The text offers a reinterpretation of the relationship between theory and practice by comparing two dialectical frameworks: Adorno’s negative dialectics and the so-called dialectic of non-all, developed by Slovenian philosophers Alenka Zupančič, Mladen Dolar, and Slavoj Žižek. The author argues that although negative dialectics aims to reconcile theory and practice, it ultimately defers this reconciliation indefinitely, driven by a fear of losing the autonomy of critical thought to political dogmatism. The dialectic of non-all presents an alternative that integrates the subject of theory with its externality, emphasizing finitude, arbitrariness, and the necessity of ending as a condition of philosophical and political action. A key claim is that dialectics as a process depends on moments that may appear non-dialectical. Its logic involves not only infinite negation – which sometimes serves merely to shield the subject from confronting its own finitude – but also systemic closure, always insufficient and therefore inherently negative. This analysis leads to a revision of the function of totality and shows that Adorno’s thought also contains resources for overcoming the theory-practice opposition, even if they remain unrealized.
You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.
