Reddit reviews Dialectic of Enlightenment (Cultural Memory in the Present)

>given the fact that the source of something can be literally anyone from an absolute expert to someone who is literally pulling total and blatant lies out of their ass.

I do agree with your sentiments here. And honestly I think much of the same strategies from the era of deconstructing bias in conventional news media are still useful today. I reference of course Adorno and Horkheimer's respective treatises, "Culture Industry" and "Dialectic of the Enlightenment", wherein degrees of simulation are used as a framework for explicating the way in which news media alienates the meaning of events as information is passed down the chain.

This type of thinking may have lead Orson Welles to make Citizen Kane in 1949 (And by may, I mean most certainly did; the rumor goes that Welles only made Citizen Kane to spite William Randolph Hearst because Hearst threw Welles out of a dinner party at his Castle for having more than two pre-dinner drinks) and Welles actually gives us a strategy for moving backwards from the third degree of simulation in an attempt to "reegender the meaning of a given event" by virtue of hearing as many people lie/provide opinions regarding that event as we possibly can, therein building an understanding of narratives as narratives rather than narratives as facts.

This of course recognizes the inherent bias (a predisposition) on the part of every human, and utilizes it to afford the modern consumer of information with exactly the strategy necessary to become as informed as possible.

Amalgamate perspectives and suddenly falling victim to a lie is nearly impossible; the internet is critical indeed.

I would say yes, but with a few caveats. I myself am a bit of an autodidact, and I study philosophy as a hobby in my free time. I am currently a university student who works part time, so I sympathize with your concerns about limited time and energy. Some things I think you should be aware of:

• Studying on your own will be slower and generally less efficient than getting a degree. You won’t have the same obligations or motivators that university students have.

• You will lack access to resources that university students have. This includes both academic material (journals, essays, books) but also an environment with instructors and fellow students to consult when you’re confused.

• You will not have the benefit of writing essays and having them graded by an instructor.

Despite this, I still think there is a lot to be gained from self study. You have the freedom to pursue whatever you want, and you can go at a pace that’s comfortable to you. Plus there’s something to be said about challenging yourself and doing constructive things in your free time.

It may be best to start with introductory texts like Copleston’s history to get a general idea for each philosopher and to find what interests you. If you are still interested in the thinkers you mentioned, you should move on to primary sources. I’d recommend the following reading plan which should cover some of the “essentials” and has a sort of progression from one thinker to the next:

1. Readings in Ancient Greek Philosophy: From Thales to Aristotle
   
2. Descartes: Selected Philosophical Writings by Descartes
   
3. Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals by Hume
   
4. Critique of Pure Reason by Kant
   
   These four books will give you a solid foundation in western philosophy. You have the fundamental ideas and questions from the Pre-Socratics, Plato, and Aristotle, rationalism from Descartes, empiricism from Hume, and the synthesis of the two in Kant. Moving on:
   
   
5. Logical Investigations by Husserl
   
   
6. Being and Time by Heidegger
   
   
7. Being and Nothingness by Sartre
   
   These three cover your interests in phenomenology, from its foundations in Husserl, to Heidegger’s magnum opus, to Sartre’s interpretation and his development of existentialism. Finally we have:
   
   
8. Dialectic of Enlightenment by Horkheimer & Adorno
   
   
9. Speech and Phenomenon by Derrida
   
   These two cover Horkheimer & Adorno’s critical take on enlightenment rationality and Derrida’s deconstruction of Husserlian phenomenology.
   
   None of these books are particularly easy (especially Husserl and Heidegger), but I encourage you to try! Take it one book at a time, read slow and take notes, and consult the IEP and SEP if you’re confused, watch YouTube lectures, or ask on this subreddit.
   
   Good luck!

