What is Pseudo-Individualism? | Theodor Adorno & Max Horkheimer | Keyword
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 апр 2022
- In this episode, I present Adorno and Horkheimer's notion of pseudo-individualism.
If you want to support me, you can do that with these links:
Patreon: / theoryandphilosophy
paypal.me/theoryphilosophy
Twitter: @DavidGuignion
IG: @theory_and_philosophy
Podbean: theoretician.podbean.com/
![Gunna - one of wun [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/w_JtBYqMgk8/mqdefault.jpg)
i like listening to your videos while i make coffee, its so calming and enlightening x
The last part of the video is very important for those that believe we simply need a sort of apocalyptic event to destroy the old world and build a new one.
man you're such a gem
hi david, I was wondering if you could speak about the theory of solipsism eventually?
Hi David. This rings very personal to me. I have had hours of contemplation on this earlier albeit on a superficial sense and in the context of the current cultural industry.
Cat pondering HARD in the back 😻🤔
6:00
This is very insightful of Adorno, Horkheimer, and Guignion (the person in the video). My take on this: Today's right-wing is obviously fascist, etc... so obviously so that we need not argue it here. However, today's left-wing, because of its lack of a comprehensive vision of individualistic liberation, packages and even romanticizes an oppressive system as something to which the participation in which the oppressed should aspire and even celebrate. A specific example: Capitalism has oppressed both persons who are considered "men" and persons who are considered "women". Feminists correctly identify the unfairness of the inequality of the particular gender-based roles within that system. Unfortunately, the mainstream of feminists then proceed to pursue equality of treatment of persons not by liberating what they consider to be "men" from their labor for corporations, but rather by enslaving what they consider to be "women" into the same roles that what they consider to be "men" have already been filling. This terrible error serves to portray the oppression of what they consider to be "women" as the liberation of women. Were feminism truly abut the liberation of what feminists consider to be "women", then it would seek to dismantle corporate employment altogether - which is not to say that such dismantling would be sufficient for comprehensive liberation, but that it would be a necessary aspect. Moreover, were feminism truly about liberation from the constructs of gender and from gender-based social roles, then it would seek to deconstruct the very idea of gender identity which it has adopted from the patriarchy, itself - and while I am well aware that some (a small subset of) persons who have been labeled as "feminist" advocate for gender deconstruction, it is simply illogical that an ideology can both advocate a gender-based nationality (which, by definition, is the essence of feminism) and sincerely seek to end the construct of gender, itself. But this is just one example of many! In terms of the politics of the USA, it is not the Republicans, with all of their transparent sexism, etc., whom I fear the most in the long-term, but the Democrats, who package a false alternative, still based in corporate capitalism, gender identity, etc., etc., etc., all whole-heartedly adopted (albeit expanded beyond binary terms) from the patriarchy that they pretend to oppose, and all still regarding persons not as individuals but as social objects whose only significances are their representations of collective identities - just as the patriarchy would have it! To the list of Adorno's and Horkheimer's terms beginning in "psuedo-", I will add "pseudo-liberals"! And, of course, when I try to explain this truth, I am bullied for so-called "mansplaining", etc. There is something truly sick in a culture that packages the oppression of women as the liberation of women and vice-versa... and, again, this is but only one example, for I could just as well cite much more obvious case of Republicans who see Trump as their liberator! Guidnion pointed out (correctly) that eliminating capitalism without eliminating other systems of oppression, such as (and not only) sexism, is insufficient. I completely agree and extend the claim: Eliminating any system of oppression, such as sexism (even if that were the aim of feminism), is insufficient without eliminating all other systems of oppression such as (and not only) capitalism. Any "ism" that is more narrowly targeted becomes an arm of oppression by other means, such as by selling oppression to us under the guise of "inclusion" in other systems of oppression.
The Jeep commercial that played before this has me worried…
Thank you
Fine presentation! So I get the 'ca plus change' of most political action. But I'm curious whether you believe in the Kantian self-enlightenment per se, amplified as it were by Goethean and Hegelian bildung. My own sense is that modern psychology and in particular the therapy industry has gotten much mileage over the last century in propagating the, I think false, notion that they offer a path to individualism.
awesome video very intellect smart man thNk you
Please discuss GIORGIO AGAMBEN's books.
thankyou
Have you ever heard of ‘Totalitarian Kitsch’?
I’m about to become a capitalist and
You know this make me think of meme culture way of bashing normies for thinking the same way when they themselves all think and express themselves in the same way.
David:
IMHO artists ( I am thinking visual) have a unique position in this theory as they oft are both laborers and sellers at the same time in 2 divergent ways to support themselves on 2 different levels both physically and psychologically still aimed at one goal - identity.… they rarely produce anything other than simulations of previous production never equal to their perceived identities.
13:20