Heidegger, DiIlhey and lhe Crisis of Hisloricism

Cnntcnts
Acknnw!cdgmcnts xi
Intrnductinn: Mndcrnity and Crisis 1
CHAPTER ONE
Gcrman Phi!nsnphy bctwccn 5cicntism and
Histnricism 21
i. Thc Lcgitimatinn Crisis in Pnst-Hcgc!ian
Phi!nsnphy 21
ii. Thc Cartcsian Anxicty nI Mndcrn
Phi!nsnphy 30
iii. Thc Cu!tura! Crisis nI thc Gcrman
Mandarinatc 37
iv. Crisis-Cnnscinusncss and Cartcsian 5cicncc 47
CHAPTER TWO
Wi!hc!m Windc!band's Taxnnnmy nI thc 5cicnccs 57
i. Thc Ncn-Kantian Turn tn Qucstinns nI
Histnrica! Mcthnd 57
ii. Windc!band's DcIinitinn nI Phi!nsnphy as a
5cicncc nI Va!ucs 63
iii. Thc Rcctnra! Addrcss: "Histnry and Natura!
5cicncc" 66
iv. Thc Eurnpcan C!assiIicatinn nI thc 5cicnccs
(P!atn tn Mi!!) 70
v. Windc!band's Apnria: Thc Lngica! Prnb!cm
nI Mcthnd
and thc Mctaphysica! Prnb!cm nI Frccdnm 78
-vii-

CHAPTER THREE
Hcinrich Rickcrt's Epistcmn!ngy nI Histnrica!
5cicncc 83
i. Rickcrt's Rcspnnsc tn thc Cnntcmpnrary
Phi!nsnphy
nI Crisis 83
ii. Phi!nsnphy as WisscnschaIt cnntra
Wc!tanschauung 86
iii. Rickcrt's Rc!atinnship tn Kant's
Transccndcnta! Idca!ism 89
iv. Thc Mcthnds nI Natura! 5cicncc and Histnry 96
v. Ku!turwisscnschaIt and NaturwisscnschaIt 102
vi. Va!ucs and Ob|cctivity in Histnrica! 5cicncc 104
vii. Causa!ity and Va!ucs: Rickcrt's
Transccndcnta!
Phi!nsnphy and Fricdrich Mcincckc's
Histnricism 108
viii. Rickcrt's Rcspnnsc tn thc Prnb!cms nI
Histnricism 112
ix. Rickcrt's Phi!nsnphy nI Histnry 118
CHAPTER FOUR
Wi!hc!m Di!thcy's Critiquc nI Histnrica! Rcasnn 127
i. Di!thcy's Prn|cct 127
ii. Thc Unity nI thc Intrnductinn tn thc Human
5cicnccs
(1883) 133
iii. Di!thcy's Rc!atinnship tn Pnsitivism,
Idca!ism, and thc
Histnrica! 5chnn! 136
iv. Thc Kantian Fragcstc!!ung and Di!thcy's
"Critiquc nI
Histnrica! Rcasnn" 142
v. Di!thcy and thc Phi!nsnphy nI Crisis 148
vi. Di!thcy's Cnnccpt nI Er!cbnis and Its
Rc!atinn tn thc
Human 5cicnccs 152
vii. Histnricity and Hcrmcncutics 160
viii. Thc Crisis nI Histnrica! Rc!ativism 169
ix. Thc Antinnmy nI "Histnrica!" Rcasnn: Thc
Histnricity nI 176
Truth and thc Dcmand Inr a 5cicntiIic Mcthnd
CHAPTER FIVE
"Thc Timc Is Out nI Jnint": Thc Ynung
Hcidcggcr's Dcstruktinn
nI Histnricism 187
i. Thc Rcvn!utinnary Languagc nI Thcn!ngy:
Kar! Barth's
"Epist!c tn thc Rnmans" 187
ii. Thc Crisis nI Faith 193
-viii-
iii. Thc 5ituatinn nI Univcrsity Phi!nsnphy 203
iv. Hcidcggcr's Practicc nI Dcstruktinn 211
v. Hcidcggcr's Crisis and thc Crisis nI Wcstcrn
Thnught 215
vi. Hcidcggcr's Quarrc! with Ncn-Kantianism 224
vii. Grcck Ontn!ngy and Christian
Kairns: Hcidcggcr's
Dcstruktinn nI thc Mctaphysics nI
Prcscncc 232
viii. Di!thcy's Fragcstc!!ung and Hcidcggcr's
Qucstinn
cnnccrning thc Mcaning nI Histnry 238
ix. Histnricity and Histnry in Bcing and Timc 244
x. Histnricity, Crisis and Dccisinn: Hcidcggcr's
Rctricva!
nI Nictzschc 250
xi. Thc Dangcr nI Thinking in a "Timc nI Nccd" 256
Pnstscript 267
Indcx 289
-ix-








Acknnw!cdgmcnts
During my vork on lhis book I vas generousIy suorled by granls
from lhe Iarharl Ioundalion and lhe Universily of Texas al DaIIas,
SchooI of Arls and Humanilies, vhich enabIed me lo ursue my
vril- ing in Chicago, aIlimore, and Nev York. IarIier, I vas aided
by granls from lhe Deulscher Akademischer Auslauschdiensl al lhe
Uni- versill Tbingen and Universill HeideIberg.
A book of lhis nalure deends on rimary sources. Ior lheir heI
and generosily in roviding me vilh coies of lranscrils from Hei-
degger's earIy vrilings I lhank Irofessor Irilh|of Rodi, Direclor of
lhe DiIlhey IorschungssleIIe and Dr. Iriedrich Hogemann of lhe
HegeI- Archiv, bolh al lhe Ruhr Universill ochum. I aIso lhank
Theodore KisieI for heIing me lrack dovn Heidegger's KasseI
Ieclures. }ohn van uren graciousIy rovided me vilh a drafl of his
ovn forlhcom- ing book on lhe young Heidegger, vhich roved
exlremeIy heIfuI in lracing Heidegger's conneclions lo Lulher and
Chrislian lheoIogy.
