Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:44:31.544Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Society, Technology, and Philosophical Reasoning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Ernst Topitsch
Ernst Topitsch*
Affiliation:
University of Vienna Vienna, Austria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The old quarrel between the logical empiricists or pragmatists and the defenders of metaphysics is still far from being settled. This situation is at least partly due to the fact that neither of the two antagonists has a clear insight in the historical background, the systematical validity, and the practical purposes of the concepts and methods used in traditional philosophy. Therefore further clarification is needed.

The following paper does not claim to give final definitions and decisions. It will rather try to draw the attention to certain ways of reasoning still very widespread in metaphysics and moral theory. Their careful analysis may throw light on some of the so-called eternal philosophical problems.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , October 1954 , pp. 275 - 296
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1954

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This is the enlarged paper of a lecture given in the Institute for the Unity of Science, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Boston on March 16, 1954.

References

1 F. M. Cornford: “Was the Ionian philosophy scientific?”, Journal of Hellenic Studies LXII, 1942, p. 1—W. Jaeger: Paideia: the Ideals of Greek Culture, Oxford 1939, p. 148.

2 H. Gomperz: “Problems and Methods of Early Greek Science”, Philosophical Studies, Boston 1953, p. 76.

3 K. Th. Fischer: Het heilig huwelik van hemel en aarde. Thesis, Utrecht 1929—A. Klinz: Micros gamos, Halle 1933.

4 N. Copernicus: De revolutionibus orbium caelestium lib. VI, Thoruni 1873, p. 30: concipit interea a sole terra et impregnatur annuo partu.

5 N. Copernicus: l.c., p. 30: Ita profecto tamquam in solio regali sol residens circumagentem gubernat astrorum familiam.

6 N. Copernicus: l.c., p. 30: In medio omnium residet sol. Quis enim in hoc pulcherrimo templo lampadem hanc in alio vel meliori loco poneret, quam unde totum simul possit illuminare. … Tanta nimirum est divina haec Optimi Maximi Opificis fabrica.

7 H. Gomperz: l.c., p. 76.

8 R. Eisler: Weltenmantel und Himmelszelt, Muenchen 1910—E. Baldwin Smith: The Dome. A Study in the History of Ideas, Princeton 1950.

9 H. Gomperz: l.c., p. 77.

10 N. Corpernicus: l.c., p. 24: His etiam accedit, quod nobilior atque divinior conditio immobilitatis existimatur quam mutationis et instabilitatis, quae terrae magis ob hoc quam mundo conveniat.—E. Zilsel: “Copernicus and Mechanics”, Journal of the History of Ideas I, 1940, p. 113.—A similar kind of reasoning was used by Francis Bacon, cf. Ph. Frank: “Metaphysical Interpretations of Science”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science I/2, 1950, pp. 79/80.

11 W. E. Peuckert: Geheimkulte, Heidelberg 1951—F. Hermann: “Zur Beurteilung der Sexualsymbolik bei Naturvoelkern”, Studium Generale VI, 1953, p. 303—J. Winthuis: Das Zweigeschlechterwesen bei den Zentralaustraliern und anderen Voelkern, Leipzig 1928—Less reliable seem to be Th. Inman: Ancient Pagan and Modern Christian Symbolism, London 1869 and J. B. Hannay: Sex Symbolism in Religion, London 1922.

12 F. M. Cornford: The Unwritten Philosophy, Cambridge 1950, p. 41.

13 E. Topitsch: “Der Historismus und seine Ueberwindung”, Wiener Zeitschrift fuer Philosophie, Psychologie, Paedagogik IV/2, 1952, p. 96—J. Piaget: Introduction a l'épistèmologie génétique, torn. II., Paris 1950, p. 282: “Il est frappant, in effet, de constater combien toutes les formes préscientifiques de causalité consistent en assimilations directes du réel aux actions humaines, exécutées individuellement ou surtout en commun”.

14 This process has been observed already by Engels: “The whole Darwinian theory of the struggle for existence is simply the transference from society to animate nature of Hobbes's theory of the war of every man against every man and the bourgeois economic theory of competition, along with the Malthusian theory of population. This feat having been accomplished … the same theories are next transferred back again from organic nature to history and their validity as eternal laws of human society declared to have been proved”. Letter of November 12th, 1875 to the philosopher Lavrov, printed in Marx and Engels on Malthus, ed. by R. L. Meek, London 1953, p. 186/87—H. Th. Fischer, l.c., p. 3 also emphasizes the process of projection and reflection: “Enerzijds werd dus het beeld von de mikrokosmos in de makrokosmos geprojecteerd, terwijl anderzijds deze projectie nu weer gereflecteerd en herkend werd in de menselike instellingen”.

15 E. Baldwin Smith: l.c., p. 79.

16 R. Eisler: l.c., vol. I.

17 H. P. L'Orange: Studies on the Iconography of Cosmic Kingship in the Ancient World, Oslo 1953, p. 18 sqq.—E. Baldwin Smith: l.c., p. 82.

18 Quoted from E. Baldwin Smith, l.c., p. 93.

19 For example: 1 = the universe; 2 = heaven and earth, summer and winter, day and night, male and female; 3 = heaven, earth and man; 4 = the seasons, the cardinal points; 5 = the cardinal points and the center; 6 = 4 + heaven and earth; 7 = the planets, etc. Practically every number can get a “cosmic meaning either by direct reference to astronomical and meteorological happenings or as the sum or the product of other “cosmic” numbers.

20 O. Franke: Geschichte des chinesischen Reiches, Bd. I., Berlin 1930, p. 80/81.

21 H. P. L'Orange: l.c., p. 9.

22 B. Hrozny: Histoire de l'Asie antérieure, Paris 1947, p. 226—A very detailed account on “cosmic” city-planning and folk-planning in the Indo-Aryan period is given by B. B. Dutt: Town Planning in Ancient India, Calcutta 1925, esp. pp. 55–58, 62, 111, 142–164, 205–246, 335/336.

23 R. Heine-Geldern: “Weltbild und Bauform in Suedostasien”, Wiener Beitraege zur Kunst- und Kulturgeschichte Asiens IV, 1930, p. 28 sqq. (a decisively important article)—J. J. M. de Groot: Universismus. Die Grundlage der Religion und Ethik, des Staatswesens und der Wissenschaften Chinas, Berlin 1918, p. 234: “Die Reichshauptstadt sowohl wie der kaiserliche Palast, der ihr Zentrum bildet, sind nach streng universalistischen Grundsaetzen angelegt. Die Hauptstrassen und Tore, Mauern, Hoefe und Hallen, Opferstaetten, Tempel und Altaere stellen fast ausnahmslos Linien dar, die genau sued-noerdlich oder ost-westlich laufen”.—W. Krickeberg: “Bauform und Weltbild im alten Mexiko”, Mythe, Mensch und Umwelt, ed. Ad. E. Jensen, Bamberg 1950, p. 295.

24 L. Frobenius: Monumenta Africana. Der Geist eines Erdteils, Frankfurt 1929, p. 119— G. Dieterlen: Essai sur la religion bambara, Thèse, Paris 1951, p. 232: “Toutes les grandes institutions (dyo) des adultes sont en rapport avec la société enfantine du Ndomo qui reflète l'organisation universelle (espace, éléments). … C'est dire que l'appartenance à la société enfantine du Ndomo constitue une pré-initiation aux sociétés d'adultes, cosmogoniques au premier chef. Les sanctuaires et les champs rituels des quatre premiers dyo sont théoriquement situés au point cardinal correspondant”.—R. Heine-Geldern: l.c., p. 51.

25 R. Heine-Geldern: l.c., p. 53—E. Diez: Entschleiertes Asien, Wien 1943, p. 264.

26 O. Franke: “Der kosmische Gedanke in Philosophie und Staat der Chinesen”, Vortraege der Bibliothek Warburg 1925–1926, Leipzig 1928, p. 1 sqq.—H. G. Creel: Sinism. A Study of the Evolution of the Chinese World-View, Chicago 1929—M. Granet: La religion des Chinois, Paris 1922, p. 17: “Le sentiment que le monde naturel et la société humaine sont étroitement solidaires a été l'élément de fond de toutes les croyances chinoises”. That in the framework of this “solidarity” the natural events were often interpreted by means of sociomorphic analogies, Granet emphasizes again and again, e.g., La pensée chinoise, Paris 1934, p. 343: “La conception du monde physique est entièrement commandée par des representations sociales”.

27 O. Franke: “Der kosmische Gedanke …”, p. 11 sqq.—A. Forke: The World-Conception of the Chinese, London 1925, pp. 79–83.

28 O. Franke: l.c., p. 32 sqq.

29 O. Franke: l.c., p. 30.

30 Th. Jacobsen: “Mesopotamia”, in The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man. An Essay on Speculative Thought in the Ancient Near East, ed. by H. Frankfort, Chicago 1946, p. 127.

31 Th. Jacobsen: l.c., p. 161.

32 R. Eisler: The Royal Art of Astrology, London 1946, p. 165.

33 J. Needham: “Human Laws and Laws of Nature in China and the West”, Journal of the History of Ideas XII, 1951, pp. 3–30; 194–230—That the basic structure of the sociocosmic ideology was substantially the same in China and in the West is emphasized correctly by O. Franke, l.c., p. 40.

34 H. F. Rudd: Chinese Social Origins, Chicago 1928, p. 72 introduce the terms “socialized universe”.—T. W. Rhys Davids: “Cosmic Law in Ancient Thought”, Proceedings of the British Academy VIII, 1917.

35 Th. Jacobsen: l.c., p. 208, 212.

36 H. Kelsen: Society and Nature, Chicago 1943.

37 H. Diels-W. Kranz: Die Fragmente der Vorsokraliker, 6. Aufl., Berlin 1951, Fr. B1, p. 89.

38 W. Jaeger: l.c., pp. 158/59.

39 O. Brunner: “Die alteuropaeische ‘Oekonomik’ “, Zeitschrift fuer Nalionaloekonomie XIII/1, 1950, p. 114.

40 W. Jaeger: l.c., p. 170.

41 W. Krantz: “Kosmos als philosophischer Begriff fruehgriechischer Zeit”, Philologus 93, 1938, p. 430.

42 H. Kelsen: l.c., pp. 233 sqq.

43 F. M. Cornford: The Unwritten Philosophy, Cambridge 1950, p. 19.

44 W. Jaeger: Aristotle, Oxford 1934, p. 384.

45 L. Brunschvicg: L'expérience humaine et la causalité physique, Paris 1922, pp. 137–159 —H. Meyer: Natur und Kunst bei Aristoteles, Paderborn 1919.

46 L. Brunschvicg, l.c., p. 140 has shown quite correctly that the cleavage between the biological regularities and the technomorphic thought-patterns is the crucial problem of the Aristotelian philosophy: “Pour nous, la contradiction est au coeur du système. … Car nous touchons au point où divergent inévitablement les deux tendences dominantes de la philosophie aristotélicienne: l'artificialisme et le naturalisme. Aristote parle tour à tour comme un sculpteur et comme un biologiste” (Italics by Brunschvicg).

47 E. Zilsel: “The Genesis of the Concept of Physical Law”, Philosophical Review LI, 1942, p. 251.

48 H. v. Arnim: Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, vol. II, Lipsiae 1903, pp. 327–332.

49 (Pseud.)—Aristoteles: De mundo, #398 b.

50 H. P. L'Orange: l.c., pp. 124–197—J. Gagé: “Stauros nikopoios. La victoire impériale dans l'empire chrétien”, Revue d'Histoire et de Philosophie religieuses XIII, 1933, p. 370—E. Peterson: Der Monotheismus als politisches Problem; Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der politischen Theologie im Imperium Romanum, Leipzig 1935.

51 L. Brunschvicg: l.c., pp. 166–170—Th. Steinbuechel: Der Zweckgedanke in der Philosophie des Thomas von Aquin, Diss. Koeln, Muenster 1912—A. Mitterer: Die Zeugung der Organismen, insbesondere des Menschen; nach dem Weltbild des hl. Thomas v. Aquin und dem der Gegenwart, Wien 1947.

52 E. Hochstetter: Studien zur Metaphysik und Erkenntnislehre Wilhelms von Ockham, Berlin 1927, p. 172.

53 K. Loewith: Meaning in History, Chicago 1949.

54 S. Hook: The Meaning of Marx, New York 1934, pp. 125–135.

55 J. Verweyen: Das Problem der Willensfreiheit in der Scholastik, Heidelberg 1909, p. 257.

56 H. Sidgwick: The Methods of Ethics, 7th ed., repr. London 1922, pp. 374/75.

57 V. Pareto: The Mind and Society, ed. A. Livingston, New York 1935, ¶401-163—A. Ross: Kritik der sogenannten praktischen Erkenntnis, Leipzig-Kopenhagen 1933—H. Kelsen: General Theory of State and Law, Cambridge/Mass., 1945, pp. 9/10;—: Was ist Gerechtigkeit, Wien 1953, pp. 23–33.

58 H. v. Arnim: l.c., vol. III, 4.

59 V. Pareto: l.c., #442—H. Sidgwick: l.c., p. 344.

60 The history of the empty formulae in moral and political philosophy is still unwritten. Valuable material can be found in the books by H. Kelsen, V. Pareto, A. Ross, H. Sidgwick which are mentioned above and in H. Welzel: Naturrecht und materiale Gerechtigkeit, Goettingen 1951.

61 Cf. footnote 63.

62 H. Kelsen: “Platonic Justice”, Ethics XLVIII, 1937/38, pp. 368–370—S. Hook: “The Quest for ‘Being’ “, Journal of Philosophy L, 1953, p. 712.

63 T. M. Knox translates the sentence Was vernuenftig ist, das ist wirklich, und was wirklich ist, das ist vernuenftig in his edition of Hegels Philosophy of Right, Oxford 1949, p. 10: “What is rational is actual and what is actual is rational”. His explanation in footnote 27 (p. 302) makes it perfectly clear that the distinction between “actuality” and “mere existence” is based primarily on evaluations. Furthermore, it becomes obvious that the whole doctrine which postulates this distinction ultimately depends on the conviction that history or in general the universal process is the working out of the rational purpose of Providence and World-Reason.

64 J. Stelenberger: Die Beziehungen der fruehchristlichen Sittenlehre zur Ethik der Stoa, Muenchen 1933.

65 H. Gomperz: Das Problem der Willensfreiheit, Jena 1907, p. 24.

66 H. Gomperz: “When does the end sanctify the means?”, Philosophical Studies, Boston 1953, p. 182.

67 H. Gomperz: Das Problem der Willensfreiheit may be still regarded as the best analysis of the free-will problem from this point of view.

68 H. A. Wolfson: “Philo on Free Will”, Harvard Theological Review XXXV, 1942, p. 131.

69 On the connections between free will and theodicy cf. F. Billicsich: Das Problem der Theodizee im philosophischen Denken des Abendlandes, Wien 1936.

70 H. Gomperz: “Some simple Thoughts on Freedom and Responsibility”, Philosophical Studies, pp. 163/64.

71 N. Berdyaev: The Origin of Russian Communism, 2nd ed., London 1948, pp. 97–100.

72 E. Topitsch: “Gesetz und Handlung. Zur Kritik der marxistischen Geschichtsphilosophie”, Merkur VIII/4, 1954, pp. 320–336, and the paper mentioned in footnote 13.

73 K. R. Popper: The Open Society and its Enemies, vol. II, 2nd. ed., London 1952.