Theodor Adorno's Philosophical Analysis

As a philosopher, Theodor Adorno is recognizably a Negativist, an individual who recognizes and explains the fact that there is a problem, that critiques are required of something taken relatively for granted, but does not actually cast a detailed so-called “solution” to the problems he is pointing out. His main problem of focus, when broken down, is that most other philosophers are asking the wrong main questions when they are creating their moral systems. For Adorno, it is not “’what shall we do (to be Good)?’” so much as “can we even do it (be Good), the way things are?” (pg.3). Adorno’s verbal saber argued that no one can do any Good right now, as the world itself is too Bad to be open to the possibility. What Good is a minor action on …show more content…
For example, let’s examine deforestation. It is not a Good path for our planet, as it is killing it over time, and in turn harming the human population, so it needs to change and/or come to an end. In order to do that, we, as a community, need to stop cutting down entire forests and biomes, or at least properly replace what we take so as not to cause so much unnecessary destruction and death. By replacement I mean replanting, and that is Good for the planet as it keeps up oxygen production and the environment, and thus is Good for humans, which means everyone involved is performing a Good/Right Act. If replanting and replacement became the worldwide habit, the custom, it would certainly be a recognizably Good Thing. Those who refused to replant/replace would be considered to be doing something Wrong/Bad, as they are going against the norm as well as threatening everyone’s lives, and thus evaluated by the rest of society as being in the Wrong. This evaluation would be a moral one, as the senses of Right and Wrong and Good and Bad are being examined and judged upon, and thus both a theoretical and actual consideration …show more content…
If world hunger was no longer an issue, to throw back to my previous example, imagine what the money used for those commercials and programs as well as the money collected by them could be used for. Infrastructural development and technological advancement would be possible at a rate unheard of in our current struggling history. Much of the reasoning behind a number of wars would become obsolete as nations no longer struggled to keep their populations alive and well. Individual relations would become easier, as stresses ingrained into our very makeup would lose most if not all of their strength over our mental and emotional wellbeing. Birthrates and death rates would settle globally, as struggles for survival would eventually end and trials to live well would develop. Of course, most of this is decades away, if not more, taking into consideration the current overarching ideals of the desensitized majorities. Adorno also does not give any direct guide to fulfilling the requirements necessary to reach that point in time, even as he argues that it indeed needs to happen at some point. The numerous other philosophies, while important for the close and immediate problems faced by humans blessed/cursed with reasoning and thus the