阿多诺认为因果性是主观理性的功能,而因果同一性的统治力在逐步衰落。阿多诺分析的焦点在于自由和必然的二律背反,并把因果性讨论赋予了政治意义。康德对因果性的论述主要在于经验实在论层面,即范畴形而下运用,而阿多诺却很少论及。阿多诺的论述偏向于认识论表象主义,而忽略康德的建构主义一面。阿多诺的批判反映了当代西方马克思主义者评价先验因果理论的立场,他的观点颇具代表性,尽管其批判存在一些谬误,但可以促进人们反思因果理性的局限性等问题。 Adorno believes that causality is the function of subjective reason, and the dominance of causal identity is gradually declining. The focus of Adorno’s analysis lies in the antinomy of liberty and inevitability, and the causal discussion is given political significance. Kant’s discussion of causality mainly lies in the empirical realism level, that is to say, it is used in a down-to-earth manner, while Adorno seldom refers to it. Adorno’s argument is biased towards epistemological representationalism, ignoring Kant’s constructivism. Adorno’s criticism reflects the position of contemporary Western Marxists in evaluating the a priori causal theory. His viewpoint is rather representative. Although there are some fallacies in his critique, it can promote people to reflect on the limitations of causal rationality and other issues.