Adorno rejected prima philosophia while defending a strict concept of real theory

Evidence

I’d like to avoid the misunderstanding that I want to rescue the traditional pre-Marxian concept of philosophy – that is, the ontological concept, the concept of prima philosophia in the broadest sense. Rather, I only want to stick to a strict enough concept … of what counts as ‘theory and real theory’. By philosophy, I mean nothing else. But what’s at issue is more than a merely terminological argument (unlike the philosophy professors, I don’t believe at all in merely terminological quarrels; rather, every philosophical concept has, by virtue of its historical dimension, an irreplaceable quality which cannot be solved by reference to synonyms). — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 1200

Categorization

• DEFINE: Precisely nails the contested distinction between ‘theory’ as prima philosophia (rejected) and ‘real theory’ (retained) that anchors the entire historiographical debate.
• XREF: The claim that philosophical concepts carry an irreplaceable historical dimension connects to Adorno’s immanent critique methodology and his theory of the non-identical — it is the wrecking-ball for any purely semantic ‘terminological quarrels’ approach. — connects to: Adorno’s fragmented aphoristic style was itself a philosophical position against system — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 834; Adorno rejected both Hegelian absolute spirit and Lukácsian proletarian totality grasp. — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 183; Adorno rejected any identity of theory and practice — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 341 (+2 more)