Adorno defended typologies because capitalism had destroyed authentic individualism for most people

Evidence

The reason for the persistent plausibility of the typological approach, however, is not a static biological one, but just the opposite: dynamic and social… . The marks of social repression are left within the individual soul. … Individualism, opposed to human pigeonholing, may ultimately become a mere ideological veil in a society which actually is inhuman… . In other words, the critique of typology should not neglect the fact that large numbers of people are no longer, or rather never were, “individuals” in the sense of traditional nineteenth-century philosophy. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 681

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies Adorno’s argument that the very use of a typology is historically warranted when social repression has reified personalities — the critique of typology must itself be historical.
• DEEPTHINKING: This passage condenses a subtle philosophical move: the refusal to critique typology in the abstract because under actual conditions typology is more honest than a false appeal to individualism. Dense, nuanced, and hard to summarize in one line.
• XREF: connects to: Adorno linked the performer’s interpretive freedom to the stage of capitalism — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 560; Adorno faulted Hegel for treating the bourgeois individual as an irreducible reality — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 834; Adorno adopted ego psychology and character typologies he had formally condemned, diluting nonidentity theory — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 680 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Adorno faulted Hegel for treating the bourgeois individual as an irreducible reality #expands (0.80) — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 834