Meaning of History - Reflections on Spengler, Toynbee, and Kant

401 Pages·1950·56.123 MB·English

by  Henry Kissinger

THE MEANING OP HIS TORY
(Reflections on Spengler, Toynbee and Kant)
Henry A,, Kissinger
'!hbleo fC ontents
I
Introduotory Note
'!he Argument (Introduction and Summary) Pa.[!e l-
History - as - Intuition (Spengler)
Introduction " 31
Metaphysics n :35-
'.!.he Development of the Culture" 45
"
The Souls o:f the Culture 62
'lne
Politics Zcono:::iics, Hachine 9Q-
#
" i12--
Conolusicns
History -as-sn- Empirical-Science (Toynbee)
Introduction Page l:5B
"
J.!e taphys lo 136-·
The Nature and Genesis or
"
Civilizations 145-
"
'Ihe Grovrth or Civilizations 1.65
'.:be Breakdown of Civilizations" 183
Schism in the noAv Social " 198
Schism in the So�i n 21�-
Conolus1ons " 23�.--
History and Uo.n' s E."Y.perlence of rt.oral1 ty (Kant)
The Problem of Freedom endNecess1ty
in the Philosophies preoe�ding
Kant Page 260
"
Metaphysio 272
"
'Moral Philosophy 277
'Jhe Philosophy of History Derived
rrom the Categorical Imperative 289
The Philosophy of History Con-1ei ved
as a Toleolog1cal System Page 300
'Iha Sense of Responsibility
Introduction Pags 323
Preedom and Necessity Hee one ll�o
- A Clue from Poetry• II �30
Appendix Introduction Page 349
Assertional Logic T"l 352
Pre-Assertional Lacie " 366
'Ihe 'Iheory of System.a 371
BP1liogr-aphy Page :384
·I-
Introductory Note.
an
An introduot!op to undergraduate hcnor theais may
seem presumpt(oue, rru-: '!. bdlieve that its 1norc.1na te length
and unorthodox method require an explanation. Aa a general
due
reason, the length is to the fact that I did not realize
the implications of the aunject when I started to work on the
the!is. As 1t grew, I have rru;:.je several efforts to cut it down,
on
such as omitting the chapters I had written Ilegel and Schweitzer.
Since this still did not succeed in reducing this thesis to a more
manageable size I have pointed out, st the end of this 1ntc,4uotory
note, those portions which I believe�-to be the nucleus. or my analy­
sis and which may be considered my hcnor thesis.
'lhe methodology re�ults from my diasatlsfaot1on with the
critical tr�atments of Spengler, and to a leaser degree, of Toynbee.
I had the impression that merely enalytloal criticiem of Spengler
.falslflea the real eaaen()e of his philosophy. JuBt as in the oase
of Nietzache, part of 8pengler•e impact reside!!! in the poetio
1maginat1venese of hi!!! desori�tiona. I have therefore made a
conoo1oue effort 1n my expoa1to�y passages to capture as muoh aa
lengthy
posaible of Spengler's ntyle. Thie hae entailed rather
quotations au� in one or two plaooa oloae reliance on the te�t.
To present Spengler'e philosophy as fairly aa poaaible I have kept
auoh clauae1 as "Spengler argues", "according to Spengler" eto. to
a mlnimumo 'Iha expository passagea are to be understood ae con�
oonoentra
tialn1ng S9Emgler' &.1 arguments. · My oornmente are ted in
discussions at the end ?f each e�ction. My baalo anal1�la is to
ba found in my "Conolu@lonG" on the Chapto�, "History - BB c Intui�
tion".,
-II-
I have followed ea3entiall7 the srune methodology with
Toynbee. Here too purely analytical oritlcism falsifies the
stately empirical approach. I have discuaaed each of Toynbee'•
main headlngs at su.:fficlent length to indicate hia method though,
. .,
except for a very few instances, I have omitted all his illustra­
tions. Again� all mi oomments are contained in an introductory
paragraph and in a oonoludlng seotlon to each heading. Again�
my fundamental oritioisms are to be found un�e� the title "Con�
clus1ona" at the end of the Chapter "H1atory-as-an-Emp1rical
8o1enoe".
In eaoh case the expoa1tory paeeagea are preceded by a
d1eouse1on of the author's metaph1s1oal aaeumptlona, to explain
their etruoturlng effect on the eubs�quent philosophy.
Since many excellent traatmenta of Kant's philosophy
exist, my d1eouss1on of h1� philosophy ls orthodox. My laat
ChapteT 1Q intended to explain the general position from whioh
I approached .the philosophy of hb tory � Needless to say I thla
la a etill tentative v1ew-po1nt.
'lhe Appendix was written after listening to a eeminar
paper by a log1oal poait. iv1st1 1n order to ole.,r tty my own thought
on the meaning of "meaning, and also to 1nd1oate what or1ter1a of
validity log1o oftera to philosophy� It lo based on a oourae with
Pror. Ilenry Scheffer and also personal consultations. The philo�
soph1oal 1nterpretat1on or \,:the· logical syate:ms la my own.
Though this analyeia was written ae a unit, the reader
-III-
mo:y, t:r be 'flishea • consider only the following eeotlons as my
honor thesisa
'lhe Argument {Introduction and Summary)
Spengler (H1ator7 - ae - Intuition)
iie taphya 1c a
Pol1t1ca. E�onom1es, The Machine
Conolut1ion.1
Toynbee Metaph7slca
'lbe nature and Oenaa19 or Civilizations
s�hlam in the So�l
Conolua1one
Kant (Entire Cbapter)
The Sense orRes pons1bil1t;y
THE ARGUMENT
(Introduction and Summary)
-1-
1. The Problem
In tho life of every person thcro comes a point when
he realizes that out of all the seemingly limitless possi­
t)llitics of his youth he he.s in fact become one actuality.
No lone;or is lifo a broad ploin w1 th forests fmd mountains
beckoning all-around, but it 'oscones apparent that one's
journey across the meadows hns indeed followed a regular pnth,
that one cen no lonr;er go this wny or thflt• but that the di­
rection is set, the limits defined.
Fe.ch step once tnken so thou�htleasly now beco, mea
fraught with tremendous portont, each &dvance to be made ap­
pear� unelterable. Looking bflclc across the path we are struck
by tho inexorability of the road, how every step both limited
nnd served rs a condition for the next P.nd viewin17, the plain
we fc,el with P.. certainty approPchinr, · lmowledge that rnony roads
were possible, that mnny incidonta she.pod our wanderini:;, that
we are here becouse 1 t vrns we who journeyed and we could be
in a different spot hrrd we v1iahod. .And we know fur the. r that
wbstcver rot1d r.e had chosen, we could not have re1;1::..:ned ata­
tionA.ry. We were unable to nvo1d in any mr--'llller our being now
in fA.ct so�ewhere e.!ld in some position. V!o hnvo come up against
the problem of Necessity and Freedom, of the irrevocability of
.
our actions, of tbe airectedness of our life.
WhRt is the me211in� of neceaaity ond where does it nrise?
Necessity ia 2n a�tribute of the past. �vents viewed in
-2-
retrospect appe�r inevitable, the fnct of occurrence testi­
fies to irre,,ocnbili ty. Causality expresses the p2ttern which
the mind imposes on n soquonce of events in order to make their
eppearBnce comprehensible. It is formulated as s lnTI, which
reve, ls a trend of recurronce nnd an ass0I'tion of cornporP.bi li ty.
Luw ever fights 3gainst the unique, ngainst the personal ex­
perience the inward bliss. Necessity recognizes only quantita­
.,
tive differences, and conceives o.f survival RS its sole test of
historical .fitness. Necessity discovers the typical in man,
the inexorable in events, the inevitable in existence. Its doc­
trine is the philosophy of 'Eternal Recurrence of which the devil
tolls Ivan Koramazoff 11 But our present earth may have been re­
.,
peated a thousPn. d times. Vlhy 1t baa become extinct, been £rozen,
crocked, broken to bits, disintegrated into 1ts elements, again
the r.n��r Gbove the firmament, then nga1n o comet, again a aun,
again from the sun it bocomes earth and on eertb the same saquence
may bnve been repeated endlessly and exactly the same to everr
detail •• ,."
Yet every event is not only nn effect but also an inward
experienco. As an effect it 1� ruled by necessity, ae nn ex­
perience it reveals the unique !n tDe personality. The desire
to reconcile llll experience of freedom vii th a de·termined environ­
r.ient is the lnment of poetry Emd tho dilemma of philosoph;y. Re.­
tlonolism attempted to solve this problem by considering its pur­
poses os the objective pattern of -0ccurren�es Bnd equating freedom
I
1. This follows Knnt a 1:inAlysis of the ca tegor•ies. See post.
with necessity. The British sceptics, pfl.rticularly Hume, sub­
mitted these notions to rigorous criticism and deni0d necessity
s3 well AS pm•posiveness. They· &r!?,Uod thnt perception involves
th8 impact of e�p1rical entities on a wax-like mind, whose sen­
sations of ploasuro are largely passive, whose concept of necea­
sit--y describe a constP..nt conjunction and to which freedom ia
·1
The limits of thought can not be establiohed by
thought, however. Hum.e1a scepticism caused him to abandon phi­
losop�y while still a young man nnd Descartes WBS forced to in­
voke God aa a guarantor of external reality w1 th th9 aid of the
·2
very f&culty tho accuracy of which he had seriously questioned.
Kant roalized thnt only £ln inward experience can transcend
the 1nexorabili ty of oonpleted action. Ha "limited ·knowledp;e to
made room for boliof • n Ee affirmed that tho real1 ty that is S'\lb­
ject to the laws of causality is given by sensuous experience
and exhaµsted in the phenomenal world. But beyond that man has
n transcendental experience of freedom which elevates him above
the reslm of necessity into a higher world-order which conditions
all nppear1mces. Freedom la a.n inwnrd state, r.n attitude that
accompanies £111 action. ·This disproves Hu!ne 1s assertion that
nothing can be definitely known, since one can always imagine the
opposite of nny thought. Our experience of freedom testifies to
a fact of existence which no thought-process can deny and �or the
l. SBe post. Ch. "History nnd Ma..,1a ?xperience of Morality.111
2. See poet. for full discussion Ch. 11fii stor:y and U�n's F'.X�!:!rionce
of Moroli ty."
1