THE ALIENATED MIND: (1918-33) Volume II David Patrick Frisby

325 Pages·2009·14.13 MB·English

THE ALIENATED MIND:
The the
emergence of sociology of
knowledge in Germany
(1918-33)
Volume II
David Patrick Frisby
/
t
Submitted in fulfilment the' Department Sociology
partial of of
for the the Glasgow University
awarding
requirements of
degree Doctor Philosophy October, 1978
of of
CHAPTER FOUR
KARL MANNHEIM: From the Critique
Ideology to the Sociology Knowledge?
of of
/
If
1
CHAPTER FOUR
Mannheim
Scheler Lukäcs
shares with and an early concern for a theory of
culture. This is from Mannheim's
evident earlier writings such as the 1917
1
es
lecture
'Lelek (Soul
Kultura' Culture'), his Lukäcs'
and review of
_.
2
Theory of the Novel (1920), his the interpretation '.
essay on of world views
3
(1923),
the important 'Über das Eigenart kultur-
and
unpublished essay
4
Erkenntnis' (1922).
soziologischer Indeed the further than
similarity goes
this. Ästhetikim-
Not is Lukäcs'
his Heidelberger
only work, and especially
portant for Mannheim's early formulations of the problems of the sociology
of culture, as. Markus has recently shown5 but, as Kettler's study of the
relationship between Mannheim and Lukcäs in Hungary has demonstrated,
the influence Lukacs I to the Mannheim.
of views as a whole was central young
In relation to Scheler th? connections are not so close. One may point, for
to the Mannheim to Scheler's
example, references which makes pre-war
in his At level, the
writings unpublished essay. a more general early writ-
Über
ings Mannheim this is true das Eigenart
of and again especially of
-
kultursoziologischer Erkenntnis betray heavy
a reliance upon a phenomeno-
-
logical in least, brings Mannheim
standpoint which, some respects at closer
to Scheler.. The that Mannheim to however, is
phenomenology refers most,
that Heidegger Scheler.
of and not Of course, Mannheim's phenomenological
position is also fused with Dilthey's hermeneutics as well as Lukäcs own early
a
these two traditions.
amalgam of One detect,
may also sometimes very
ds
In 'Lelek
clearly as Kultur', the fascination Simmel Is theory
which of
had for
cultural alienation Mannheim, indeed it had for the Lukäcs.
as
early
In direction, the Rickert Lask is
another neo-Kantian philosophy of and evi-
2
dent in Mannheim's doctoral thesis 'The Structural Analysis Epistemology'
of
(1922,
Hungarian 1918) is, Lukäcs'
original as once again, early writings.
However, it
would be a mistake to assume that these early formulations of
a sociology of culture are concerned only with a theory of culture. On the
contrary, they the
often contain rudiments of certain central problems which
Mannheim later developed into his knowledge. There thus
sociology of seems
little in the Remmling does, that 'Mannheim
point making claim, as made
the transition from to in 1925, he his
philosophy sociology when published
article, "The knowledge". 18 Not had Mann-
problem of a sociology of only
heim by this time developed but he had
already a sociology of culture also
developed themes to his knowledge. In
a number of central sociology of
follows, in the first this
what systematic section of chapter, an attempt will
be to highlight the themes Mannheim's demon-
made major of early work and
their for but for
strate relevance not merely a sociology of culture also a
knowledge. Close -attention be to Mannheim's
sociology of will paid un-
Kettler in 'to
published essay not, as rightly points out, order create-any sort
Mannheim. His the time
of mystery about published works of were more
"professional" therefore in He
polished and and more modest aspiration.
took intellectual in the for
greater risks essays written self-clarification and
these
are, accordingly, more self-revealing. '9 It is also within Mannheim's
earlier work that it is possible to trace the important influence Lukcas
which
exercised over Mannheim. This from the dis-
extends not merely common
i
in Budapest in the 'Szellemkek'
cussions investigated
group, which are else-
by. Kettler, but to
where also Mannheim's his
written work and participation
in the 'Free School Human Sciences' (Mannheim's
of in 1917. lecture 'Soul
Culture' belongs. to the lecture
and its
Lukäcs
series given under auspices).
3
himself later indeed
many years went so far as to suggest that, in this period
'I in
stood a close relationship to Mannheim he he
when was a student and
was, one might say, my unofficial academic pupil 1.10 Thus the
relation-
between
ship Mannheim Lukäcs be traced back to their
and can earlier years
in Budapest.
It to be to Mannheim
remains seen what extent remained con-
scious of the need to confront Lukäcs' work, especially Geschichte und
Klassenbewusstsein,
in his later
writings.