I second the idea that it really depends on what languages/literatures your cousin is thinking of studying. I'd hesitate to recommend anything too theoretical for an incoming freshman. But, if you are going to go that route, here are some suggestions:

Erich Auerbach's Mimesis is the closest thing that the discipline has to a foundational text. Generally, this is required reading for a first-year graduate student. Not sure how I would've handled this as an undergrad. That said, I wouldn't hesitate to assign a chapter or two from it to any class I teach, provided it relates to our other readings. It's a kind of survey that traces the development of Western Literature from Homer's Odyssey to twentieth-century lit. Each chapter deals with a different text. https://amzn.com/0691160228

You could also try a reader of some kind. I worked with this text as an undergrad in one of my classes: The Cultural Studies Reader. It's basically an anthology of theoretical texts that catalogues different theoretical approaches and introduces you to a lot of major thinkers. I thought it was great and it really sparked my love (...ahem..."love"...) for theory. In my opinion, it's a bit more approachable than something like The Princeton Sourcebook in Comparative Literature, which is also a good option if you're looking for something more serious.

If you're looking to follow up on /u/Caitlionator's suggestion suggestion about Critical Theory, I would suggest Adorno's and Horkheimer's The Dialectic of Enlightenment. Dense reading for an incoming freshman (IMO), but worth it for someone interested in Marxist-oriented theory.

If all of this is seeming too serious and/or dense (which it might be for an incoming freshman), you could try some of the graphic guides published by Icon books. Here's an example: https://amzn.com/1848311818. There are all kinds of options for these. To be honest, I don't really think these are that great; but the few that I've seen seemed fun and interesting. They provide some good context, so they might work as a kind of springboard for you cousin to explore some of these subjects further on his own.

Other than that, it's hard to make suggestions without knowing what your cousin's interests are. As an undergraduate, I always would've preferred to receive a literary text as a gift rather than a theoretical text (unless it was something I really wanted). Maybe a book from one of his favorite authors, or one of that author's favorite authors? Does he like Classics? Maybe a nice copy of Homer?

Edit: spelling

Umm, I must say that I wish we could use the German original, but I don't know German, and I guess that most others in the sub don't know either. I do think there will be meanings we'll be missing, and others we'll take completely wrong. That's a common problem that every bilingual faces (me included). It is your decision, and if my partner in crime will be using the original German, there's an even greater incentive. Just take in mind that due to most of us reading in English, reading a German edition will put a certain pressure on you to translate back and forth between the languages.

With that being said, I'll be using the English translation present in this link:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0804736332/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1522167390&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=dialectic+of+enlightenment&dpPl=1&dpID=51d%2BeDj%2Ba%2BL&ref=plSrch

I'd highly recommend starting off with Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's article on Adorno. SEP does a great job of summing up the life and works of various philosophers. SEP also has an article on Max Horkheimer, who was a close associate of Adorno and authored a couple of important works with him.

I've read Dialectic of Enlightenment, written by Adorno and Horkheimer, which was okay. I thought it read more like literature than hard, useful theory. If anything, read The Culture Industry: The Enlightenment As Mass Deception which is a chapter out of that book (the link takes you to the full text). I think its a decent appraisal of Western mass culture.

In general, I don't think that the Frankfurt school in general is that useful or important. But I haven't read all that much of their stuff, perhaps others have found more use for their work.

Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer wrote on this topic in The Dialectic of Enlightenment, particularly in a chapter entitled "The Culture Industry." For a quick introduction, take a look at the SEP article on Adorno, in particular the section on Critical Social Theory. There is also a collection of Adorno's essays on the topic entitled The Culture Industry: Essays on Mass Culture.

well. A book that changed my life back when I was 15 was Walden from Thoreau. I threw away everything I owned. yeah I mean everything even my bed. I own nothing that dates from before I was 15. Would this have the same effect today? who knows.

back then, the book Beyond Good and Evil by Nietzsche had something to to with me ''taking a break'' from school, contributing too did: genealogy of Morals, into the wild, Adorno - dialectic of Enlightenment ( had no idea what that guy was talking about back then but made me real queasy about the world nonetheless.)

books that changed my life recently: Lying from Sam Harris. Steven Pinker - Enlightenment now made me pick a lot of fights with people who like to hate this world.