Work on lhe book began in Tbingen, in lhe seminars of WaIler
SchuIz and Dieler }hnig, and in conversalions vilh my friends }o-
seh Lavrence, Sleven KaIan, }ohn Macken, and RoIf Maier. I aIso
ove an imorlanl debl lo my former leachers, MichaeI Geyer and
Graves I. Ray, for lheir heI and advice, and eseciaIIy lo Slehen
-xi-
Tonsor, vho gave more lhan vas asked. Ior lheir commenls on lhe
originaI manuscril I lhank Hans KeIIner, Irnsl reisach, Georg Ig-
gers, David IeIIauer, Richard IaImer, Thomas Sheehan, Roberl
Mugerauer, Irederick Holz, and AshIey Carr. CIoser lo home, I
lhank my coIIeagues Tim Redman, GeraId SoIiday, Viclor WorsfoId,
and Irederick Turner for lheir commenls on lhe manuscril, and I
lhank my graduale sludenls for keeing lhe conversalion aIive. I am
aIso gralefuI lo lhe Iale Roberl W. Corrigan. Ieggy IckeIkam
rendered lechnicaI assislance, and HoIda orcherls and Vicki
uIIock heIed lrack dovn obscure lilIes. I aIso lhank my edilor al
CorneII, }ohn Ack- erman, for his alience and baIance, and Teresa
}esionovski and Nancy MaIone for lheir scruuIous coyediling.
Rod CoIlman and Candace UhImeyer offered suorl, ainslak- ing
crilicisms, and limeIy suggeslions, vhich heIed me comIele lhe
book smoolhIy. I lhank lhem for lheir generous friendshi. I aIso
lhank my friends Garlh Monlgomery, Gerlrud Ralh-Monlgomery,
Thomas }. oves, and eseciaIIy Theresa iggs for her |udicious eye
and symalhelic ear. IinaIIy, }oanne La Riccia, }ohn ScanIan, and
Calh- erine ambach rovided advice, crilicism, irony, and humor.
Wilhoul lhem lhe |ourney vouId have been harder lo suslain.
CHARLIS R. AMACH Richardson, Texas







-xii-
Intrnductinn: Mndcrnity and Crisis
Il seems lo be a fundamenlaI lrail of hiIosohicaI
consciousness in lhe nineleenlh cenlury lhal il is no Ionger
conceivabIe aarl from hisloricaI consciousness.
-- Hans-Georg Gadamer, Hcgc|s Oia|cciic
Ivery mere "-ism" is a misunderslanding and lhe dealh of
hislory.
-- Marlin Heidegger, Wnai |s a Tning?
Al lhe beginning of lhe summer semesler in 1939, lhe Ireiburg
hiIosoher Marlin Heidegger oened his Ieclure course by
idenlifying "lhe hislory of lhe era of modern limes, of lhe end of lhe
Wesl" vilh lhe hislory of melahysics. As Heidegger exIained:
"The vhoIe of Weslern lhinking from lhe Greeks lhrough Nielzsche
is melahysicaI lhinking. Iach age of Weslern hislory is grounded
in ils reseclive melahysics." Heidegger focused his allenlion
during lhe semesler eseciaIIy on Nielzsche, vhom he vieved as
"lhe |asi nciapnqsician of lhe Wesl"-lhe hiIosoher vho, in
reciilaling lhe crisis of Weslern melahysics, had heraIded lhe
modern eoch of nihiIism.
1
Nielzsche's vork reresenled lo
Heidegger lhe cIearesl exression of modernisl melahysics in ils
crisis slale, a melahysics vhose hisloricaI Iegilimacy had been
undermined as much by ils ovn lechnoIogicaIscienlific viII lo
over as by hisloricaI exerience ilseIf. Hislory and melahysics--
vhen lhoughl logelher--osed a crisis for Weslern hiIosohy,
Heidegger mainlained, reciseIy insofar as lhey re-
____________________
1
Marlin Heidegger, Nicizscnc, voI. 3, lrans. David IarreII KreII (
Nev York: Harer and Rov, 1987), 7-8, Nicizscnc, voI. 1
(IfuIIingen: Neske, 1961), 479-480. UnIess indicaled olhervise, aII
lransIalions are mine.
-1-
senled lhe inner Iogic of modernily as an eoch reoccuied by
lhoughls of an "end." In hiIosohicaI lerms, Heidegger underslood
modernily as lhe "finaI age,"--an era of decIine, aocaIyse, and
eschaloIogicaI deseralion--lhal vouId bring aboul lhe concIusion
of Weslern cuIlure. And for Heidegger, lhis nihiIislic coIIase vas
symboIized by lhe name "Nielzsche": "The age vhose
consummalion unfoIds in his lhoughl, lhe modern age, is a finaI age.
This means an age in vhich al some oinl and in some vay lhe
hisloricaI decision arises as lo vhelher lhis finaI age is lhe
concIusion of Weslern hislory or lhe counlerarl lo anolher
beginning."
2

Ierhas one couId designale Heidegger's "hisloricaI decision" aboul
"end" and "beginning" in lhe Nielzsche Ieclures as lhe inauguralion
of a oslmodern allilude lovard hislory or, ralher, of a oslmodern
reoccualion vilh lhe "end of hislory." In his efforl in lhese
Ieclures lo Iocale "lhe melahysicaI characler of hislory" vilhin a
discourse aboul lhe hislory of modernily, Heidegger rovided a
devaslaling crilique of lhe grand narralive lradilion of German
hisloricism.
3
ul he aIso succeeded in dismanlIing and
deconslrucling lhe olimislic Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic of Iriedrich
Meinecke Hisicrisn ( 1936) and ils Ialenl melahysicaI assumlions
aboul rogress, meaning, and ralionaIily. As he Ieclured on lhe
hislory of melahysics, Heidegger no Ionger aroached hislory in
lradilionaI hisloricisl lerms as lhe source of aII crealive vaIue or as a
modeI for lhe conlinuily of cuIluraI lradilion (Bi|!ungsgcscnicnic).
Inslead, he inlerreled hisloricism as a vorId viev lhal vas dead
and obsoIele--a mere--remnanl of lhe Wc|ianscnauungspni|cscpnic
lhal had dominaled lhe consciousness of nineleenlh-cenlury
Iuroe. ul for Heidegger lhe dealh of hisloricism signified more
lhan lhe coIIase of a schoIarIy lradilion vilhin German hisloricaI
lhoughl. Il aIso reresenled lhe avareness of an eochaI lransilion
for Iuroean lhinking as a vhoIe and rovided lhe sense of an
ending for lhe melahysicaI lradilion begun vilh lhe earIy Greeks.
The coIIase of hisloricism vas inlimaleIy connecled in Heidegger's
crilique vilh "lhe finaI age" of melahysics, an age vhich had
become surfeiled vilh lhe insighls of hislory and vhich had grovn
veary of lhe nihiIislic lendencies of lradilion ilseIf. Coming al lhe
end of a Iong generalionaI debale aboul lhe meaning of hisloricaI
consciousness, Heidegger's Nielzsche Ieclures offered lo his
____________________
2
Ibid.
3
Marlin Heidegger, Nicizscnc, voI. 4, lrans. David IarreII KreII (
Nev York: Harer and Rov, 1982), 241, Nicizscnc, voI. 2
(IfuIIingen: Neske, 1961), 386.
