Abstract Theodor W. Adorno's mature thought can be characterized by the attempt to articulate what he calls a “new categorical imperative after Auschwitz.” By this, Adorno means that theory and praxis must be organized in such a way that the Holocaust does not repeat itself. This article argues that Sándor Ferenczi’s metapsychology is key to understanding Adorno’s attempt to rethink the nature of precisely such a new categorical imperative. One of the key themes of Adorno’s entire corpus is the problem of the “identification with the aggressor” – an idea that originates with Ferenzci rather than, as is commonly thought, Anna Freud. The Ferenczian dimension of Adorno’s thinking becomes particularly clear in Adorno’s thoughts on the question of freedom. In this context, Adorno engages in a psychoanalytically informed critique of the philosophy of freedom and a speculative philosophical critique of psychoanalysis. The fashioning of a “new categorical imperative” after Auschwitz entails a form of education directed towards a new form of Mündigkeit, one oriented towards contradiction, resistance, and a steadfast refusal to “identify with the aggressor.”

中文翻译：

---

阿多诺、费伦齐和新的“奥斯威辛之后的绝对命令”

摘要 西奥多·W·阿多诺 (Theodor W. Adorno) 的成熟思想的特点是试图阐明他所谓的“奥斯威辛之后的新绝对命令”。阿多诺的意思是，理论和实践的组织方式必须确保大屠杀不会重演。本文认为，Sándor Ferenczi 的元心理学是理解阿多诺试图重新思考这种新的绝对命令的本质的关键。阿多诺整个语料库的关键主题之一是“与侵略者的认同”问题——这个想法起源于费伦茨奇，而不是人们普遍认为的安娜弗洛伊德。阿多诺思想的费伦齐维度在阿多诺关于自由问题的思想中变得尤为明显。在这种情况下，阿多诺参与了对自由哲学的精神分析学批判和对精神分析的思辨哲学批判。在奥斯威辛之后形成“新的绝对命令”需要一种针对新形式的 Mündigkeit 的教育形式，一种面向矛盾、抵抗和坚定拒绝“与侵略者认同”的形式。