Negative dialectics rejects systematic progression in favor of releasing the non-identical

Evidence

At the back of this there lay a simple insight: the world might also be able to exist without human beings, but human beings cannot exist without the world. Negative dialectics meant: be mindful of the Other. It did not round off into a system, did not represent a progress from one category to another, as in Hegel. Instead, it admonished one again and again, in every case, to release the non-identical' from which identitarian’ thought, the self-satisfied spirit, could never tear itself away and which it could only distort, with unforeseeable consequences. Hypostatizations would never succeed in the long term, and the only reasonable solution must therefore be to recognize and accept the object, the Other, the alien: this was the conclusion of Negative Dialectics. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 2545

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Defines what Adorno’s negative dialectics is FOR (mindfulness of the Other) against what it refuses (Hegelian systematic progression).
  • XREF: connects to: A negative dialectic must affirm synthesis while negating it in every concrete case — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 119; The irrationality of society did not justify abandoning dialectical theory — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2396; Negative dialectics replaces unity with what lies outside conceptual domination — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2534 (+6 more)

Broader Connections