Re: BHA: re: to Ruthi

[Martti Puttonen <pop@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Ruth,


>
> I agree with you that Adorno's ontology is weak.  He employs the notion of
"the primacy of the object," but it's left as something like a regulatory ideal.
As I've said before, I think that it is because he sees statements, including
ontological ones, as mediated -- and sees such mediation as a barrier, a kind
of mesh of subjectivity that thought carries with it necessarily.  So it's not clear
to him how to distinguish between statements about how the world is and
statements about our beliefs about how the world is.

I generally agree with what you say above. I think, that Adorno had
only an implicit possibility of having a philosophical notion or an
idea of mediation. I consider it being the nodal problem in Adorno's
negative dialectics, which is based on subject object dualism and
which is adequately derived this identity thinking philosophy.

>
> I think that he does okay with critical "thinking," as you put it, but I guess
I would agree with you that it is, ultimately, constrained by the limits to his
ontological realism.  I think that a big problem with Adorno is that he is
ambivalent about what causality is.

I agree. I see, that Adorno tried to have real causalities, but was
compelled to keep that notionas a general necessicity. He saw the
impossibility of not having it in philosophy.
>

> Warmly,
> Ruth
>
Martti




     --- from list bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---