Adorno and Arendt

Bibliographic Data

ID4071111
AuthorsTerence Holden (0000-0002-4311-9103, corresponding author)
Year2019
Volume46
Issue1
Pages41-70
Publication date2019-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueNew German Critique (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0094-033X • E-ISSN: 1558-1462
PublisherDuke University Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1215/0094033x-7214667
OpenAlexW2978807876
LanguageEN
References cited14

Through a comparative analysis of their diagnosis of radical evil with the divergent ways in which Theodor W. Adorno and Hannah Arendt register and respond to the exhaustion of the modern regime of historicity, this article employs the terminology of historical anthropology as developed by Reinhart Koselleck and François Hartog. It proceeds to a retrospective reconstruction of the fashion in which both thinkers stand between the modern and contemporary regimes of historicity by interpreting these diagnoses, precisely in their divergence, as symptomatic of the "crisis of time," as Hartog puts it, which emerges across the evolution from the former to the latter regime. Adorno and Arendt provide, by virtue of their transitional status, an interesting perspective from which to address the pathological features of the contemporary regime of historicity as identified by Hartog and Hartmut Rosa

Art · Divergence (linguistics) · Epistemology · Historicity (philosophy) · Linguistics · Perspective (graphical) · Political science · Sociology · Terminology · Hannah Arendt's Political Philosophy · History · Law · Philosophy · Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism · Political Theology and Sovereignty

Tools

Open DOI