![]() ![]() Benjamin (London: Routledge, 1992), 52.Ħ. Horkheimer and Adorno, Dialektik der Aufklärung, 17–18, 32–34, 74–76 Dialectic of Enlightenment, 11–12, 26–28, 67–68.ħ. Jean-Francois Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, trans. Bernstein, “Art against Enlightenment: Adorno's Critique of Habermas,” in The Problems of Modernity: Adorno and Benjamin, ed. ![]() Ashton (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1973), 320 Adorno, Against Epistemology: A Metacritique, Studies in Husserl and the Phenomenological Antinomies, trans. Hinkel (New York: Dodd, Mead, 1916) Rudolf Bultmann: “New Testament and Mythology,” in Kerygma and Myth, ed. Hartknoch, 1786–92) Carl Gustav Jung, The Psychology of the Unconsciousness: A Study of the Transformation and Symbols of Libido, A Contribution to the History of the Evolution of Thought, trans. Verlag, 1856) Johann Gottfried Herder, Ideen zur Philosophie der Geschichte der Menscheit (Riga: J. von Schelling Einlietungin die Philosophie der Mythologie, in Saemmtliche Werke (Stutgart: J. Muller, Comparative Mythology (New York: Arno Press, 1977).Ĥ. Friedrich W. Black, 1899) Jane Harrison, Epilegomena to the Study of Greek Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1921) Max F. ![]() Dotty, Mythography: The Study of Myths and Rituals (London: The University of Alabama Press, 2000), 11 Bruce Lincoln, Theorizing Myth: Narrative, Ideology and Scholarship (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1999), 49–50 Milton Scarborough, Myth and Modernity, Postcritical Reflections (New York: State University of New York Press, 1994), 13, 106 Porter, The Enlightenment, 1–5, 11, 70–71, 75 Ernst Cassirer, The Myth of the State (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1946), 82–83.ģ. Edward Bennet Taylor, Primitive Culture (New York: Harper, 1958) James George Frazer, The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1922) William Robertson Smith, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites, First Series, The Fundamental Institutions (Edinburgh: Adam and C. The essay does not discuss enlightenment as a historical movement but as a particular philosophical and political ideal.Ģ. Philiph Stambovsky, Myth and the Limits of Reason (Dallas, TX: University Press of America, 2004), 2–3, 7, 11 William G. Be that as it may, the present essay is focused on the Dialectic of Enlightenment's criticism of the affinity of enlightenment on the one hand and instrumental reason and conceptual thought on the other. However, nowadays many scholars argue that as a historical and social phenomenon Enlightenment was heterogeneous and thus its characterization by the prevailing generalizations is simplistic and doomed to overlook its complexity. According to the Dialectic of Enlightenment, and within the framework of the philosophical discussion which developed following its publication, enlightenment refers to the homogeneous movement that is identified with a distinctive set of ideas and stances (rationalism, criticism, progress, social and political involvement, etc.). ![]() The concept of enlightenment is quite controversial. John Cumming (New York: Herder & Herder, 1972), 4–5 Roy Porter, The Enlightenment (London: Macmillan Press, 1990), 1–2, 8–10 Dorina Outram, The Enlightenment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12. Adorno, Dialektik der Aufklärung (Frankfurt: Fischer, 1969), 10–11 Dialectic of Enlightenment, trans. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |