Adorno defined language as existing only through free subjective consciousness

Evidence

Adorno jumped too quickly to the conclusion that a loss of quality and content must sometimes be accepted as the price of progress in mastering the material. It was also clear here how questionable it was to talk of `making language speak’ as a standard. What was language? It surely meant something different to Adorno from what it meant to Heidegger. For Adorno, language was not something that came over the subjective consciousness, but rather something which only existed to the extent that subjective consciousnesses were free. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 557

Categorization

• XREF: Contrasts Adorno’s linguistic subjectivism with Heidegger’s conception of language as something that comes over consciousness — a key split between Critical Theory and Heideggerian phenomenology. — connects to: For Adorno, language exists only insofar as subjective consciousnesses are free. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2253; For Adorno, destroying reified language and submitting to another language coincide — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2250
• DEFINE: Clarifies what ‘making language speak’ could legitimately mean for Adorno versus Heidegger.
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: For Adorno, language exists only insofar as subjective consciousnesses are free. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2253; For Adorno, destroying reified language and submitting to another language coincide — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2250

Broader Connections

• For Adorno, language exists only insofar as subjective consciousnesses are free. #corroborates (1.00) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 2253