Insanity of Normality made me forgive some people I had real bad feelings toward, though I'm sceptical now of what is said in the book

unless you understand german you won't be able to read this: Blödmachinen , made me a snob in regards to media. Bernard Stieglers books might have the same effect in english

oh and selfish gene by Dawkins made me less judgmental. Don't know why. I just like people more

EDIT

oh lest I forget: Kandinsky - Concerning The Spiritual in Art made me paint my appartement black blue; Bukowski and the Rubaiyat made me drink more, Born To Run made me run barefoot, Singers Practical Ethics made me donate money and buy far less stuff.

> Finns det någon fråga som lyder "Varför är X nödvändigt?" eller "varför är X viktigt?" som INTE har ett godtyckligt svar?

Detta är en extremt liberal ståndpunkt -- en ren värdenihilism, av den typ som liberalism, kapitalism, och upplysningen gett upphov till i den västerländska kulturen. Vore jag fascist är det nog precis detta tankesätt som jag hade identifierat som roten till all den dekadens ni fascister älskar att identifiera.

Att hålla den ståndpunkten är vad sofisterna höll fast vid i det gamla Grekland, och vad en del upplysningstänkare i alla fall orsakade andra att tänka. Se till exempel Hume, för vilken det inte var irrationellt att föredra mänsklighetens undergång före ett myggbett.

Om du vill kunna ge ett mindre svagt och godtyckligt svar på den frågan föreslår jag att du läser de tänkare som argumenterat mot detta intellektuella förfall, och som har identifierat det. Ett par boktips. (Varje ord en egen länk)

>Det finns många problem med kapitalismen, jag nämnde bara ett par av dem.

Så vilka är de andra problemen, och hur löser din fascism dem?

>Hur samhället ska vara organiserat? Svaret på den här frågan skulle kunna bli oändligt långt. Kort sagt, jag vill imitera det gamla tyska Gausystemet, bevara parlamentarismen men avskaffa allmänna val i alla dess former, decentralisera vissa frågor som inte berör storstadsbyråkrater och så vidare. Du får nog vara mer specifik i din frågeställning om du vill få ett mer tillfredsställande svar.

Du skrev att: "Strukturerar vi vårt samhälle på så sätt att det präglas av stark sammanhållning och tillit på folkgemenskapens grund, och att den styrande eliten hamnar i maktposition i kraft av sina förmågor och sin genuina vilja att göra gott, och inte i kraft av ärvd makt eller ärvda rikedomar, så ser jag inte hur det hela skulle kunna misslyckas.".

Hur uppnår denna organisation detta mål?

>Kan du ge något exempel på länder i vilka man förändrat samhället på det sätt även jag vill, men misslyckats på något sätt? Vilka historiska exempel är det du tänker på?

Mig veterligen kan jag inte ens ge några exempel där man ändrat samhället som du vill och lyckats.

Däremot finns det gott om exempel där man inte ändrat det som du vill och ändå lyckats.

Sure, how about you read a book as well.

https://www.amazon.com/Dialectic-Enlightenment-Cultural-Memory-Present/dp/0804736332/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1509839887&sr=1-1&keywords=Dialectics+of+Enlightenment

So next time some writes a piece of bullshit like this

>Critical Theory was essentially destructive criticism of the main elements of Western culture, including Christianity, capitalism, authority, the family, patriarchy, hierarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restraint, loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, heredity, ethnocentrism, convention and conservatism.

>Critical Theorists recognized that traditional beliefs and the existing social structure would have to be destroyed and then replaced with a “new thinking” that would become as much a part of elementary consciousness as the old one had been.

you can recognize it as such

International Studies major here to say that this video is apologetic pablum. Many assumptions are made, including the implicit assumptions that countries develop in a vacuum and that all countries' trajectory began at the same point in time on a level playing field. The video assumes that strong institutions and cultural beliefs affect degree of development instead of being a product of it. Nowhere is there any mention of core-periphery relationship, history, etcetera.


If you want an introductory understanding of uneven development start with Ankie Hoogvelt's Globalization and the Postcolonial World, Immanuel Wallerstine's World Systems Analysis, and Edward Said's Culture and Imperialism. For an intermediate understanding complete the first 3 then read Adorno/Horkeimer's Dialectic of Enlightenment, Marcuse's One Dimensional Man, and Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation.