Continental Philosophy Review, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 275-306, 2007
32 Pages Posted: 10 Aug 2008
Date Written: August 8, 2008
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.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Smith, Nick, Adorno vs. Levinas: Evaluating Points of Contention (August 8, 2008). Continental Philosophy Review, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 275-306, 2007. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1213275