This essay defines Theodor W. Adorno’s philosophical language criticism as materialistic. It takes up Max Beck’s discussion of Adorno’s critique of German metaphysical jargon in his paper “Jargon, Bullshit, sinnlos”. However, this essay argues for a twofold critique as being constitutive for Adorno’s approach: It is directed not only at Martin Heidegger’s ontological understanding of language but also at Logical Empiricism’s formalistic understanding of it. Beck’s claim of an affinity between the methods of Adorno and the Vienna Circle is therefore (...) questionable. The first part illuminates the philosophical significance of Adorno’s encounters with the Vienna protagonists. The second part discusses the differences between a formalistic and a materialistic approach: instead of excluding metaphysical expressions as meaningless, Adorno contextualizes them historically and socially. Thus Adorno criticizes early analytic philosophy’s reductive treatment of language and its rigorist understanding of enlightenment. The third part connects the critiques of formalism and of jargon by pointing to their own socio-historical embeddedness. Finally, it argues for the contemporary relevance of such twofold critique. (shrink)

Gegenwärtig werden häufig politisch-moralische Ansprüche an die Kunst gerichtet. Dieser Aufsatz tritt ihnen unter Verweis auf ihren grundsätzlichen Konflikt mit ästhetischen Ansprüchen entgegen. Anhand von Oscar Wildes ästhetisch-theoretischen.