Selvihan Polat

This study is to discuss the possibility and content of metaphysics today through an examination of the fundamental findings of Adorno, who is one of the most significant theorists of the 20th century. Contemporary philosophy suffers from a depression resulting from discussions on the end of history and the end of philosophy. The findings of Adorno who developed his philosophy about the content of the metaphysics based on the Auschwitz experience which he regarded as an ethical disaster are vital and explanatory. Adorno, who is a symbol of negation through negative dialectic in opposition to the affirmative quality of conventional theory, puts metaphysics among his targets in his criticism. He grasps a conflict through drawing attention to the fragmented harmony and even to antagonism between metaphysical thought and worldly experience. In addition, he adopts a radical attitude in metaphysical criticism through problematizing the question whether life is possible or not after Auschwitz. He arrives not at the denial of metaphysics like other positivists but at a radical change through emphasizing the strong need for an awareness of the varying nature of the internal patterns of metaphysics. Metaphysics, for instance, which formerly pointed out what is transcendental, and which has now transformed into a material reality, has to be in harmony with worldly experience and suffering today. In other words, it has to be based on the real suffering rather than affirmative estimations.

In this study, it is claimed that Theodor W. Adorno, instead of formulating a normative ethics theory, developed a critical rejection of ethical theories by adopting a negating perspective. The crucial point supporting this claim is the tragic experience of the Auschwitz event. Auschwitz, as Agamben suggests, is the gray zone where victim and executioner resemble each other; it is the annihilation of humanity and the most severe manifestation of moral destruction. “Auschwitz,” going beyond being a mere geographical location of genocide, is evaluated as a moral devastation caused by the prescriptions laid out by teachings of good life on how one should live. The fact that this devastation and the conditions that brought it about still persist leads to a belief in the closure of ethical and righteous living under current circumstances. The elements that drive Adorno towards this belief include late capitalism, the notion of instrumental reason, the imperative of the cultural industry imposing “conformity,” and the prevailing bourgeois trend characterized by coldness and indifference. These interconnected elements not only contribute to the decay in the moral realm but also lead to disruptions in all aspects of life. Despite the intense crisis of the era, Adorno's critical philosophy, by not allowing submission, speaks of a negative categorical imperative that focuses on “what not to do” to prevent disasters like Auschwitz from recurring. The new negative categorical imperative, which does not allow rational grounding, departs from concrete suffering, unlike Kant’s categorical imperative. In this sense, Adorno’s mentioned new categorical imperative, rather than forming an ethical theory, critically examines the validity of universal principles and ethical consequences.

This study examines Walter Benjamin’s concept of “dialectics at a standstill” within the context of the interrelations among history, image, and method. While this concept plays a central rôle in The Arcades Project and On the Concept of History, it is not presented as a systematic doctrine but rather through fragments and aphorisms. Benjamin, by means of a literary montage technique that aims more at showing than at narrating, brings together fragmented quotations in order to rethink the past, rendering neglected historical elements visible and disclosing their critical value. This approach breaks away from a linear and progressivist conception of history and instead points to the dialectical intersection of past and present within Jetztzeit—namely, the moment in which dialectical images emerge. The Zweideutigkeit that surfaces in these images makes visible the polysemy produced through the commodity fetishism of modernity, placing the image at the center of critical reading. Despite objections from critics such as Adorno and Tiedemann—who emphasize the terminological indeterminacy of the concept and the interpretive demands it entails—this study argues that Benjamin’s technique of presenting quotations in their original form constitutes a conscious methodological choice, one that opens up new conceptual and methodological possibilities for historical analysis.

This study examines the Jena Romanticism, a cultural and intellectual movement that sought to unify myth, reason and art into a holistic worldview. It explores how the Jena Romanticism responded to the socio-political and philosophical challenges of the late 18th century, including the Enlightenment, the French Revolution, and the alienation of modernity, from the perspective of Friedrich Schlegel, who significantly influenced his contemporaries. Schlegel’s emphasis on the poeticization of life, Romantic irony, and his call for a new mythology highlight his belief in the transformative power of art and imagination to bridge the gap between reason and sensory experience. By emphasizing the transformative power of art, the early Romantics proposed a holistic approach to life that bridged the gap between art, philosophy and human experience. The paper also underlines that Schlegel’s perspective remains relevant today, offering valuable ideas for overcoming modern fragmentation and promoting creativity, unity and a deeper interaction between art and philosophy in contemporary life.

