Insane that so many Marxists want to say true things about society, but don’t really know or care about how to do so.

I’ve felt the bite of the “scientific marxism” bug. You have to be able to say something about social science.

Not yet; they’re up next. I’ve only listened to the Africana episodes about names I recognize like Fanon, etc., and some of the early Indian ones back at a time when I was curious about Buddhist/Hindu debates

My brain disease is that, when they say “two-point-six repeating,” I imagine the “repeating” as being a repetition in time

So that the smaller 3rds of the plank in the second case would actually be indefinitely increasing in length, like:

Length = 2 + 6 ÷ 10^n

or ^t
for time units

Oh, interesting idea-thank you!

Yeah, it’s funny for Adorno. He was apparently raised as a Christian to an extent (Cath. then Prot.), and Judaism doesn’t seem to have been a part of his life in the same way as it was for Benjamin, Horkheimer

But I see your frustration

Arendt would actually suggest that Adorno was anti-Semitic

much as far as I’ve seen, not even in his book on Kierkegaard..

Idk, there are a lot of threads around this that I find myself interested in, but not knowing exactly where to go with them

With that book, she opens by discussing Fear & Trembling and the akedah, and she wants to talk about the thematics of “sacrifice” in a way that is differentiated from how Adorno talk about sacrifice
She talks about how Adorno misunderstands the akedah, but also Adorno, never talks about the akedah

I had an opportunity to do some academic-type stuff with Kierkegaard scholars earlier this year, and I striped to take a stab at The Broken Middle, where she, obv, talks about Kierkegaard quite a lot, but talks about Luther too. Not always positively though, but I can’t say I grasped it all.

And I haven’t really understood that yet, but I’m en route—really, my Hegel is still so surface level