THE BURDEN OF NEGATIVE DIALECTICS

"Everything different will appear divergent, dissonant, negative, as long as consciousness is compelled, by its very formation, to press towards identity, as long, that is, as consciousness measures against its claim to totality anything not identical to it. Dialectics holds this up to consciousness as a contradiction." Adorno, Negative Dialectics, Introduction, Section 2, "Dialectics Not as Standpoint," Translation by Christian Thorne and Matthias Menda*

Psychologically speaking, this is the situation in which we all find ourselves. Divergence from the familiar has to be learned, it will not occur naturally, precisely because of the ego. The conclusion that primitive, monological identity draws, is that what is different is "immoral," "unintelligent" or "lacking" in value, not being able to discern the authentic dialectical quality that lies beneath appearance. There is a danger of missing the future (of missing a more advanced quality), we must not fool ourselves, thinking we are immune from this simplicity... quite the opposite. When higher quality presents itself to us, it will likely transcend the categories of the familiar, which will make it suspect, by default our psychology will work to condemn it. Advanced quality has an advanced set of presuppositions, it proceeds from the foundation of a higher consciousness, that of totality. That something assaults my common sense is not proof (as our intuition would have us believe) that it is therefore, automatically lacking in value. To be carried higher, we must be capable of seeing the stupidity we mistake for intelligence. We must be able to condemn it by standards that transcend the presuppositions that led us to validate its quality in the first place. But woe to those who dare to think in terms of dialectics:

"Anyone who submits to dialectical discipline will, no doubt, pay a bitter sacrifice in the qualitative variety of experience. The dialectical impoverishment of experience, however, so scandalous to hale and hearty opinion, is ultimately in keeping with the abstract monotony of the administered world. The agony of dialectics is agony over that world, raised to a concept." Adorno, Negative Dialectics, Introduction, Section 3, "Reality and Dialectics" 

Those who are mindlessly convinced by the administered world, taking on the discipline of dialectical thought, they are inevitably bound to lose the delusion of its comforts. Beyond this psychological sacrifice, there is also a social sacrifice; those who expose delusions are persecuted by those who love them. To take upon oneself the discipline of dialectical thought, is in some sense, masochistic. Is it not better to divide the world in terms of black and white logic, thereby reducing everything to simplicity? What is the motivation, why should a thinker take this burden upon themselves, why shatter one's sense of well being? The answer is because only dialectics offers the probability of greater comprehension, thereby leading to more powerful solutions. The answer is because of the kind of power dialectics offers man, as a tool by which to shape, the quality of his existence in terms of transcendent intelligence.
   



*https://sites.williams.edu/cthorne/theodor-adorno-negative-dialectics/

-
-
-