1923’te kurulan ve varlığını günümüze kadar sürdüren Frankfurt Toplumsal Araştırmalar Enstitüsü’nü dönemlere ayırırken önemli sosyo-politik uğraklara ve kronolojiye dikkat ederek şöyle bir sınıflandırma yapmak mümkün görünmektedir: 1. Cafe Marx: Carl Grünberg, 2. Eleştirel Teori’nin Doğuşu: Max Horkheimer, 3. Sürgün Yılları: Amerika Deneyimleri, 4. Eve Geri Dönüş: Theodor W. Adorno, 5. Eleştirel Teori’nin Dönüşümü: Jürgen Habermas ve Axel Honneth. Kimi zaman “Frankfurt Okulu” kimi zaman da “Eleştirel Teori” olarak anılan Frankfurt Toplumsal Araştırmalar Enstitüsü’nün ne tür bir proje ya da düşünce ekolü olduğunun üzerinde durmak gerekmektedir. Çünkü Enstitü’yü, araştırma konularının çeşitliliği ve üyelerinin farklı disiplinlerden olması nedeniyle, belirli bir kategori altına sokmak mümkün değildir. Enstitü’nün problematiğini ve yapısını anlamak için “Eleştirel Teori”nin ne olduğunun ortaya konulması gerekmektedir.

This study traces Theodor W. Adorno’s claim that metaphysics has been secularized in the category of history by considering his criticisms of both traditional metaphysics and contemporary criticisms of metaphysics. Indeed, in the 20th century, Adorno emphasizes the importance of secular metaphysics and heretical speculation despite the efforts of the sciences and scientific philosophy to discredit and liquidate metaphysics and thus philosophy. By problematizing this radical emphasis and its reasons, attention will be drawn to the functionality and necessity of philosophy in our age of decay and decadence. In addition, it will be argued that secular metaphysics opens the door to emancipation by allowing one to experience the non-identical instead of identifying with the given. In the 1965, in History and Freedom: Lectures, Adorno challenges the traditional meaning of metaphysics and proposes its transformation into history, declaring that truth is no longer embodied in transcendent and eternal concepts but in concrete suffering and the ability to respond to it. Adorno’s Negative Dialectics, on the other hand, does not propose an affirmative metaphysical doctrine, but concludes with a chapter on metaphysics that, while criticizing traditional metaphysics, expresses solidarity with the possibility of a transformed metaphysics. The horror of Auschwitz is concrete evidence of the collapse of all systems of thought. Since the decay of the great metaphysical systems has led to the disintegration of philosophical truths, the understanding of truth requires the interpretation of the remaining fragments/debris. Therefore, by emphasizing the necessity of a philosophical turn from thought to interpretation, it imposes a new task on philosophy. The model of this interpretation is the natural history model Adorno developed in his early manifesto, “The Idea of Natural-History” (1932).

This study examines how Erich Fromm’s analytical social psychology, developed between 1929 and 1936 in response to the crisis of the Weimar Republic and the rise of fascism, particularly in his effort to understand the psychological origins of mass obedience, opens up a space for freedom and agency for the subject between psychoanalytic determinism and historical materialism. In synthesizing Freudian psychoanalysis with Marxist social theory, Fromm positions the concept of “social character” (Gesellschaftscharakter) as a mediation (Vermittlung) and a connecting element (Bindeglied) between the economic base and the ideological superstructure. This conceptual framework allows us to think of the individual as both determined by social conditions and capable of transforming those conditions. Fromm’s understanding of freedom is not an unlimited autonomy but a process of emancipation that takes place within determinations. It is precisely at this point that the tension between active adaptation and passive adaptation shows that the subject can both submit to social conditions and transform them. The study argues that Fromm’s theoretical framework overcomes both Freudian instinctual determinism and vulgar Marxist economic determinism, thereby offering an original perspective on the historical agency of the subject.