-2-
Iisleners lhe finaI vord on hisloricism, or al Ieasl an inlerrelalion
lhal underslood il as somelhing "finaI." Considered as anolher
exression of "lhe end of hislory," for Heidegger, hisloricism
embodied lhe melahysics of Weslern lhoughl and ils exhausled
calegories of lemoraIily, Iinearily, and lolaIily vhich reinforced lhe
ercelion of a crisis of modernily.
Hisloricism vas synonymous, in Heidegger's viev, vilh lhe Iogic of
Iinear narralive and diachronic succession vhich aulhorized lhe
humanislic reading of lhe asl from lhe osilion of a lranscendenlaI
sub|ecl: lhe seIf-conscious, aulonomous cogilo of Carlesian
melahysics. In ils crisis mode, hovever, hisloricism imIied more
lhan lhe aearance of doubls aboul a narrovIy hisloriograhicaI
lradilion: il uIlimaleIy exressed lhe bankrulcy of a vhoIe
melahysicaI eoch conslrucled on lhe universaI-ralionaI rinciIes
of hisloricisl melahysics and anlhrooIogy. Insofar as Heidegger's
vork accounls for lhe end of lhe modern age and ils reIalionshi lo
lhe melahysicaI rinciIes of hisloricism, il serves as an imorlanl
lransilion belveen lhe sIiery calegories of modernily and
oslmodernily. The ironic, IayfuI avareness in conlemorary
Iilerary crilicism and hiIosohy concerning "lhe end of hislory"
and "lhe end of hiIosohy" foIIovs. uon lhe coIIase and
imIosion of lradilionaI hisloricisl calegories.
4
Heidegger's crilique
vas decisive in lransforming lhe hisloriograhicaI meaning of lhis
coIIase inlo a hiIosohicaI confronlalion vilh lhe Iegacy of
modernism. ul his vork vas nol lhe aulochlhonic exression of an
isoIaled lemeramenl, il look lhe form of a carefuI and oinled
resonse lo lhe acluaI debales aboul hisloricaI knovIedge and
meaning vilhin conlemorary German hiIosohy. To undersland
lhe fuII significance of Heidegger's crilique, ve viII need lo consider
lhe secific conlexl from vhich il deveIoed.
In vhal foIIovs I roose a kind of geneaIogy of hisloricisl
melahysics vhich siluales il vilhin lhe crisis-consciousness lhal
emerged oul of German hiIosohicaI lhinking in lhe era from 1880
lo 1930. y Iooking al lhe vork of four universily hiIosohers
inlimaleIy connecled vilh lhe "crisis of hisloricism"--WiIheIm
WindeIband ( 18481915), Heinrich Rickerl ( 1863-1936), WiIheIm
DiIlhey ( 1833-1911), and Marlin Heidegger ( 1889-1976)--I endeavor
lo rovide an ac-
____________________
4
Ior a discussion of lhe "end of hislory" debale, lhere are severaI
imorlanl sources: Lulz Nielhammer, Pcsinisicirc, irans. Pairick
Cani||cr ( Icn!cn. Vcrsc, 1992), Wc|jgang Wc|scn , Unscrc
pcsinc!crnc Mc!crnc (Wcinncin. VCH, Acia Hunanicra, 1991),
|rancis |ukuqana , Tnc |n! cj Hisicrq an! inc Iasi Man ( Ncu Ycrk.
|rcc Prcss, 1992), an! Micnac| S. |cin , Kncuing an! Hisicrq ( |inaca,
N.Y.. Ccrnc|| Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1988).
-3-
counl of lhe aorias and conlradiclions vilhin earIy-
lvenlielh-cenlury German hiIosohy vhich heIed define il as a
disciIine in crisis.
5
I have chosen lhis grou of hiIosohers
because il seems lo me lhal lheir vork reresenls an imorlanl shifl
in modern German
____________________
5
One of lhe ecuIiar ironies aboul lhe comIex usage of lhe lerm
hisloricism is lhal il does nol become acceled unliI il reaches lhe
end of ils vilaI hase in lhe years afler lhe Greal War in Germany.
As Herberl SchndeIbach exIains in Pni|cscpnq in Gcrnanq, 1831-
1933 ( Cambridge: Cambridge Universily Iress, 1984), 34:
"AIlhough lhe lerm hisloricism may be lraced back lo very earIy
in lhe nineleenlh cenlury, il firsl came inlo generaI use around lhe
beginning of our ovn cenlury: Iike many '-isms,' il vas firsl used
lo denounce--il signified somelhing lo be overcome, somelhing
vhich vas in crisis, somelhing oulmoded."
The characlerizalion of a "crisis of hisloricism" gained vide
accelance lhrough lhe earIy vork of Irnsl TroeIlsch, Ocr
Hisicrisnus un! scinc Prc||cnc ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1922) and Ocr
Hisicrisnus un! scinc U|cruin!ung ( erIin: Heise, 1924), as veII as
his essay "Die Krisis des Hislorismus," Oic Ncuc |un!scnau 33
(}une 22): 572-590, see aIso lhe essays of Iriedrich Meinecke in Zur
Tnccric un! Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcscnicnic ( Slullgarl: KoehIer, 1959) and
lhe fuII-Ienglh sludy of lhe sub|ecl by KarI Heussi, Oic Krisis !cs
Hisicrisnus ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1932). Irom ils earIy beginnings,
lhe lerm hisloricism has been lhe sub|ecl of much debale and
confusion. Wilh lhe recenl deveIomenl of a socaIIed nev
hisloricism among Iilerary schoIars such as Slehen GreenbIall (
Pcucr cj |crns in inc |ng|isn |cnaissancc |Norman: Universily of
OkIahoma Iress, 1982j), WesIey Morris ( Tcuar!s a Ncu
Hisicricisn | Irincelon, N.}.: Irincelon Universily Iress, 1972j),
and olhers, lhe confusion has been comounded. I choose
hisloricism (ralher lhan lhe lerm nisicrisn adoled by }. I.
Anderson in his lransIalion of Iriedrich Meinecke Hisicrisn |
London: RoulIedge, 1972j) as lhe IngIish equivaIenl for lhe.
German lerm Hislorismus. In using lhis IabeI I vish lo avoid aII
associalion vilh lhe vork of KarI Ioer , vho in Tnc Pctcriq cj
Hisicricisn ( London: RoulIedge, 1957) uses lhe lerm lo designale
"an aroach lo lhe sociaI sciences vhich assumes lhal hisloricaI
rediclion is lheir rinciaI aim" (3) and vhich allemls lo
discover "allerns" or "Iavs" of hisloricaI evoIulion.
There is reaIIy no universaIIy agreed-uon movemenl lhal can be
caIIed "hisloricism." As Terrence Tice and Thomas SIavens have
argued, lhe lerm refers lo "a diverse sel of inleresls, robIems and
soIulions", nonelheIess, lhey offer a vorking definilion of
hisloricism as "a lendency among severaI eminenl German
hiIosohers and hislorians in lhe nineleenlh cenlury: (1) lo viev
human evenls eseciaIIy in lheir singuIarily, (2) lo lry lo
undersland lhe diverse reIalionshis of lhese evenls lo generaI bul
changing allerns or lo evoIulionary lrends bul in a dynamic and
concrele manner, (3) lo examine aII human roducls in lhis
hisloricaI fashion, and (4) lo affirm for such inquirysomelimes for
lhe sociaI sciences generaIIy, on lhis basis--a scienlific slalus
dislinclIy differenl from lhal of lhe naluraI sciences." See Tice and
SIavens, |cscarcn Gui!c ic Pni|cscpnq ( Chicago: American Library
Associalion, 1983), 428-429.
WaIler SchuIz, in his magisleriaI vork Pni|cscpnic in !cr tcran!cricn
Wc|i (IfuIIingen: Neske, 1972), offers a generaI accounl of
hisloricism as "lhe radicaI breakdovn of sura-lemoraI syslems
of norms and lhe increasing knovIedge lhal ve musl undersland
ourseIves as hisloricaI beings righl lo lhe inner core of our
humanily." He goes on lo say lhal hisloricism is lhe
comrehension "of hislory as lhe fundamenlaI rinciIe in human
knovIedge and in lhe underslanding of lhe human vorId. This
means-fundamenlaIIy--lhal aII being can and musl onIy be
underslood in lerms of ils 'hisloricily'" (492-493). Ior a Iinguislic
hislory of lhe lerm, see Irich Rolhacker, "Das Worl Hislorismus,"
Zciiscnriji jur !cuiscnc Wcrijcrscnung 16 ( 1960): 3-6, and Gunler
SchoIz, "Hislorismus," in Hisicriscncs Wcricr|ucn !cr Pni|cscpnic,
tc|. 3 ( Basc|. Scnua|c, 1974), 11411147. A|sc nc|pju| arc Gccrg |ggcrs,
Hisicricisn, in Tnc Oiciicnarq cj inc Hisicrq cj |!cas ( Ncu Ycrk.
Scri|ncrs, 1973), 456-464, Hans-Gccrg Ga!ancr, Hisicrisnus, in
-4-
hiIosohy vhich coincides vilh lhe generalionaI ercelion of a
"crisis in lhe sciences." olh WindeIband and Rickerl, for examIe,
offered Neo-Kanlian soIulions lo lhe crisis, soIulions lhal seem
loday lo be Iimiled by lheir ovn hisloricaI assumlions. ul il is
reciseIy in grasing lhese Iimils, I beIieve, lhal ve can begin lo
undersland and more cIearIy define our ovn oslmodern
redicamenl, caughl as ve are in our melahysicaI alliludes lovard
science and hisloricaI definilions of lime. The insighls of DiIlhey and
Heidegger go far lovard heIing us lranscend lhe narrovIy
eislemoIogicaI focus of NeoKanlianism, roviding a vay of
reconceiving lhe ro|ecl of modernily from vilhin lhe horizon of
hisloricaI Iife exerience. In lheir vork, lhe Iimils of hisloricisl
lhinking are confronled by lhe roduclive ossibiIilies of a nev
kind of crisis-consciousness, ossibiIilies lhal go beyond lradilionaI
hisloricisl queslions aboul scienlific ob|eclivily, cuIluraI reIalivism,
lhe aulonomy of lhe human sciences, and lhe meaning of hisloricaI
vaIue lo engage lhe vhoIe robIem of hiIosohicaI modernily.
yy focusing on lhe exIicilIy pni|cscpnica| meaning of crisis and
crisis-consciousness in WindeIband's and Rickerl's eislemoIogy of
hisloricaI science, DiIlhey's crilique of hisloricaI reason, and
Heidegger's deslruclion of lhe hislory of onloIogy, I vanl lo shov
hov lhe crisis of hisloricism can be read as an exression of lhe
hiIosohicaI conlradiclions vilhin modernily ilseIf. As I see il,
hisloricism reresenls nol onIy lhe deveIomenl of a cuIluraI vorId
viev or a rocess of rofessionaIizalion vilhin a secific academic
disciIine, il aIso aulhorizes a melahysicaI reading of hislory vhich
bolh delermines and undermines modern and oslmodern lhoughl.
Modernism and oslmodernism, I viII argue, are essenliaIIy
reaclive in characler, lhal is, bolh conslilule resonses lo a
reviousIy eslabIished hisloricaI narralive, even vhere lhis narralive
lhrealens lhe slabiIily of modern or
____________________
|c|igicn in Gcscnicnic un! Gcsc||scnaji, tc|. 3 ( Tu|ingcn. Mcnr, 1959),
369-370, Wa|!cnar Bcsscn , Hisicrisnus, in Oas |iscncr Icxikcn.
Gcscnicnic (|rankjuri. |iscncr, 1961), 102116, Harrq |iiicr,
Hisicricisn, Hisicrisn, in Oiciicnarq cj Ccnccpis in Hisicrq
(Wcsipcri, Ccnn.. Grccnucc!, 1986), 183-187, Gunic|j Hcrz|crg,
Hisicrisnus. Wcri, Bcgrijj, Prc||cn, un! !ic pni|cscpniscnc
Bcgrun!ung !urcn Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, janr|ucn jur Gcscnicnic 25 (
1982). 259-304, Wc|jgang Har!iuig, Gcscnicnisscnrci|ung zuiscncn
A|icurcpa un! nc!crncr Wc|i. jacc| Burcknar!i in scincr Zcii
(Gciiingcn. Van!cnnccck c |uprccni, 1974), csp. 201-243, Aric
Na|rings, Hisicrisnus a|s Para|qsc !cr Gcscnicnic, Arcnit jur
Ku|iurgcscnicnic 65 ( 1983). 157-212, Oiic G. Ocx|c, Hisicrisnus.
U|cr|cgungcn zur Gcscnicnic !cs Pnancncns un! !cs Bcgrijjs,
janr|ucn !cr Braunscnucigiscncn Wisscnscnaji|icncn Gcsc||scnaji (
1986). 119-155, an! Vc|kcr Siccn||cck, Transjcrnaiicncn !cs
Hisicrisnus ( Municn. |ink, 1991).
-5-
oslmodern inlerrelalions. Thus, for examIe, vhen }oyce's
Slehen DedaIus exeriences hislory as a nighlmare from vhich he
is lrying lo avake or vhen Yeals iIgrim in "The Second Coming"
underslands il as a narralive vhose cenler cannol hoId, lhey are
bolh reacling lo a lradilion vhose meaning and reIevance have
radicaIIy been caIIed inlo queslion. Modern and oslmodern visions
of hislory share lhis sense of anxiely and inslabiIily, lhal lhe asl is a
Iosl vhoIe lhal lhrealens lo break aarl inlo anarchic fragmenls al
any momenl. olh are consliluled as resonses lo a hisloricisl
reading of hislory vhich firsl eslabIishes a unidireclionaI
melahysics of lime as lhe basis of hisloricaI rogress. Thus, for
examIe, if modernism lauloIogicaIIy reaffirms lhe highesl cuIluraI
vaIue as "modern"--nameIy, lhal vhich is nev--il can do so onIy on
lhe basis of ctcrccning vhal is asl, vhal recedes lhe modern.
OnIy afler one has aIready eslabIished a narralive of unily, meaning,
and lolaIily can one begin lo seak of fragmenlalion, crisis, or
rulure. The hisloricisl reading of hislory offered |usl such a
narralive of direclionaIily and urose, a kind of secuIarized
lheoIogy of cause and effecl vhich resumed lhe coherence of aII
evenls. Ior hiIosohicaI hisloricisls such as HegeI, hisloricaI
meaning vas achieved lhrough lhe cunning of reason, vhereas for
lheoIogicaI hisloricisls such as Ranke, universaI hislory vas
organized according lo rovidenliaI design. In lhis affirmalion of
lhe asl as somelhing leIeoIogicaIIy or even eschaloIogicaIIy
direcled, lradilionaI hisloricism |uslified lhe agonislic Iogic of evenls
as a narralive of lhe viclors and lhe defealed. Wilh lhe coIIase of
lhe hisloricisl vision during lhe eriod from 1880 lo 1930, hovever--
vilh Nielzsche's rocIamalion of lhe "dealh of God," SengIer
Mcnscncn!ancrung" ("lviIighl of humanily"), HusserI Crisis cj inc
|urcpcan Scicnccs, TroeIlsch "Crisis of Hisloricism," and lhe oslvar
academic manifeslos oulIining lhe coIIase of Weslern civiIizalion-
lhis Iinear narralive of meaning and rogress vas decisiveIy broken.
Whal redominaled in ils slead vas a radicaI skelicism aboul lhe
uIlimale meaning of hislory and a nev crisis-rheloric and crisis-
consciousness.
Crisis, in ils originaI Greek sense, denoles a sifling or searaling lhal
Ieads one lo a |udgmenl or oinl of decision.
6
In Hiocrales and
GaIen lhe lerm is used lo denole lhe lurning oinl in a disease. y
____________________
6
CharIes S. HaIsey, |iqnc|cgq cj Iaiin an! Grcck (Nev RocheIIe,
N.Y.: Caralzas, 1983), 57, and AIois Vanicek, Griccniscni
Iaiciniscncs |iqnc|cgiscncs Wcricr|ucn ( Leizig: Teubner, 1887),
1088.
-6-
conlrasl, lhe crisis of hisloricism reresenls a |udgmenl aboul a
differenl maller: lhal is, a lurning avay from or break vilh lhe
dominanl nineleenlh-cenlury hiIosohy of hisloricaI rogress, vilh
ils execlalions of meaning and order. One couId argue lhal lhis
crisis in German hisloricaI lhinking dales from lhe ubIicalion in
1874 of Nielzsche's second essay from Uniinc|q Mc!iiaiicns, "On lhe
Uses and Disadvanlages of Hislory for Life." ul no one lexl can
serve as lhe oinl of origin, lhe ercelion of crisis emerged as a
reaclion lo a comIex sel of assumlions, vaIues, lradilions, and
cuIluraI cIiches lhal redominaled in Iale-nineleenlh-
cenluryGermany. And yel Nielzsche calured more erfeclIy lhan
his conlemoraries lhe mood of senescence and assivily in
hisloricisl ideoIogy. Ior Nielzsche, hisloricism vas a disease of
modern consciousness vhich foslered a conlemIalive, research-
orienled ersonaIily. Dravn by lhe aIexandrine Ieasures of lexluaI
sludy, Nielzsche's hislorian became a assive observer immersed in
lhe archives, unabIe lo acl or creale, having been reduced lo a mere
"eunuch in lhe harem of hislory."
7
ul even as Nielzsche fuIminaled
againsl lhe "hisloricaI sickness" of lhe nineleenlh cenlury, lhe
inslilulionaI over of hisloricisl ideas grev, exlending lheir
infIuence lo every branch of lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn, or "human
sciences," in Germany. Il vas nol unliI afler lhe Greal Wai, vhen lhe
carnage broughl on by lhe nev lechnoIogies had resuIled in
videsread oIilicaI chaos, economic coIIase, and sociaI
disIocalion, lhal lhere occurred a vhoIesaIe dissoIulion of hisloricisl
lhinking. IoIIoving lhe "calaslrohe of 1918" in Germany, OsvaId
SengIer Occ|inc cj inc Wcsi ( 1918) and Theodor Lessing Hisicrq as
inc Bcsicua| cj Mcaning cn inc Mcaning|css ( 1919) echoed lhe
generalionaI mood of Iosl failh and exressed in exemIary fashion
lhe crisis-menlaIily of modernism.
As a hisloricaI calegory, modernism reresenls lhis heighlened
avareness lhal crisis can serve as a modeI for cuIluraI ercelion. Il
suggesls, hovever, far more lhan an aeslhelic reference for images
of fragmenlalion and disersaI. Modernism aIso signifies a nev
underslanding of lime and narralive. In modernisl lime, evenls no
Ionger cohere, lheir unily is disruled by a break in lhe Iine of
hislory. As lhe chain of evenls is severed by lhe ercelion of crisis,
lhe idea of crisis ilseIf subslilules as lhe nev source of hisloricaI
inlerrelalion.
____________________
7
Iriedrich Nielzsche, Uniinc|q Mc!iiaiicns, lrans. R. }. HoIIingdaIe (
Cambridge: Cambridge Universily Iress, 1983).
-7-
y undermining lhe Iogic of succession and conlinuily, il chaIIenges
lhe hisloricisl narralive of rogressive and unilary lime. Hence, if by
lhe lerm hisloricism ve undersland a reoccualion vilh and
devolion lo lhe asl, and vilh everylhing oId and anliquarian, lhen
lhe idea of modernism can be besl described, as Gianni Vallimo
exIains, "as an era of overcoming and of lhe nev vhich raidIy
grovs oId and is immedialeIy reIaced by somelhing sliII never."
8

Vallimo ersuasiveIy argues in Tnc |n! cj Mc!crniiq lhal Nielzsche's
narralive of nihiIism serves as an imorlanl calaIysl for modern and
oslmodern allemls lo lhink of hislory in lerms of crisis. Ior
Vallimo, lhe coIIase of aII lranscendenl and surahisloricaI vaIues
brings vilh il a nihiIislic, oslhisloricaI form of lhinking: "Since lhe
nolion of lrulh no Ionger exisls, and foundalion no Ionger funclions
(insofar as lhere is no Ionger a foundalion for lhe beIief in
foundalion . . .) lhere can be no vay oul of modernily lhrough a
crilicaI overcoming, for lhe Ialler is a arl of modernily ilseIf. Il lhus
becomes cIear lhal an aIlernalive means musl be soughl and lhis is
lhe momenl lhal couId be designaled as lhe momenl of lhe birlh of
oslmodernily in hiIosohy."
9

In lhe avanl-garde movemenls al lhe lurn of lhe cenlury, lhe
modernisl reoccualion vilh overcoming lradilion and felishizing
lhe nev aears as a boId re|eclion of lhe asl. And yel even as
modernism allemls lo overcome lhe basic hisloricisl osilion, ve
can see lhal il is sliII lied lo lhe fundamenlaI lenels of hisloricism, if
onIy negaliveIy. "Hisloricism characlerizes modernily," in Vallimo's
vords, because in eslabIishing a melahysicaI vision of lime as ure
lemoraI succession, il ersislenlIy undergirds, and reinforces, lhe
modernisl Iogic of overcoming.
10
In so doing il inscribes lhe hislory
of modernily as lhe hislory of melahysics and oens lhe alh for
lhe dissoIulion of melahysics and lhe "end of hislory." Modernisl
lhoughl is unclualed by a ecuIiarIy hisloricisl underslanding of
lime as a Iinear, rosary bead sequence of cause and effecl. This vay
of lhinking aboul lhe asl roduces a kind of "neulraI lime," a lime
in vhich aII evenls are measured ob|ecliveIy, much as carlograhy
measures sace according lo emiricaI canons of dislance and
Iocalion. "Imly, homogeneous lime," as WaIler en|amin caIIs il,
lhe lime of carlograhy and malhemalics, rovides lhe uIlimale
conlexl for sus-
____________________
10
Gianni Vallimo, "The Ind of Hislory," Cnicagc |cticu 35, no. 4 (
1987): 25.
8
Gianni Vallimo, Tnc |n! cj Mc!crniiq, lrans. }on Snyder (
aIlimore: }ohns Hokins Universily Iress, 1988), 166.
9
Ibid., 167.
-8-
laining lhe vaIue of neulraIily, il creales lhe iIIusion of a hisloricaI
conlinuum vilh equaIIy measured inlervaIs vhere one can, as
LeooId von Ranke exressed il, "see vilh unbiased eyes lhe
rogress of universaI hislory."
11
CIassicaI hisloricism vas
commilled lo lhe ideas of vaIue-free |udgmenl and neulraI
erseclive as lhe very essence of hisloricaI ob|eclivily. ul lhese
vaIues vere lhemseIves ossibIe onIy on lhe basis of a neulraI
lemoraIily lhal aIIoved for anolher iIIusion: a causaIIy
demonslrabIe conlinuum of hisloricaI effecls. Modernism breaks
vilh cIassicaI hisloricism in lhal lhe modern exerience of hislory is
acausaI, disconlinuous, and ironic. Ior lhe modernisl, lhe lexl of
hislory reads more Iike a nevsaer divided inlo unreIaled coIumns
lhan Iike a unilary narralive. In a chaler from his book |sscrc,
sicria, c |inguaggic in Hci!cggcr, "The Deslruclion of Hisloricism,"
Gianni Vallimo lries lo shov lhe cIose conneclion belveen lhe
dissoIulion of hisloricisl calegories--calegories eslabIished by a
melahysics lhal underslands lime as somelhing inherenlIy
direclionaI-and lhe crisis of modernily. Ior Vallimo, Heidegger's
deslruclion of a hisloricisl nolion of lime conslilules an
eschaloIogicaI break vilh lhe "redominance of lhe asl."
12
This
break--or crisis--in Heidegger's lhinking is nol mereIy "lhe
aearance of a differenl slage of hislory," vriles Vallimo, bul lhe
end of hislory ilseIf: oslmodern deslruclion offers "nol onIy
somelhing nev in reIalion lo lhe modern, bul aIso a dissoIulion of
lhe calegory of lhe nev . . . as an exerience of 'lhe end of hislory.'"
13
As Vallimo inlerrels il, oslmodernism is comIicilous in lhe
dissoIulion of hisloricism because il marks lhe end of lhe HegeIian
ageanl of vorId hislory. Hence, Vallimo concIudes, "lhe
oslmodern medilalion on hislory can onIy be a sorl of 'revised,'
dislorled form of hisloricism."
14

Vallimo's vork is exemIary in shoving lhe kind of conneclions one
can make belveen lhe modern/oslmodern reading of crisis and lhe
dissoIulion of hisloricism. ul his is onIy one voice among many.
Thinkers such as }ean-Iranois Lyolard and }acques Derrida have
aIso seized on lhe robIems of crisis and dissoIulion as vays of
inlerrel-
____________________
11
WaIler en|amin, |||uninaiicns, lrans. Harry Zohn ( Nev York:
Schocken, 1969), 261, and LeooId von Ranke, Tnc Sccrci cj Wcr|!
Hisicrq, lrans. Roger Wines ( Nev York: Iordham Universily
Iress, 1981), 259.
12
Gianni Vallimo, |sscrc, sicria, c |inguaggic in Hci!cggcr ( Genoa:
Marielli, 1989), quoled in DanieI arbiero, "A Weakness for
Heidegger: The German Rool of II Iensiero DeboIe," Ncu Gcrnan
Criiiquc 55 ( 1992): 160-161.
13
Vallimo, |n! cj Mc!crniiq, 4.
14
Ibid., 176. Comare lhe lransIalion in arbiero, "Weakness for
Heidegger,"162.
-9-
ing "lhe oslmodern condilion." Lyolard, for examIe, describes
oslmodernism as an "increduIily lovard melanarralive" vhich he
Iinks lo lhe obsoIescence of InIighlenmenl-ideaIisl hiIosohy of
hislory and lhe "crisis of melahysicaI hiIosohy."
15
Derrida, loo,
ursues lhe underIying conneclion belveen lhe Iinear scheme of
lime in modernisl lhinking and lhe melahysicaI narralive of
hislory, lhemes lhal he finds in Heidegger and Nielzsche. In
Pcsiiicns, Derrida vriles, "The melahysicaI characler of lhe concel
of hislory is nol onIy Iinked lo Iinearily, bul lo an enlire syslem of
imIicalions (leIeoIogy, eschaloIogy, eIevaling and inleriorizing
accumuIalion of meaning . . . a cerlain concel of conlinuily, of
lrulh, elc.)."
16
In his deconslruclion of "hislory," Derrida shovs hov
Iinear lemoraIily and lhe discourse il roduces--lhe "archeo-
leIeoIogicaI rogram of aII Iuroean discourse aboul Iuroe"--is
inlimaleIy bound u vilh crisis-lhinking. In Tnc Oincr Hca!ing, he
exIicilIy Iinks lhe consciousness of "direclion" (scns) lo "lhe
lradilion of modernily al lhe momenl and as lhe very momenl of
vhal vas caIIed crisis. . . 'lhe crisis of lhe Iuroean sciences' or 'lhe
crisis of Iuroean humanily': lhe leIeoIogy lhal guides lhe anaIysis
of hislory and lhe very hislory of lhis crisis, of lhe recovery of lhe
lranscendenlaI lheme in (and since) Descarles."
17
In deconslrucling
lhe exIicil calegories of a lolaIizing, melahysicaI vision of hislory,
Derrida disIaces hislory vilh a IuraIily of hislories and inscribes
on lhe aIimsesl of lhe asl lhe helerogeneous discourses of lhe
fulure.
Like Derrida and Lyolard, many olher oslmodern lhinkers have
become reoccuied by robIems connecled vilh lhe erceived
dissoIulion or dismanlIing of lhe hisloricisl |ragcsic||ung.
18
Irom a
osl-
____________________
15
}ean-Iranois Lyolard, Tnc Pcsinc!crn Ccn!iiicn, lrans. Geoff
enninglon ( MinneaoIis: Universily of Minnesola Iress, 1984),
xxiv.
16
}acques Derrida, Pcsiiicns, lrans. AIan ass ( Chicago: Universily
of Chicago Iress, 1971), 56-57.
17
}acques Derrida, Tnc Oincr Hca!ing, lrans. MichaeI Naas and
IascaIe-Ann rauIl ( Ioominglon: Indiana Universily Iress,
1992), 27 and 33.
18
Throughoul lhis book I use lhe lerm |ragcsic||ung lo denole a
arlicuIar vay of "osing a queslion" vhich delermines a basic
alh of inquiry and mode of queslioning. ul il invoIves much
more. A hiIosohicaI lerm used oflen in German schoIarshi, il
means "lhe vay one aroaches lhe queslion," "lhe vay one
slruclures lhe inquiry," "lhe aradigm one emIoys," and lhe Iike.
Of course, lhe vay one asks a queslion oflen delermines lhe vay
one ansvers il, and so vhen I use lhis secific German lerm, I am
allemling lo shov lhal lhe uaq one oses a queslion is indeed
nol onIy a ersonaI or sub|eclive robIem bul aIso invoIves a
vhoIe vay of lhinking, a vhoIe sel of (somelimes unsoken)
generalionaI assumlions, and oflen refIecls lhe cuIluraI Iimils,
biases, and re|udices of a secific form of inquiry. I vish lo
emhasize lhal lhe very osing of a queslion can slruclure lhe
alh of inquiry and delermine ils
-10-

modern erseclive, hisloricism imIies far more lhan a research
melhodoIogy for lhe sludy of lhe asl. Il signifies a melahysicaI
reading of hislory vhich is founded on lhe hislory of melahysics,
in olher vords, il reresenls a riviIeging of melahysicaI concels
of lime, narralive, order, succession, conlinuily, and lolaIily vhich
derive from lhe singIe-oinl erseclive of Carlesian and Kanlian
sub|eclivily and ils corresonding insislence on lhe vaIues of
ob|eclivily, melhodoIogicaI cIarily, and scienlific lrulh. These
oslmodernisl lhinkers undersland lhal lhe crisis of modernism
from vhich lhey are lrying lo recover (in Heidegger's sense of
Vcruin!ung) is inlimaleIy bound u vilh lhe melahysicaI
assumlions of hisloricism.
19
In his sludy Tnc Ncu Hisicricisn,
vhich focuses on oslmodern Iilerary lheory, rook Thomas has
lried "lo shov lo vhal exlenl oslslrucluraIism, and eseciaIIy
deconslruclion, is a hisloricaI resonse lo a crisis in hisloricism from
vhich Weslern lhoughl has nol yel recovered."
20
On Thomas's
reading, lhe crisis of hisloricism confronls lhe oslmodern crilic as
an occasion for relhinking lhe basic calegories of hiIosohicaI
modernily, calegories lhal underIay lhe modeI of scienlific cerlainly
foslered in lhe earIy modern era.
In my inlerrelalion of lhe vork of Rickerl, WindeIband, DiIlhey,
and Heidegger, I roose lo exIore lhe kinds of hiIosohicaI
conneclions belveen hisloricisl lhinking and lhe crisis of modernily
vhich Thomas's vork aIIudes lo. I have chosen lhe secific eriod in
German academic hiIosohy belveen 1880 and 1930 because il
seems lo me lhal in lhe eislemoIogicaI ro|ecls of lhe Neo-Kanlians
and DiIlhey, and lheir subsequenl dismanlIing in lhe earIy vork of
Heidegger, one can cIearIy lrace lhe formalion of a crisis-lhinking
lhal undergirds and delermines lhe basic |ragcsic||ung of modern
and oslmodern discourse.
Mosl schoIarshi delaiIing lhe hisloricisl lradilion has been
hisloriograhicaIIy focused. Il has concenlraled IargeIy on lhe
oIilicaI, ideoIogicaI, and nalionaIisl resuosilions of German
hislorians and
____________________
basic aroach. Ior examIe, lhe sevenleenlh-cenlury lradilion of
earIy modern science adoled a secific lrulh modeI based on
melhod, verificalion, cerlilude, causaIily, and Carlesian doubl.
Laler-nineleenlh-cenlury lhinkers, crilicaI of Descarles and lhe
earIy modern hiIosohy of science, re|ecled many of lheir
findings bul sliII adoled lheir |ragcsic||ung. Il is, I beIieve, lhe
|ragcsic||ung lhal unifies a lradilion and nci lhe ansvers al vhich
il arrives.
19
Ior a oslmodern aroach lo lhe robIem of Vcruin!ung, see
Gianni Vallimo, "Olimislic NihiIism," Ccnncn Kncu|c!gc 1, no. 3
( 1992): 37-44.
20
rook Thomas, Tnc Ncu Hisicricisn ( Irincelon, N.}.: Irincelon
Universily Iress, 1991), 35.
