The Genesis of the Symbolic: On the Beginnings of Ernst Cassirer's Philosophy of Culture PDF
Preview The Genesis of the Symbolic: On the Beginnings of Ernst Cassirer's Philosophy of Culture
Arno Schubbach The Genesis of the Symbolic New Studies in the History and Historiography of Philosophy Edited by Gerald Hartung and Sebastian Luft Volume 7 Arno Schubbach The Genesis of the Symbolic On the Beginnings of Ernst Cassirerʼs Philosophy of Culture Translated by D. J. Hobbs The translation of this work was funded by Geisteswissenschaften International – Translation Funding for Work in the Humanities and Social Sciences from Germany, a joint initiative of the Fritz Thyssen Foundation, the German Federal Foreign Office, the collecting society VG WORT and the Börsenverein des Deutschen Buchhandels (German Publishers & Booksellers Association). ISBN 978-3-11-060702-4 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-062363-5 ISSN 2364-3161 Library of Congress Control Number: 2021935308 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Translated into English from the original German: Die Genese des Symbolischen. Zu den Anfängen von Ernst Cassirers Kulturphilosophie. Cassirer Forschungen 16. © Felix Meiner Verlag, Hamburg 2016. Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com Contents List of Abbreviations VII Introduction 1 The Beginnings of a Work 23 Cassirer’s Disposition for the “Philosophy of the Symbolic” from 1917 23 The Discovery 29 The Prelude to the Disposition: The Question of the “‘Existence’ of the Mental Itself” 40 Consciousnessand Knowledge in Substance and Function 44 The “Psychology of the Symbolic” on this Side of Knowledge 52 The Impulse towards Systematic Expansion: Cassirer’s History of Aesthetics 59 The “Logic of the Symbolic”: The Specific Form of the Logical Concept 64 Particularizations of the Concept: The Demand of Richard Hönigswald 70 The “System of Exact Sciences”: The Specification of Concepts 74 Additional Types of Specification: Aesthetics and the Arts 90 The “Metaphysics of the Symbolic”: Philosophy of the Symbolic and Philosophy of Culture 92 Turnings towards the World: A Brief Comparison of Cassirer and Dilthey 112 The Empirical Transformation of the Transcendental 123 Kant’s Third Critique and Cassirer’s Philosophy of Culture 123 The Background of Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment in Philosophy of Science 128 The Reflective Judgment and the Two Natures of Things 137 The Reflective Judgment and its Assumptions according to the “First Introduction” 142 Systematicity and Particularity of Experience in the Activity of Judgment and Reason 147 The Revisions of the Critique of the Power of Judgment and its Background in the History of Science 161 The Empirical Transformation of the Transcendental 165 VI Contents Kant’s Aesthetic Answer to the Question of the Universal for the Particular 171 Connections to Cassirer: Specification and Systematicity of the Symbolic 182 The Genesis of the Symbolic and Cassirer’s Engagement with the Cultural Sciences 213 The Objective Spirit Objectivated: Cassirer’s Reception of the Cultural Sciences 219 The Genesis of the Symbolic: Wilhelm Wundt’s Theory of Gestures 227 Wundt’s “Indicative Gesture”: Natural Conditions of the Symbolic 234 Determinations of the Symbolic in General: Reflection and Emancipation 244 The Differentiation of Symbolic Reflection: Logic and Art, Concept and Form 252 The Genesis of Logic and Art: Wundt’s “Indicative” and “Reproductive Gesture” 255 Reformulations: Wundt’s Naturalistic Genesis and Cassirer’s Genesis of the Symbolic 262 Language, Gesture, and Sound: From Wundt to Humboldt 271 Cassirer’s Reception of Humboldt’s Linguistic Research: A Brief Overview 284 Humboldt’s Analysis of Inflection and the Historical Interpretation of Roots 292 Language, Matter, and Form 306 The Diversity of Language and the Preconditions of the Concept 315 Concluding Remarks 325 Appendix 333 “‘Philosophy of the Symbolic’ (General Disposition)” 333 “Material and Preliminary Work on the ‘Philosophy of the Symbolic’” 369 Bibliography 379 Index of Names 397 Index of Subjects 401 List of Abbreviations Works by Ernst Cassirer ECW: Ernst Cassirer, Gesammelte Werke ECW1.Leibniz’SysteminseinenwissenschaftlichenGrundlagen. ECW2: Das Erkenntnisproblemin der Philosophie und Wissenschaft derneueren Zeit, Vol. 1. ECW3: Das Erkenntnisproblem inder Philosophieund Wissenschaft derneuerenZeit, Vol. 2. ECW4: DasErkenntnisprobleminderPhilosophieundWissenschaftderneuerenZeit,Vol.3. ECW5: DasErkenntnisproblemin derPhilosophie undWissenschaft derneuerenZeit, Vol. 4. ECW6:SubstanzbegriffundFunktionsbegriff. ECW7:FreiheitundForm. ECW8:KantsLebenundLehre. ECW9:AufsätzeundkleineSchriften1902–1921. ECW10:ZurEinsteinschenRelativitätstheorie.ErkenntnistheoretischeBetrachtung. ECW11:PhilosophiedersymbolischenFormen.ErsterTeil.DieSprache. ECW12:PhilosophiedersymbolischenFormen.ZweiterTeil.DasmythischeDenken. ECW 13: Philosophie der symbolischen Formen. Dritter Teil. Phänomenologie der Erkenntnis. ECW14:IndividuumundKosmosinderPhilosophiederRenaissance. ECW16:AufsätzeundkleineSchriften1922–1926. ECW17:AufsätzeundkleineSchriften1927–1931. ECW18:AufsätzeundkleineSchriften1932–1935. ECW21:AxelHägerström.EineStudiezurschwedischenPhilosophiederGegenwart. ECW22:AufsätzeundkleineSchriften1936–1940. ECW23:AnEssayonMan.AnIntroductiontoaPhilosophyofHumanCulture. ECW24:AufsätzeundkleineSchriften1941–1946. ECN: Ernst Cassirer, Nachgelassene Manuskripte und Texte ECN1:ZurMetaphysikdersymbolischenFormen. ECN2:ZieleundWegederWirklichkeitserkenntnis. ECN4:SymbolischePrägnanz,Ausdrucksphänomenund“WienerKreis.” ECN5:Kulturphilosophie.VorlesungenundVorträge1929–1941. ECN6:VorlesungenundStudienzurphilosophischenAnthropologie. ECN8:VorlesungenundVorträgezuphilosophischenProblemderWissenschaften1907–1945. ECN9:ZuPhilosophieundPolitik. ECN10:KleinereSchriftenzuGoetheundzurGeistesgeschichte. ECN11:Goethe-Vorlesungen(1940–1941). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110623635-001 VIII ListofAbbreviations Texts from Ernst Cassirer’s Literary Estate Disposition1917:“‘PhilosophiedesSymbolischen’(allg.Disposition).” Sheets1–241:“MaterialundVorarbeitenzur‘PhilosophiedesSymbolischen.’” Manuscript1919:Untitledmanuscriptfrom1919. Works by Immanuel Kant Asiscustomary,referencestotheCritiqueofPureReasonaregiventothefirstandseconded- itionsoftheworkasAandB,followedbypagenumber.Referencestotheotherlistedworksby KantaretotheAkademieeditionbyvolumeandpagenumber,whicharealsoincludedinthe consultedtranslations. AHE:Anthropology,History,andEducation. CPR:CritiqueofPureReason. CPJ:CritiqueofthePowerofJudgment. FI:“FirstIntroductiontotheCritiqueofthePowerofJudgment.” LL:LecturesonLogic. LN:LogikNachlaß.GesammelteSchriften,Vol.16. MF:MetaphysicalFoundationsofNaturalScience. PFM:Prolegomenato AnyFutureMetaphysicsThatWillBeAbletoComeForwardasScience. Introduction The object of the philosophy of culture is an unusual one. Compared with the themesofotherphilosophicalsubdisciplines,culturehastocountasaquitere- centphenomenon,but it is nevertheless just as fundamental as it iswide-rang- ing.To begin with culture means much more than giving the traditional ques- tions of theoretical and practical philosophy a new foundation. At the same time,the philosophyof culture also has to admit that it is itself included in its “object”: philosophy is one part of what we call culture. Reflection on the phi- losophy of culture thus takes place within the field of phenomena to which it isdedicated.Itparticipatesinthe“object”onwhichitreflects,anditinfluences thehistoricaldevelopmentofthatobject,afactwhichcanhardlyleavephiloso- phy’s understandingof itself untouched. The task that thus arises is that of apprehending the philosophy of culture systematicallyas a cultural phenomenon andunderstanding its emergencehis- torically as a reaction to social developments.¹ Followingsporadic earlier refer- ences, the philosophical concept of culture famously first became established terminologicallyinthe18thcentury,andalreadyatthattimeitwasintertwined withtheincipientprogressofmodernization.²Assuch,itisbynomeanssurpris- ingthatthereareawidevarietyofreactionsandattitudestowardstheconceptof culture:ontheonehand,Rousseausawinculturethethreatofthehumanbeing becomingalienatedfromhisnaturalneeds;ontheotherhand,Kantemphasized the possibilities for the moral cultivation of the human being.