Continental Philosophy Review

, Volume 40, Issue 2, pp 187–204

Adorno and Heidegger on language and the inexpressible

Article

Abstract

I argue that the reflections on language in Adorno and Heidegger have their common root in a modernist problematic that dissected experience into ordinary experience, and transfiguring experiences that are beyond the capacity for expression of our language. I argue that Adorno’s solution to this problem is the more resolutely “modernist” one, in that Adorno is more rigorous about preserving the distinction between what can be said, and what strives for expression in language. After outlining the definitive statement of this problematic in Nietzsche’s early epistemological writings, I outline Heidegger’s solution and subsequently Adorno’s critique of Heidegger. Finally, I argue that situating Adorno within the modernist problem of language and expression is crucial for making sense of his philosophy as a form of critical theory.

Keywords

Adorno Heidegger Modernism Negative dialectic Language Experience World disclosure Expression Critical theory 

References

  1. Adorno, T. (1966). Negative dialektik (p. 44). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  2. Adorno, T. (1970). Metakritik Der Erkenntnistheorie (p. 47). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  3. Adorno, T. (2002). Ontologie und Dialektik. 1960/1 lectures (pp. 66–79). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  4. Bernstein, J. M. (2001). Adorno: Disenchantment and ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action, vol 1. (trans. Thomas McCarthy). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  6. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (trans. J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson) (p. 218). San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  7. Heidegger, M. (1982). The basic problems of phenemonology (trans. A. Hofstadter) (p. 17). Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Heidegger, M. (1993a). The way to language. In D. Farrell Krell (Ed.), Basic writings (p. 424). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Heidegger, M. (1993b). ‘The Origin of the Work of Art’, in Basic Writings, p. 198.Google Scholar
  10. Joyce, J. (1963). Stephen hero (p. 213). New York: Directions Press.Google Scholar
  11. Kant, I. (1974). Kritik der Urteilskraft (pp. 90–103). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  12. Lafont, C. (2000). Heidegger, language, and world-disclosure (trans. G. Harmon) (p. 70). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Nietzsche, F. (1979). Philosophy and truth: Selections from Nietzsche’s notebooks of the early 1870s (Ed. and trans. by D. Breazeale) (p. 51). Atlantic highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  14. Pippen, R. (2004). A short history of nonbeing. Critical Inquiry, 30(424–428), 426.Google Scholar
  15. Pippen, R. (2005). The persistence of subjectivity: On the Kantian aftermath (pp. 104–105). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Polt, R. (1999). Heidegger: An introduction (p. 18). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self (p. 469). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. von Hoffmannsthal, H. (1951). Ein brief. In Prosa, volume 2 (pp. 7–22). Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Verlag.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Borough of Manhattan Community CollegeNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations