계몽의 현재화: 푸코, 호르크하이머, 아도르노

Abstract

For Foucault, Horkheimer, and Adorno, Enlightenment is synonymous with critique; thus, the questioning and critique of enlightenment are fundamentally inquiries into and critiques of the present. The actualization of enlightenment entails the critical problematization of the present and the theoretical and practical responses to the problems of contemporary society. In this sense, their philosophy is a philosophy of the present, and at the same time, it takes on the character of a critical social ontology. Their critique, understood as the actualization of Enlightenment, becomes a philosophy of the present aimed at the realization of freedom and the possibility of a better society. The archaeological and genealogical methodology proposed by Foucault as a methodology for criticizing the ‘present society’ can contribute to clarifying the complexity of the perception of martial law and Law for Enlightenment. Meanwhile, Horkheimer and Adorno’s method of negation-grounded in the ‘unrelenting critique of negativity’ and the ‘productivity of eliminating the bad’- offers normative implications and practical insights for political praxis aimed at resolving insurrection. Despite the differencesin their strategies and content of the critique of reason, Foucault, Horkheimer, and Adorno ultimately share a common horizon: the purpose of critique of society and enlightenment and the sustained hope for the possibility of other societies.