David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
European Journal of Philosophy 23 (2):293-320 (2015)
That something is profoundly wrong with the way in which enlightenment has unfolded has widely been taken to be the main thrust of Dialectic of Enlightenment. In this paper, I propose to defend that to understand the book and shed light on some of its most puzzling features, one should rather take Horkheimer and Adorno's critical claim at face value: through their criticism they contend to have prepared a positive concept of enlightenment. How this can be so is the question I want to answer. I defend that what we need is an account that works out the conceptual grounds on which their critique can operate. The focus of my attempt will consist in understanding what they mean when they assert that rationality is intrinsically social and how they conceive of rationality as being reflective at its core
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Jürgen Habermas (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1, 'Reason and the Rationalization of Society'. Polity..
Charles Taylor (1985). Philosophy and the Human Sciences. Cambridge University Press.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1991). Elements of the Philosophy of Right. Cambridge University Press.
Max Horkheimer (2002). Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments. Stanford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Alfredo Lucero-Montano (2006). Horkheimer and Adorno's Dialectic of Enlightenment. Philosophy Pathways 114.
Hauke Brunkhorst (2000). Enlightenment of Rationality: Remarks on Horkheimer and Adorno's Dialectic of Enlightenment. Constellations 7 (1):133-140.
Nigel Tubbs, Hegel and the Dialectic of Enlightenment : The Recognition of Education in Civil Society.
Avner Cohen (2011). Myth and Myth Criticism Following the Dialectic of Enlightenment. The European Legacy 15 (5):583-598.
Marianna Papastephanou (2000). Ulysses' Reason, Nobody's Fault: Reason, Subjectivity and the Critique of Enlightenment. Philosophy and Social Criticism 26 (6):47-59.
Kai Nielsen (1977). Rationality, Needs and Politics: Remarks on Rationality as Emancipation and Enlightenment: Enlightenment is Man's Release From His Self-Incurred Tutelage. Philosophy and Social Criticism 4 (3):281-308.
Kenneth R. Westphal (2002). ‘‘‘Rationality and Relativism: The Historical and Contemporary Significance of Hegel’s Response to Sextus Empiricus’. Esercizi Filosofici 6:22--33.
Michael P. Levine (2003). Can the Concept of Enlightenment Evolve? Asian Philosophy 13 (2 & 3):115 – 129.
Charles W. Mills (2002). Defending the Radical Enlightenment. Social Philosophy Today 18:9-29.
Anthony J. Cascardi (1999). Consequences of Enlightenment. Cambridge University Press.
John W. Tate (1997). Dead or Alive?: Reflective Versus Unreflective Traditions. Philosophy and Social Criticism 23 (4):71-91.
Janet R. Jakobsen (1995). Deconstructing the Paradox of Modernity: Feminism, Enlightenment, and Cross-Cultural Moral Interactions. Journal of Religious Ethics 23 (2):333-363.
Added to index2012-05-05
Total downloads30 ( #132,498 of 1,906,958 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #345,326 of 1,906,958 )
How can I increase my downloads?