International Phenomenological Society

Max Scheler on the Place of Man in the Cosmos Author(s): Marvin Farber Source: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 14, No. 3 (Mar., 1954), pp. 393-399 Published by: International Phenomenological Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2104111 . Accessed: 04/09/2011 11:25
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

International Phenomenological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.

http://www.jstor.org

DISCUSSION MAX SCHELER ON THE PLACE OF MAN IN THE COSMOS tideof evoluof kindsweremadeto stemthe rising Attempts various Thiswasa primary philosophy general. and in tionary naturalism, scientific century at idealists the close of the nineteenth motiveof philosophical tendencies Members diverse of century. part andinthefirst ofthetwentieth or at and schools, who werenormally war withone another otherwise the strife, werein unisonin opposing doctrinal engagedin internecine amongthe conception man and his works.Prominent of naturalistic Simmel, Eucken,Dilthey, were Rickert, German philosophers Professors wereto be againstnaturalism reactions and similar Weber, and Husserl; towardcombatting mucheffort seen in other countries. Husseridevoted as essay,"Philosophy a Rigorous as by naturalism, shown hisoften-quoted was preeminent among Max Scheler, Professor Husserl'scollaborator, his "philosophical was anthropology" Similarly, the anti-naturalists. of to to to an acceptable fideists, thetheory designed provide alternative, critic He manofthespecialsciences. was a mostdetermined oftheevoluand in as influence; he theory biology wellas ofits philosophical tionary the activities include to Marx and Freud. extended arenaof his critical which did so muchto popularize he of Indeed,the"sociology knowledge" to a Marxism which managed find has is an example thenon-Marxian of of place in academiccircles.For years an ardentspokesman Catholic he an had period"), wasalsoin somerespects thought (Scheler a "Catholic however, he for precursor the Nazis.2Fortunately himself, of ideological of the to diedbefore accession power theNazis. Scheler presents a Conmo8,3 In hislittle bookon ThePlaceofMan in the The anthropology." summary the main pointsof his "philosophical of for "Whatis man,and whatis his placein being?"are central questions of He out anthropology Scheler. points thattheproblems a philosophical in in including of importance Germany, widecircles, had become central man to In the degree which scientists. his opinion, existing philosophical a had a for had become problem himself reached maxmumin all known sciences to of are treasures" thespecial He thatthe"mighty history. states
Logos, Vol. I, 1910-11. "Philosophieale strengeWissenschaft," and 'Cf. V. J. McGill, "Scheler's Theory of Sympathyand Love," Philosophy of Vol. II, March 1942. University Buffalo, Research, Phenomenological ' Die Stellung Menschen Kosmos,Otto ReichlVerlag,Darmstadt,1928. im des
I

Science."'

8983

394

PHILOSOPHY

AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

be utilized,in orderto develop a new formof self-consciousness selfand intuition. That Schelerwas not the personto attemptto use those "treasures" is amplyshownby his text,hereas well as elsewhere. If Schelerreflects: one asks an educated European what he understands by the word "man," then threesets of incompatible ideas occur to him, deriving from the Jewish-Christian tradition, from ancient Greece ("reason,"the "logos," etc.), and frommodern naturalscienceand genetic Thus there is a theological,a philosophical, psychology. and a naturalscientific anthropology, but, Scheler declares,we do not have a unified idea of man. This is a strangeconclusionto draw. The scientific view supersedesthe others,as a matterof fact,and it is reallyunified, unless of whichcannot one injectsa special requirement unityinto the discussion Scheler betrays his misgivings. his opinion, In be fulfilled scientifically. the ever growingnumberof special sciences which are concernedwith man "conceal" the "essence" of man more than they "illuminate"it. He seems to be playingan assumptivegame with the term"essence." Is the to different thefindings "essence" ofman predetermined be something from it whichno microscope of the sciences?Presumably must be something or can chemicaltests can reach,and whichno descriptive observations ascerstatesthat today all the threeviews of man tain. Scheleralmost hopefully cited above are greatlyshaken, the Darwinian solutionof the problem This is indeed hopeful of discredited.4 of the origin man being completely on thinking his part. Scheler'sinterestis in the "essence" of man in relation to animalsand plants,and in the specialmetaphysical place ofman. man's "special place" requiresthat the The problem of determining meaningof "man" be defined appropriately. For Scheler,the term"man" must not be used to name the special characterspossessed by men as a and mammals.It seems clear that the conceptof of sub-group vertebrates man must be "loaded" fromthe outset, so that man is irreducibleto to the nature.According the traditional conception, conceptof man as the the idea of God as a centralpoint of reference. image of God presupposes This conceptof man, whichis designatedthe "essential" view of man, is declaredby Schelerto have a totallydifferent meaningfromthe naturalscientific conception.Whether this "essential" concept of man, which to assigns a special place to man as such, in contradistinction all other livingspecies,has any rightat all, is the themeof Scheler'sdiscourse.He makes no secretof his aim to champion the religiously inspiredview of to man in opposition the view of man which is determined the special by is sciences.His motivation indicatedclearly. For Scheler,thereis "a new principle"which makes man to be man, a
in is 4Scheler'santi-evolutionism set forth somedetailin his book,Der Formalismusin derEthikunddie materials Wertethik, VerlagNiemeyer, Halle, 1913-1916.

PLACE OF MAN IN THE COSMOS

395

to be cannot reduced the"natural which to in opposed life general, principle to It this names principle. is supposed "spirit" of evolution life."The term and of the of the comprise concept reason, intuition essences, goodness, of spheres finite appearswithin spirit in love,etc. The act-center, which "life"centers, to in being,is calleda "person," contrast all functional viewed fromwithin.In Scheler's whichare called "mental"centers, is as manalone,insofar he is a person, able to "riseabove"himself, view, the space-time as a and from center it were"beyond" being, as a living to himself, be the object of his including world, make everything, to mainScheler be cannot a "part"ofthisworld, But knowledge. thiscenter locusin spaceand time.It can have a definite and henceit cannot tains, manis portrayed Thus, of ground being." in be only situated "the highest doesnot But and upon supervening himself theworld. Scheler as an essence is of that his in theleastjustify contention man's "center" activity not a as himself besthe can to the mustreconcile The reader partoftheworld. If in a without locus spaceandtime. heis accustomed of thought a realbeing he meanings, willperhaps their to bothering inspect without words tousing spaceand time,"just as he will as suchexpressions "beyond go alongwith of ground whenhe speaksof "the highest he think is doingsomething being." for tradition-Schelling, examplein Likehispredecessorstheidealistic not thatis itself capableofbeingan as being spirit theonly Scheler regards in only the its and as It object. is construed pureactuality, as having being neither is the of of performanceitsacts.The center spirit, person, therefore determined, but onlyan essentially beingas an object nor as a thing, are of structure acts. Otherpersons also not capable of being ordered acts,and "identheir and We objects. mustpost-perform co-perform free withit itself. the withthewilling, love,etc.,ofa person, ourselves tify" which, to spirit" leadsreadily the"onesuper-singular Thislineofthought connecon we thinks, haveto assume thebasisoftheunbreakable Scheler of of tionof "Idea" and "Act." The assumption an order "Ideas" indebeing. sucha spiritual is consciousness takento require of pendent human and the The "Ideas" arenot"anteres,"butarewith things, areheldto be world-realization. in generated the eternalspiritin acts of continuous or already find we "Ideas," we do notmerely a being essence When think a "co-generating" a of independent us,butit is rather "co-bringing-forth," love,out ofthe with ofthe"Ideas" and ofthevaluescoordinated eternal use should fact It themselves." is a curious thatScheler of "origin thethings without themselves" explanaand such expressions as "origin" "thethings source his from supposed spiritual could "originate" tion.How anything them"the The unexplained. use oftheexpression things remains wholly It case an merely interesting ofperseveration. is a long selves"is perhaps

396

PHILOSOPHY

AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

way fromHusserl's famous slogan, which expressedan appeal to "the themselves." Schelerhas gottenfaraway from"the things"(or the things facts of experience) here, with his talk of "eternal love," "spirit," etc. "generation," of In orderto make moreclear the peculiarity "spirit,"Schelerconsiders act. It is supposedby himto spiritual the act of "ideation" as a specifically from all technical intelligence.What be an act completelydifferent Scheler means by a "problem of intelligence"will be elucidated by an examplewhichhe gives: I now have a pain in my arm; how did it arise, and how can I get rid of it? That is a problemof positive science. But, I direction, can grasp the same Schelergoes on in his chosenphilosophical that this world pain as an exampleof the verystrangeessentialcondition, What is at has pain, evil, and suffering all. Then I shall ask differently: and how must the apart fromthe fact that I now have it here, pain itself, such as "pain in general" for groundof thingsbe constituted something this is an "in to be possible?The readerwill be temptedto ask whether for of general"kindofquestion.The importance nerves pain wouldindicate at thattheansweris always "in particular," least withregardto thenatural To worldand actual experience. be sure,a betterexamplecould have been executed. could have beenmoreskillfully chosen,and theperformance of "Ideation" is taken to be independent the numberof observations The "essential forms of which we make, and of inductive inferences. of construction" the world are grasped in one example of the regionof as thatwe thusgainis regarded essencewhichis in question.The knowledge whichare of this essence. for in generality all possiblethings holding infinite Such insightsare regardedas valid "beyond the limit of our sensuous experience"and as "a priori."Schelersees such "essential cognitions"as axioms (1) functions: It is said to providethehighest two fulfilling different us the directionof a for all the positive sciences,which firstof all show and observation,induction,and deduction throughintelligence fruitful contention. Schelerdoes not justifythis bold, empty thinking. discursive That conceptsare used in hypotheseswill be agreed to by all, but no would thinkof callingthem"a priori"in Scheler's scientific methodologist in sense. Investigators the "positive sciences" do not look to the alleged "highestaxioms" forthe directionof theirobservation.(2) There is the whose final goal is describedas knowledgeof functionfor metaphysics, absolute being. They are describedin Hegel's words,as "windowsto the absolute." Denying that essencescan be reducedto empiricalcauses of a finitekind, Scheler argues that they can only be ascribed to the "one spirit."He is quite sure of that,but so faras demonstration super-singular upon is his is concerned, procedure simplyto speak, or to write,depending the circumstances.

PLACE OF MAN IN THE COSMOS

397

of of the Scheler speaks Plato'svision "Ideas" as turning soulawayfrom of and in to the content things intoitself, order find "origins" thesensuous when he of procedure ofthings. Thishe takesto be themeaning Husserl's of the reduction." connects knowledge "Ideas" to a "phenomenological the refers to theprocedure "crossing here of out" or "bracketing" Scheler in coefficient existence world-things,order gain their of of to accidental of with theory the "essentia." Whilenotin complete agreement Husserl's defines which really asserts thatin it theact is meant "reduction," Scheler of Scheler's reduction thehuman conception thephenomenological spirit. He its appearsto be crudeand incorrect. seemsnot to have graped real and to be viewing in accordance it withhis own nature, methodological and that mystical product objectionable standpoint needs.It is a rather the of his which comes close'to type misunderstanding results from exegesis, of the involves "discarding" reality. the to according which "reduction" (or Thus, Schelerasks what it means,to speak of "de-realizing" "deor the withHusserl's view, actualizing") "ideating" world.He disagrees and of thatit means withholding judgments existence; he takesit to mean that itself thatthereality-factor is suspended wayofexperiment, it is by and asideofthe "fearofthemundane." annihilated, to meanthesetting from textthat Scheler his sees something is correct, that It is evident a of but thathe evencatches glimpse theplayofa method; also thathis articles faith thefirm ofhisphilosophical of and drift antecedently accepted from the lead and persuasion himto talkof"annihilation" emancipation and Howquaintit is to seehimendeavor wreck to "fear themundane." of talksofthe"ascetic"act of remove worlds without instrument. an Scheler is and it "de-realization," statesthat,if existence "resistance," can only in in in out consist thesuspension, theplacing ofplay ofthatlife-drive, and to the aboveall appears"as resistance," which relation which world is of of the at thesametime the condition all sense-perception accidental here-now-thus. in his view,thisact can onlybe performed that by But, in as the called"spirit." Onlyspirit itsform pure"will"can effect being of that as regards themode inactualizing the"feeling-drive-center"Scheler out real"ofthereal.Man thusturns to be theliving ofaccessto the"being Husserl's terms toward life. its methodological beingthatcan be "ascetic" out of play," "suspension," "accidentalhere-now-thus," etc., "putting of of are used,to be sure.But the admonition the founder modern phein of to withthesuspension all beliefs theinterest a of nomenology, begin the of and ("until final grounds"), radical philosophy knowledge experience He howeasyit is to adapt is certainly illustrated Scheler. hasshown not by and the generalphenomenological patternto non-philosophical nonthe asceticism toward uses. scientific Such practices-annihilating world, into and its transformation the use life, assumptive of the term"spirit"

398

PHILOSOPHY AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

and to works. spirit getintoactivity to realize Scheler criticizes "natuthe both and ralistic" theories, mechanistic vitalistic, mistaking relationfor the and the shipofspirit life.Theyare accusedofoverlooking essence life of nature thepeculiar and in itspeculiar structure its laws, and of comof and the of pletely missing "originalness" independence thespirit. underthe heading the "naturalistic-vitalistic" Marx is mentioned of and to refers hiscritique Marx's"historical of types, Scheler materialism" of His in his"Sociology Knowledge.", brief of rendering Marx'sthesis as is as of inadequate hisrenderingHusserl to proved be,andjustas misleading. Marxis quotedas talking about"Ideas thathaveno interests passion and as the backofthem" "missing mark"in world-history-and means, that from "vital-and-drive that the of Scheler states, powers come sphere man." is As for Scheler optimistic regard history. his view, himself, with In to in an in history thelargeshows increase theroleofreason, wayofan by of increasing acquisition "Ideas" and values.He looks to philosophical man," all specific contributions worksof man go forth-language, and and wrong, state,myths, the tools,ideas of right religion, science, etc. The "basic structure man" is obviously be treated of to apartfrom its and culturalconditions, naturalistic since all "naturalistic" theories And have beenrenounced. yet,everything is known way of the that by and the much-despised specialsciences theories "naturalistic" mustbe frozen packedaway,in an appropriately "essential" state,in order to makepossible "going the forth" the"works man."Onlya well-stocked of of a hat everallowed rabbitto "go forth" from It is simply it. dishonest to renounce and naturalistic to procedures then makeuse ofthem covertly. Thequestion aboutman'splaceinthecosmos leadsScheler ask finally: to a is am at will "Why there world all,andwhy 'I' at all?" The reader reflect of a that not everystring wordsconstitutes real question. Presumably would refer question not his Scheler "Whyam 'I' at all?" toan obstetrician. and lead His lineofthought motivation himin quitea different direction. He statesthat one shouldapprehend "essential the of necessity" the the consciousness the world,the self,and the of connection between God of here consciousnessGod,whereby is apprehended as a "being through
5M. Scheler, "Probleme einer Soziologie des Wissens," in Die Wissensformen und die Gesellschaft.

science. "Life" and "spirit"are conceivedby Scheler to be essentially different, and yet as related.Spiritis said to "ideate" life,whereaslifealone enables

will"when and "pure needed, thelike-couldbestbe obviated a proper by of of appraisal thetruth naturalism, in short, a critical or, by philosophy of

to anthropology providethebasis fora philosophy history of and ofculture. It is assigned the task of showinghow, out of the "basic structureof

PLACE OF MAN IN THE COSMOS

399

itself" with the predicate "holy." This "sphere" of "absolute being," whetherit is accessible or not to experienceor knowing,is regardedas to belonging the essenceofman just as constitutively his self-consciousas ness and world-consciousness. World-consciousness, self-consciousness, and God-consciousness are held to forman indissolubleunity of structure. Scheler regards the "world-ground" being in man, as immediately as apprehendedand realizedin man. What has Scheler contributed toward determining man's place in the cosmos?To some extenthe has contributed novelty:in degreeand kind of in obfuscation, manner of crudenessin misrepresenting phenomenology and naturalistic theories.But also, curiously, thereis noveltyin the way in whichhe seemsable to recognize ideas whichmightbe made significant if fruitful treated subject to the canons of logic and on the basis of the sciences. As mattersstand, Scheler presentsa sorry,confused,and eminentlyunworthy picturein his attack on scientific as philosophy, well as in his dogmaticdefenseof selectedarticlesof faith. MARVIN FARBER.
UNIVERSITY OF BUFFALO.