Hey /lit/, I'm not in humanities but this year I took a

File: 19429830_1424169604329403_5756575460686423057_n.jpg (32KB, 640x793px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 640x793px

Hey /lit/,

I'm not in humanities but this year I took a subject called "theories of ideology" out of vanity and now I'm running out of time to get through all the required texts, relying on classmate's notes to get the grasp.

One of the authors we deal with is Adorno and his critique of positivism. First there's his interpretation of Marx's theory of value (not labor, but the one that deals in fetishism). Adorno calls this process of valuation "real abstraction" (translation) and it seems fairly straightforward. Then he accusses the positivists of being unable to comprehend this critical insight into capitalist society due to relying only on facts. But then, there's this claim that in the same way that fetishization of goods occurs (eg. people think there's something inherent in value of things, when in reality their value only exists in relation to all other goods on the market), so is positivism (eg. focus on empirical facts) as an ideological standpoint necessarily present in the capitalist mode of production. Why is positivism capitalist or rather what is the relation between the two?

Can someone familiar with these works explain?

I could put together some bullshit myself, but would rather know the real argumentation behind it. If I get good answers I got more questions about Bourdieu, Flusser and Galloway. Tnx in advance friendos.