In their Dialectic of Enlightenment, Horkheimer and Adorno set out to "explain why humanity, instead of entering a truly human state, is sinking into a new kind of barbarism." Philosophy teacher Tom Donovan (PhD UCRiverside) offers a fresh reading of that classic text showing that it is first and foremost a critique of the metaphysical urge. Describing our world of "stupid consumption, mindless entertainment, and perverted games and relationships" he notes, "these sorts of games have no end game, as fantasy spectators never really win, and yet they don’t see it because they are too busy watching the other lose. This is the secret of class society. As long as there is someone below you, then lack of reconciliation doesn’t hurt so badly." Citing the Super Bowl, Clippers owner Donald Sterling, basketball players like LeBron James, plus the Kardashians, mega churches, and comedians like Jon Stewart, Donovan gives us a new understanding of our age and how the broken threads that are today’s Capitalism, religion, and sports contribute to unraveling the fabric of Modernity. Against readings that claim that Dialectic of Enlightenment is a simple critique of instrumental reason that ultimately undermines rationality itself, Dr. Donovan argues that the real critique is aimed at the metaphysical urge itself. As such, rationality itself is not the target of attack nor is the notion of enlightenment. Taking Adorno's and Horkheimer's example of the Marquis de Sade, the author observes, "…Sade can only find pleasure in domination. The fear of the outside has morphed into fear of a reconciled world, fear of a world where everyone treats each other as ends in themselves. A society like this can tolerate porn but not socialism, a society like this won’t miss the ice-caps but wouldn't miss the Super Bowl, a society like this lets civilization sink into barbarism so long as they can watch The Bachelor. Stylistically this book attempts to rationally mimic the fragmentary nature of Dialectic of Enlightenment so that through form and content the argument of the book will emerge dialectically. Readers will see that Dialectic of Enlightenment actually offers a positive conception of enlightenment and a philosophical instance of the use of dialectics. The book is for readers interested in critiques of capitalism and religion, and sports in America, as well as Marxism and Critical Theory. It will intrigue academics interested in the Frankfurt School and the idea of the "Metaphysical Urge."

A major study of modern culture, Dialectic of Enlightenment for many years led an underground existence among the homeless Left of the German Federal Republic until its definitive publication in West Germany in 1969. Originally composed by its two distinguished authors during their Californian exile in 1944, the book can stand as a monument of classic German progressive social theory in the twentieth century.>

This volume contains a new translation, with a historical introduction by the translators, of two works written under the pseudonym Johannes Climacus. Through Climacus, Kierkegaard contrasts the paradoxes of Christianity with Greek and modern philosophical thinking. In Philosophical Fragments he begins with Greek Platonic philosophy, exploring the implications of venturing beyond the Socratic understanding of truth acquired through recollection to the Christian experience of acquiring truth through grace. Published in 1844 and not originally planned to appear under the pseudonym Climacus, the book varies in tone and substance from the other works so attributed, but it is dialectically related to them, as well as to the other pseudonymous writings. The central issue of Johannes Climacus is doubt. Probably written between November 1842 and April 1843 but unfinished and published only posthumously, this book was described by Kierkegaard as an attack on modern speculative philosophy by "means of the melancholy irony, which did not consist in any single utterance on the part of Johannes Climacus but in his whole life. . . . Johannes does what we are told to do--he actually doubts everything--he suffers through all the pain of doing that, becomes cunning, almost acquires a bad conscience. When he has gone as far in that direction as he can go and wants to come back, he cannot do so. . . . Now he despairs, his life is wasted, his youth is spent in these deliberations. Life does not acquire any meaning for him, and all this is the fault of philosophy." A note by Kierkegaard suggests how he might have finished the work: "Doubt is conquered not by the system but by faith, just as it is faith that has brought doubt into the world!."

In this book, Horkheimer surveys and demonstrates the gradual ascendancy of Reason in Western philosophy, its eventual total application to all spheres of life, and what he considers its present reified domination.

Could it be that atheism and belief in God are both forms of avoidance behavior? It's easier to focus on belief than it is to take up a new practice of living. Perhaps both are ideological distractions that mystify the nature of reality and what knowledge is. What if we admit that we are neither believers nor atheists: Does that mean we're nothing?Philosophy aims to help us understand the world without appealing to something beyond. It's considered to be rooted in the search for eternal truths, and when the truth is unclear, philosophy is expected to embrace modesty and have a willingness to say I don't know. Rejecting the false dialectic of God/atheism will help us recognize that the world is our construction and our responsibility so long as we are here.Drawing on Georg Luk�cs and Max Horkheimer, the author argues that belief in God and atheism are both ideological distractions. They are both forms of immaturity that can only be transcended through action. The real good news is that we can do away with belief in the supernatural, but it will take more than non-belief; it will take philosophical action.He takes us on a journey through our philosophical practices to purge ourselves of mystified notions. The journey is long, but at least the path is strewn with the charm of Socrates, Descartes, Marx, and Sartre.In short, Prof. Donovan says, Nothing exists but this world, our world... Nothing is beyond God and atheism. Why not become nothing? Make yourself and those who matter proud.

In 1947 Horkheimer and Adorno connected the Enlightenment with totalitarianism. Since when the Left has drifted into the language and imagery of the European Counter-Enlightenment, the movement against 1776 and 1789. Bronner sets out to reclaim the heritage of progressive politics.