Competing Accounts of Progress: The Redemptive Purpose of Memory in J.B. Metz and Theodor Adorno

What unifies the accounts of history and progress presented by Adorno's Critical Theory and Metz's political theology? I show: (i) that both resist the ‘magic spell’ of an Enlightenment totality on whose strength the violent excesses of modernity have been built; (ii) that both accomplish this resistance by memory of victims or the ‘losers of history’; and (iii) that both hold out hope for the possibility of progress in time. However, the two accounts differ in important ways. These differences stem from: (i) the transference of historical subjectivity from homo emancipator to the God of Jesus’ passion; (ii) the role of the ‘eschatological proviso’ in guaranteeing theological futuricity; and (iii) the fullness of Metz's eschatological justice as compared to Adorno's conception of progress as the mere ‘avoidance of catastrophe’. This project brings the work of one of the most influential social critics of the twentieth century into dialogue with that of a politically engaged theologian of the same historical‐cultural context. In doing so, I hope to suggest the theological richness of Metz's approach but also the significant contributions of dialectical criticism to the practice of theology in the modern era.     

Adorno vs. Levinas: Evaluating points of contention

Although Adorno and Levinas share many arguments, I attempt to sharpen and evaluate their disagreements. Both held extreme and seemingly opposite views of art, with Adorno arguing that art presents modernity’s highest order of truth and Levinas denouncing it as shameful idolatry. Considering this striking difference brings to light fundamental substantive and methodological incompatibilities between them. Levinas’ assertion of the transcendence of the face should be understood as the most telling point of departure between his and Adorno’s critiques of instrumental reason. I attempt to explain why Levinas believed this move was justifiable and how Adorno would understand Levinas’ notion of illeity as a cultural byproduct and a form of dogmatism. Adorno’s historical and sociological account of the disenchantment of the world and the destruction of aura within a culture fully administered by scientific rationality and economic reductionism sharply contrasts to Levinas’ transcendental phenomenology, and I argue that Adorno’s thoroughgoing refusal to constrain dialectical reflection is ultimately more compelling. This paper benefited from exchanges with Jay Bernstein, Bob Scharff, Gregg Horowitz, David Wood, Max Pensky, Scott Bakker, and critics of the earlier version of this argument presented at the 2004 meeting of the Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy. I also thank unnamed reviewers from Continental Philosophy Review for their generous and thoughtful comments and the members of the University of New Hampshire Center for Humanities for their financial support.     

Introduction: W. E. B. Du Bois: Religion and Social Inequality

W.E.B. Du Bois understood the critical role religion plays in power inequities in the, world. He was very acquainted with how it is used as a tool to exclude and subordinate human beings and yet, at the same time, serve as a source of refuge. This special issue of the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion is a collection of articles that examines religion and social inequality from a variety of different angles with a Du Boisian lens. When we focus our lens on religion and social inequality, we are highlighting the ways in which religion plays a part in the unequal distribution of power across social groups in society. This special issue focuses on how religion impacts social life and the way individuals and groups embody or struggle to reclaim their agency within a context of silent oppression at times and not-so-silent oppression at others times at the personal-, group-, and global levels.     

Adorno: Cultural Education and Resistance

In recent years, culture has become significantly politicized, or conspicuously de-politicized, in different parts of the UK, making its appearance in education policy of pivotal interest and ripe for critical attention. From the vantage point of Theodor Adorno’s work on the culture industry and his writings on the work of the teacher, I argue that cultural education is a site where something crucial and distinctive takes place. Within the Enlightenment tradition, critical self-reflection and resistance to heteronymous ways of thinking are core aims of education. Adorno’s contribution to an understanding of these aims leads us to consider the importance of ‘live contact with the warmth of things’ as essential to ethical and intellectual life. The kindly tolerance of the pluralist ideal is now being teased and goaded by acts of terror and widespread concern about personal and social security. At such an unstable juncture, an understanding of cultural education as an experience of ‘incorrigible plurality’ enriches and informs the beleaguered ideal of pluralism and points a way forward in troubled times.     

Embodiment: An Introduction

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics -