The work represents the application of the program of criticism of the ideology of the Frankfurt School to German spiritual culture of the first half of the 20th century, primarily to the existential philosophy of M. Heidegger, K. Jaspers and others. For specialists in social philosophy, historians of philosophy and students of philosophical specialties at universities .

The work of T. Adorno “The Jargon of Authenticity. On German Ideology,” first published in 1964, is a practical application of the program of ideological criticism to German philosophy and spiritual culture of the early and mid-twentieth century. The work adjoins “Negative Dialectics,” which Adorno considered his main philosophical work, and continues a number of his studies devoted to individual forms of ideology in modern society; some of them were included in the author’s collection with the characteristic title “Interventions.” It is difficult to give a clear definition to the subject of Adorno’s criticism in this work: it is a fairly wide range of explicit philosophical constructs, implicit ideological ideas, discursive and communicative practices presented in philosophy, fiction, and journalism , television and radio programs, etc. According to Adorno, all these phenomena are united by the specific use of language (the terminological language of philosophy, the metaphorical structure of poetry, illocutionary features of communication, etc.), endowing it with an implicit (hidden from the “consumer”) ideological function - the function of preserving the existing social order. The text examines most closely a number of philosophical concepts of K. Jaspers, O.F. Bolnov and M. Heidegger, who for Adorno are the exemplary embodiment of “jargon”; this makes the work an important monument to the polemics and demarcation of the Frankfurt School with existential (in the author’s understanding) philosophy. The work seems extremely interesting as an original version of the philosophy of language, which combines the methods of formal, conceptual, semantic and social-critical analysis in Adorno’s version. Finally, the text is a brilliant example of the author's literary style, which, of course, suffered some damage during translation.