In the this be focussed the
second part of chapter, attention will upon explicit
the development
confrontation
with problems associated with of a sociology
knowledge the to knowledge to
of and attempts apply such a sociology of
Within the the first these belongs
specific areas. context of of endeavours
11
(1924),
the 'Historismus' 'Das Problem Soziologie des Wis-
essay einer
12
(1925),
'Ideologische Interpretation der
sens' und soziologische geistigen
Gebilde' (1926)13 the important Eine
end unpublished essay soziologische
(Konjunktives
Theorie der Kultur ihrer Erkennbarkeit. kommunikatives
und und
14-
Denken) but, from the 1924
undated references cited, probably or slightly
later. The to the knowledge in this
attempts apply sociology of period com-
(written
Mannheim's Habilitationsschrift 'Das Konservative Denken'
prise
15
1925, 1927), 'Die Bedeutung der Konkurrenz im Gsbiete des
published
16
Geistigen' (paper delivered in 1928, 1929) 'Das Problem
published and
17
der Generationen' (published 1928). The these is
examination of essays
intended to imply'that Mannheim had turned his
not now attention exclusively
4
towards knowledge since
a sociology of the
continued significance of problems
with a sociology in Rather,
associated of culture are still much evidence.
taking
the explicit up of a sociology knowledge his
of grows out of earlier con-
develops themes.
cerns and new
4
Such interests lead to
is
must necessarily a re-examination of what usually
acknowledged to be Mannheim's German Ideologie Utopie,
major work und
in 1929.18 This is, in different book
published many respects, a very
from Ideology
Utopia introduced to the English
and
which was speaking world
in 1936.19 The had impact German
earlier version which a major on social
-
thought
three 'Ideologie
was much shorter, comprising only chapters: und
-
Utopie', 'Ist Politik Wissenschaft ' 'Das
als möglich? and utopische
Bewusstsein'. The hope to
original was, as' we show, much more concerned
the that in Lukäcs' Geschichte Klassen-
with some of problems appear und
bewusstsein than the later translation A interest in this
suggests. central
the therefore be the between Mann-
section of present chapter will relationship
heim's theory ideology the
and critique of and establishment of a sociology
knowledge. Only by detailed Ideologie Utopie it
of a analysis of und will
be to for the impact this in Germany, impact
possible account of work an
hardly be by the English translation.
which can comprehended a study of
Whatever the judgment Ideologie Utopie, it is
upon und certainly apparent
that Mannheim in his 1929 that, he
post writings assumed along with others,
had the knowledge
successfully established sociology of as a recognised
discipline. The the knowledge
role of sociology of within sociology and
the is theme both his dictionary
social sciences as a whole a major of con-
(published
tribution, 'Wissenssoziologie' 1931 five both
and now chapter of
the English translation Ideologie Utopie the post-war German
of und and
20
edition), and his lecture, Die Gegenwartsaufgaben der Soziologie (deliver-
21
in 1932). (i.
ed and published It is in this 1928-32)
period e. roughly
that Mannheim intended
also
publication of not only a substantial study of
Max Weber's sociology but also a collection of essays Soziologie des Geistes
5
(outline
1930), briefer
written as well as a study of contemporary social
thought Weber, Troeltsch, Scheler the title Zur Denklage der Gegen-
under
- -
22
In fact,
wart. none of these volumes appeared in Germany, though three
the
of essays which were to comprise Soziologie des Geistes
were subsequent-
ly in
published a much altered form as Essays on the Sociology of Culture in
1956.23
Not did Mannheim himself 'a
only make number of major revisions
in the
draft' but 'in to the import the ideas
original order make meaning and of
in idiom to the different
comprehensible
another and readers of a generation
in different tradition, the had to the
raised a national editors rethink original
24
text distorting the intentions'. It is therefore
without author's unfortunate-
ly to to these in their translated form belonging
not possible refer essays as
to this
period.
However, do have to is the
what we access considerable number of reviews
highlight the that Ideologie Utopie in Germany.
which reception und received
It logically follow from the the that dis-
would outline of present chapter some
this Mannheim's be the
cussion of reception of work should part of present
But there
chapter. since are a substantial number of contemporary reviews
Ideologie Utopie, it is fitting that they form the
of und perhaps more part of
the debates the knowledge in
succeeding chapter on surrounding sociology of
25
Germany.
4
Kettler's investigation the between Mannheim Lukäcs
of relationship and
In Budapest to in
prior and, during the Hungarian Revolution has
part,
shown
that Mannheim
was very much under the influence of Lukäcs in this period.
6
Mannheim took in the discussions the Szellemkek
part regular weekly of group
by Lukäcs between 1915 1918. This i i-
organised and others and group of ntel
from the the
ectuals, cutt off contact with mass of population, were con-
the Hungarian As the founders
cerned with cultural renewal of society. one of
this
of group relates,
'Amongst its founder belonged the intimate
members
friends Georg Lukäcs: Bela Baläzs, Lajos Fülep
of
Anna Lesznai Those
and who also come along
...
the ("the Bela
were younger people children"),
Fogarasi, Karl Mannheim Arnold Hauser
and
...