³ The concept of On the connection between the emergence of the philosophy of culture and cultural self- reflection,cf. also Konersmann (2003, pp.15f. and 99–105), as well as Konersmann (1996b, pp.348–353). Historicallyandsystematically,theconceptofcultureliesinparticularonthehorizonofthe comparison of a wide variety of regional or social cultures; on this point, cf. Busche (2000, pp.78–85).Againstthebackdropofculturalcomparison,NiklasLuhmannalsoexaminesthe conceptofcultureinthecontextofsocialself-observationsincethe18thcentury;cf.Luhmann (1999,pp.31–54,inparticularpp.35–42and48–54). OnthisillustrativeconstellationofRousseauandKant,cf.Recki(2010,pp.174–178,andfor moredetail2008,pp.269–285).Onthetraditionofculturalcritiquethathasaccompaniedthe philosophy of culture since its beginnings, cf. Bollenbeck (2007,with particular reference to Rousseauinpp.22–76),aswellasKonersmann(2008,inparticularpp.14–17).OnKant’sunder- standingofculture,cf.Bartuschat(1984).Thesereferencesprovideonlyabriefoverviewofa historyoftheconceptof “culture,”butitisalsotruethatahistoryofthissortdoesnotplay asignificantroleinwhatfollows;forfurtherdetails,cf.onceagainBusche(2000),aswellas Perpeet(1976),whoseclaims,admittedly,seemquiteproblematic,bothinviewofthealleged “scientisticimpact”ofCassirer’sphilosophyofcultureandbeyond(Perpeet1976,p.53). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110623635-002 2 Introduction culture experienced an upswing (which still persists today) around 1900,when philosophyfrequentlybegan toclaim to have at its fingertips philosophical an- swers to the renewed surge towards modernization and the associated crisis- experiences. In reaction to an increasinglycomplex and confusing world, how- ever,philosophy usually followed a Rousseauian impulse, not uncommonly in- voking the notion of a totalityor of life,which modernity seemed to be putting into jeopardy.⁴ From the point of view of the present, such approaches often seemtobetoosimplistic,andoccasionallyevendangerous,giventhattheycon- tributedtotheerosionofthepoliticalandintellectualcultureoftheWeimarRe- public.Viewed in particularly philosophical terms, however, they are able nei- ther to identify the object of the philosophyof culture conclusively nor even to take up the decisive challenge at all. Rather, they skip over this challenge when they simply set the unity of culture in opposition to its multiplicity or pit internal cultivation against the hustle and bustle of civilization,when they point to the diversity of the scientific disciplines themselves as symptoms of thecrisisandonlyappeartojustifytheirowndiscourseviatheeffusiverhetoric of the cultural critic. Ernst Cassirer’s philosophyof culture stands against such apessimisticcri- tiqueofculture,whichwascharacteristicofthezeitgeistatthebeginningofthe 20th century. Rather, following Kant’s confidence in human cultivation,Cassir- er’sphilosophyisconcernedwiththefundamentallyemancipatorypowerofcul- ture.When Cassirer – as the present study will prove in more detail – sketches out the plans for his new project of a philosophy of culture in June 1917, he is outlining,inthemidstofthefirstworldwar,aphilosophyofculturethatfocuses on the opportunities for the human being’s cultural emancipation, one that re- ferstoscientificknowledgeasitsparadigminspiteofallofthetechnicalmachi- neryofwar.Occupiedbydayinthetaskofcensoringthedailypapersfromfor- eigncountries at the War PressOfficeuntiltheysuitedthe purposesof German propaganda,⁵Cassireransweredthehardshipsofthetimewithaquiteuntimely optimism,insteadofworkingthemuptoafeverpitchlikemanyothers.Thisun- dertakingcouldalmostgivetheimpressionthatCassirerwasapplyinghimselfto the task of proving a claim formulated a month later, in July 1917, by Hermann BahrintheNewReview[DieneueRundschau].Namely,Bahrinsiststhatitissim- plynotthecasethattheGermans“lack thephenomenonoftheall-encompass- ingman,”butratherthatErnstCassirerspecificallyiscalledtothistask.Therea- Onthephilosophyofcultureandthephilosophyoflifefrom1900untiltheWeimarRepublic, cf.Bollenbeck(2007,pp.199–232);foratreatmentthattakesCassirerintoaccount,cf.Koners- mann(2003,pp.66–81,and1996a). Cf.ToniCassirer(2003,p.129),aswellasMoynahan(2013,pp.36f.).
The list of books you might like
