h1

%0 Thesis
%A Sanati-Masboughi, Zakria
%T Auf der Suche nach dem verlorenen Subjekt : der Stellenwert des Ästhetischen im Kontext der Geschichtsphilosophie der kritischen Theorie
%C Aachen
%I Publikationsserver der RWTH Aachen University
%M RWTH-CONV-122914
%P Getr. Zählung
%D 2006
%Z Aachen, Techn. Hochsch., Diss., 2006
%X This dissertation compares subject representations taken, on the one hand, from M. Horkheimer and T. W. Adorno’s jointly composed essay “Dialectic of Enlightenment” and, on the other hand, from Adorno’s fragmentary essay “Aesthetic Theory”, which was published posthumously.In order to implement such a comparison, critical theory’s philosophy of history was firstly examined, such as it is elaborated in “Dialectic of Enlightenment”. The principal theses inherent in Horkheimer and Adorno’s essay are the following:a) History is influenced by the force of self-preservation.b) In order for this intended self-preservation to be realised, it was necessary to dominate nature in a collective act.c) In order to dominate nature, firstly a particular type of thinking and rationality was necessary and secondly a particular type of subject.d) The necessary type of rationality is described in “Dialectic of Enlightenment” as instrumental-rational thought. This way of thinking corresponds with the domination of nature. In this mode of thought and rationality, nature is always subjugated and oppressed to the benefit of self-preservation. The necessary type of subject is – according to “Dialectic of Enlightenment” – the Self. The Self executes the domination of nature. The historical process of creation ran its course according to this pattern, and modern man came into being in the same way as his archaic forebear did.e) All the components cited under c) and d) are – according to the authors of “Dialectic of Enlightenment” – constitutive for both the myth, which dominated archaic time, and for modernity, dominated by enlightenment. One can say, then, that myth was already enlightenment and that modernity displays mythical traits, on account of the continued existence of the so-called mythical fear of nature. This entwining of myth and enlightenment is, then, the cardinal thesis in “Dialectic of Enlightenment”. With regard to the before-mentioned outline of critical theory’s philosophy of history, the composition of the subject of enlightenment – the Self – was of major significance for this dissertation. Both as the starting point for instrumental reasoning – and as its lackey – this subject shrinks down to the level of a pathetic façade, characterized by the dictatorship of self-preservation. The type of subject that is diametrically opposed to the Self is, for Adorno, that of works of art. As is well known, in his “Aesthetic Theory”, Adorno undertook a phenomenology of art and works of art. One of the basic concepts of this phenomenology is the provision of works of art with attributes which are otherwise solely so-called human qualities. A closer look, however, reveals that those features transposed onto the works of art represent, for Adorno exactly that which the subject of enlightenment – that is, the Self – has lost or is lacking. This leads on to the conclusion, then, that, for Adorno, that which is such as works of art are, is in fact the representation of an emphatic subject, that justifies the concept of subject, unlike the Self, which falls short of it.
%F PUB:(DE-HGF)11
%9 Dissertation / PhD Thesis
%U https://publications.rwth-aachen.de/record/61236