Generally, these Sunday discussions
were organ-
ised dominated by Lukäcs; he forward
some
and put
topic for discussion be thoroughly dis-
which would
by the Typically it
cussed group. was concerned
literary in
with a moral and/or problem which one con-
Dostojevski German
centrated especially upon and
One
like Eckart.
mystics could crudely character-
ize the leanings the "left
political of group as
however, it is to
orientated"; more accurate poi nt
-
out how unpolitical they all were. In fact the
had in
group more common with g religious gather-
'
ing than
with a political club.
discussions
these
The
unpolitical and, one might add, unsociological nature of
.
intellectual development is
to Mannheim's also confirmed
which were crucial
that
Arnold Hauser
by the who suggests
reminiscences of
in
'In 1917 Karl Mannheim was uninterested politics
the the The
as were all members of group. main
for this lay Lukäcs
with who was con-
responsibility
Lask, Weber Jaspers interested
and and
cerned with
he had
in
philosophy and religion ever since returned
from Heidelberg kind We
as a of mystic
...
discussed but literature,
never politics rather
At that time
philosophy and religion. no one was
27
interested in '
sociology.
yet
In too, Mannhei had in Lukäcs. In
other respects, m much common with
1912 Mannheim in Berlin for by Simmel
studied
a year and attended courses
later Freiburg Heidelberg before to Buda-
as well as studying at and returning
before the First World War. As have Lukdcs'
pest shortly we seen, -early
a considerable debt to Simmel's theory
writings exhibit of cultural alien-
V-
7
This is true the first
ation. also of published work of Mannheim, 'Lelek
es
Kultura'
.
In 1917,
again probably under Lukäcs' stimulus, members of the Sunday dis-
cus0ion group, Szellemkek, founded 'Free School for the Geisteswissen-
a
schaften to the
which was propagate cultural-philosophical world-view of
those capitalism
in Lukäcs' 'an to in the
who,
words, constituted opposition
name of idealist philosophy. What they had in common was the negation of
28
positivism. Again, it be that this 'opposition to
should emphasized capital-
ism' but lay in its idealistic,
was not always of an overt political nature rather
Amongst those lectures in this
often spiritualistic rejection. who gave
'school' Lukäcs, Mannheim, Fogarasi, Szabo*, Hauser, Kodäly,
were and
Bartok. From the text Mannheim's lecture learn that Erwin
of we only
Szabo directly lecture: 'On the Basic Questions Marx-
offered a political of
ism'. Lukäcs lectured Fogarasi the
on aesthetics, on methods ofintellect-
history, Hauser dilettantism in Kodäly the Hungarian folk
ual on art, on
Bartok folk
song and on and modern music.
Mannheim's lecture 'Soul Culture' delivered in the
and autumn of 1917
-
and published in 1918 was intended as a programmatic statement of the
-
Intentions. Its tenor,
group's general as Markus comments 'originates in
Si l in Lukäcs' that is in the Philosophie der Kunst
mme and essays,
con-
ceived in the spirit of these essays, although the Lebensphilosophie ten-
4
dencies in Mannheim
emerge than in the Lukäcs
significantly more strongly
1912-141.29
manuscripts of The Lukäcs to here by Märkus
works referred
his then
are part of unpublished writings on aesthetics completed between
30
1912 1916
and and are often referred to by Mannheim in his later
writings.
8
However, Mannheim have been
much may acquainted Simm9I's
with work
through Lukacs' it though Mannheim himself Simmel's
reception of
attended
-
lectures in 1912-13 it remains true that the central theme his lecture is
- of
undoubtedly drawn from Simmel. As in Lukäcs' from this
writings period,
Mannheim
the
conceives of contemporary crisis as a cultural one. He argues
that 'the
danger in is that it beyond
greatest contemporary culture grows our
31
grasp and to it increasingly Mannheim
makes our relationship precarious'
.
develops this theme in Simmel Is theory
a manner which mirrors of cultural
alienation and the opposition between subjective and objective culture. For
Mannheim,
'It is the dependency
mutual of objective and
impossible
subjective culture which makes
the the the Object-
existence of one'or other.
I like independent lev-
ve culture envelops us an
iathan, it to develop
yet cannot continue and
its the
maintain own existence without assist-
individuals. On the
ance and co-operation of
hand, the individual denies his ful-
other own
f ilment if he fails to'regenerate the
objective
32
it. '
culture and constantly appropriate
In the the lecture,, Mannheim this
course of expands upon growing separation
the framework theory
of objective and subjective culture, again within of a
is that Simmel. Mannheim
of culture which reminiscent of of maintains
that is
objective culture
'the totality the
of objectivations of mind which,
In their historical development, have become
a
human legacy. They
comprise religion, science,
the forms life. In
art, state and of contrast, we
Simmel
speak of subjective culture when as
-
correctly observed the for fulfil-
soul strives
-
through itself, through inward
ment not an move-
but indirectly
ment through these
cultural object-
33
I vations, that is, through their '
appropriation.
develops this theory
Mannheim to the
of cultural estrangement with reference
though having
work of art which, its origin in its creator, becomes separated