pressure of universal on particular is broken. |
Bu konuşmada/yazıda Adorno'nun Hegel'in 'diyalektik'i kavrayışı üzerine eleştirileri ele alınacaktır. Adorno, Hegel'in olumsuzlamayı olumsuzlama düşünesinin sonuçta bir olumlamaya dayandığını ve bunun da bir son (olumlama) noktasını hedeflediğini dile getirir. Bu ise diyalektiğin ucunu bağlamak anlamına gelir ve temelinde ilerleme düşüncesi yatmaktadır. Oysa tarihte gerek doğrusal gerekse sarmal — ki bu da sonuçta doğrusal bir zeminde gelişir — bir ilerlemeden söz edilemez. Bu noktada, insanlık tarihi ilerlemeler kadar gerilemelere de tanıklık eder; 20. yüzyıl bu konuda bize yeterince veri sağlar.
Öte yandan, diyalektiği bir üst olgunluk aşamasında ya da sentez aşamasında durdurma/sonlandırma düşüncesi (diyalektiği varolan bir hedefin gerçekleştirildiği noktada kesme/bitirme çabası) diyalektiğin kendisine ihanet etmektir. Bu nedenle, Adorno, negatif diyalektik görüşünü geliştirir. Negatif diyalektik'in hem başı ve sonu bağlı değildir hem de özdeşlik düşüncesini kabul etmez. Negatif diyalektik sürekli bir olumsuzlamaya dayanır; böylece tümel olanın, evrenselin tikel üzerindeki baskısı da kırılmış olur. |
