Posts

The Meaning of a Constellation: Saussure, Adorno, and Relational Thinking

Image
The Logic of the Constellation. AI image 1. The Metaphor Comes First A constellation begins with stars scattered across the sky, yet the figure we see among them belongs to neither star individually. It emerges from the way they are related: the stars remain where they are, but their arrangement gives them a different visibility as a whole. What appears, then, is not another object above the stars, but a configuration through which the elements become intelligible in relation to one another. The image is simple, but it carries a surprisingly deep implication. We are accustomed to thinking of things as possessing an identity of their own and then being related to other things. A constellation reverses that emphasis. What becomes visible depends partly on the relations in which its elements appear. The individual remains distinct, yet its significance changes with the surrounding configuration. This makes the metaphor especially useful for thinking about language and thought. A wor...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Normalization of Difficulty: Adorno, Derrida, and the Absorption of Difference

Image
Introduction: When Difficulty Becomes Familiar Why would a philosophy concerned with society and its transformation make itself so difficult to read? Bryan Magee put a version of this question to Herbert Marcuse in an interview on the Frankfurt School. Magee acknowledged the intellectual stature of its members but objected to the extraordinary difficulty of some of their writing, singling out Theodor W. Adorno as a particularly striking case. Marcuse did not simply dismiss the complaint. He acknowledged that there were things in Adorno he himself did not understand, while suggesting that the problem could not be separated from the condition of ordinary language itself. Noam Chomsky voiced a remarkably similar objection when asked about the language of postmodernism. His verdict was blunt: “nobody can understand a word they’re saying.” For Chomsky, such writing could function as a kind of private language, allowing intellectuals to adopt a radical posture while remaining detached fr...
Post a Comment
Read more

What the Concept Forgets: Nietzsche, Adorno, and the Problem of Non-Identity

Image
1. The Problem of the Leaf We recognize different leaves as leaves because we overlook what distinguishes one from another. An oak leaf, a maple leaf, and a palm leaf differ in shape, texture, size, colour, and structure, yet the word leaf allows us to treat them as instances of a common kind. Conceptual thought makes this recognition possible by setting aside differences that would otherwise prevent us from grouping individual things together. The operation is so familiar that its selective character easily disappears from view. What happens to the differences that the concept leaves aside? Friedrich Nietzsche addresses this question in “On Truth and Lies in an Extra-Moral Sense” by examining how words and concepts come into being. A word, he argues, does not provide a transparent expression of the thing to which it refers. Its origin already involves a series of transformations: a nerve stimulus is transferred into an image, and the image is then reproduced in a sound. At each...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why Is Adorno So Difficult? Language, Concepts, and Non-Identity

Image
1. The Problem of Difficult Philosophy Why would a philosophy concerned with society and its transformation make itself so difficult to read? Bryan Magee put this question to Herbert Marcuse in an interview about the Frankfurt School. Magee acknowledged the intellectual stature of its members, but objected that much of their writing was extraordinarily difficult, sometimes to the point of seeming unintelligible. He singled out Theodor W. Adorno, whom Marcuse had described as a genius, and observed that some of Adorno's work was literally unreadable. The difficulty seemed particularly striking when compared with traditions such as analytic philosophy and existentialism, whose major writers could be witty, forceful, and accessible to a broad audience. Marcuse partly accepted the criticism. He admitted that there were many things in Adorno that he did not understand. Yet he also offered a justification. Ordinary language, he argued, had become deeply permeated by the established s...
Post a Comment
Read more