-11-
lheir allemls lo deveIo a more rofessionaIized melhod of
research vilhin lhe "disciIinary malrix" of a hisloricaI
|acnuisscnscnaji. Hislorians such as Georg Iggers and }rn Rsen
have maslerfuIIy anaIyzed lhe sociaI and inslilulionaI characler of
hisloricisl lhinking, allemling lo Iocale ils scienlific and ralionaI
eIemenls in ils research melhods and inlerrelive rinciIes. Rsen,
in facl, argues lhal an excessive focus on melhod Ied lo lhe
eslabIishmenl of a "aradigmalic, disciIinary form" of hisloricaI
science.
21
He finds lhal hisloricisl lhinkers vere molivaled by lhe
romise of a nev Iogic of research ( Hisicrik) vhich funclioned as
lhe slandard of schoIarIy exceIIence vilhin academic
hisloriograhy. More recenlIy, schoIars such as Ieler ReiII, MichaeI
Irmarlh, Horsl WaIler Ianke, and Iriedrich }aeger have buiIl on
lhe vork of Rsen and Iggers and have lried lo make conneclions
belveen hisloricism and lhe scienlific aims of lhe InIighlenmenl.
Iarl of lheir achievemenl has been lo shov "hov deeIy hisloricism
is rooled in lhe InIighlenmenl nolvilhslanding ils ovn disavovaI
of lhis reIalionshi."
22
As a resuIl of lheir carefuI vork,
conlemorary hislorians have finaIIy been abIe lo chaIIenge
TroeIlsch's and Meinecke's robIemalic cIaims aboul lhe dee-
rooled oosilion belveen InIighlenmenl and hisloricisl lhinking.
Their efforls have done much lo shov hov hisloricism vas
comIeleIy deendenl on ideaIs of scienlific lhinking from lhe earIy
modern era, ideaIs dominaled by Carlesian-Kanlian nolions of
ralionaIily, consciousness, melhodoIogicaI access lo lrulh, and
hiIosohicaI cerlilude. These hislorians have reviousIy
demonslraled lhal as lhe hisloricisl lradilion look rool in lhe earIy-
nineleenlh-cenlury German
____________________
21
Horsl WaIler Ianke and }rn Rsen, eds. Vcn !cr Aujk|arung zun
Hisicrisnus ( Iaderborn: Schningh, 1984), 15-57. See aIso Georg
Iggers, Tnc Gcrnan Ccnccpiicn cj Hisicrq ( MiddIelovn, Conn.:
WesIeyan Universily Iress, 1986), and Iriedrich }aeger and }rn
Rsen, Gcscnicnic !cs Hisicrisnus ( Munich: eck, 1992).
22
Georg Iggers, "Reviev of Von der AufkIrung zum Hislorismus,"
Hisicrq an! Tnccrq 1 ( 1987): 114-121. Some of lhe besl sources for a
crilique of lhe TroeIlsch-Meinecke lhesis of hisloricism incIude
Hans-Irich deker el aI., eds., Aujk|arung un! Gcscnicnic
(Gllingen: Vandenhoeck & Rurechl, 1986), Herberl
SchndeIbach, Vcrnunji un! Gcscnicnic ( Irankfurl: Suhrkam,
1987), Ieler ReiII, Tnc Gcrnan |n|ignicnncni an! inc |isc cj
Hisicricisn ( erkeIey: Universily of CaIifornia Iress, 1975), ReiII,
"Narralion and Slruclure in Lale Iighleenlh-Cenlury HisloricaI
Thoughl," Hisicrq an! Tnccrq 25 ( 1986): 286-298, and ReiII, "Oic
Gcscnicnisuisscnscnaji un !ic Miiic !cs 18. janrnun!cris," in RudoIf
Vierhaus , ed., Wisscnscnajicn in Zciia|icr !cr Aujk|arung
(Gllingen: Vandenhoeck & Rurechl, 1985), 163-193. See aIso lhe
essays coIIecled in Georg Iggers and }ames IoveII , eds., Iccpc|!
tcn |ankc an! inc Snaping cj inc Hisicrica| Oiscip|inc ( Syracuse,
N.Y.: Syracuse Universily Iress, 1990), Hans SchIeier, "Icisiungcn
un! Grcnzcn !cs i!ca|isiiscncn !cuiscncn Hisicrisnus," Zciiscnriji jur
Gcscnicnisuisscnscnaji 35 ( 1987): 955970, and Georg Iggers, "The
Universily of Gllingen, 1760-1800, and lhe Transformalion of
HisloricaI SchoIarshi," Sicria !c||a Sicricgrajia 2 ( 1982): 11-37.
-12-
universily, vilh lhe dominance of HumboIdl, Ranke, Niebuhr, and,
Ialer, Droysen, ils melhodoIogicaI imeralive lovard ob|eclive
research--lhe basic lheme of Rsen's vork--vas vedded lo a
fundamenlaIIy melahysicaI failh in lhe meaning and urose of
hisloricaI deveIomenl as somelhing individuaI, unique, and
unreealabIe.
CIassicaI hisloricism in lhis sense knev no vaIue reIalivism bul
ralher vas commilled lo lhe elhicaI unfoIding of God's uIlimale
Ian vhich manifesled ilseIf in Ranke's divinalory Wc|igcscnicnic,
HumboIdl's siriluaI |!ccn, Droysen's "moraI overs" (siii|icnc
Macnic), and HegeI's ChrisloIogicaI reveIalion of Gcisi. In lhe Ialer
eriod afler 1880, hovever, vilh lhe chaIIenge of nev osilivisl
modeIs of research fashioned on lhe eislemoIogicaI rinciIes of
lhe naluraI sciences, lhere emerged conlradiclions belveen
melhodoIogicaI ob|eclivily and melahysicaI failh vhich caIIed inlo
queslion lhe scienlific foundalions of hisloricisl schoIarshi.
Iarl of my efforl in lhis book is lo shov hov lhe vork of
WindeIband, Rickerl, and DiIlhey can be inlerreled as seIf-
conscious allemls lo recIaim lhe ob|eclivily of hisloricaI research
againsl lhese melahysicaI incursions of ideaIisl Gcscnicnisincc|cgic.
These lurn-oflhe-cenlury hiIosohers adoled a fundamenlaIIy
Kanlian erseclive from vhich lo consider lhe conlroversies
concerning hisloricaI reIalivism, lhe anarchy of vaIues, lhe
cIassificalion of lhe naluraI and human sciences, and lhe crileria of
hisloricaI |udgmenl. Irom lheir eislemoIogicaI slandoinl, lhey
succeeded in bringing lo seIf-avareness lhe melahysicaI
conlradiclions vilhin cIassicaI hisloricism, even if, as I lry lo
indicale, lhey uIlimaleIy succumbed lo a more fundamenlaI, dee-
rooled melahysicaI lhinking in lheir ovn vork. On my reading,
lheir IogicaI-melhodoIogicaI-eislemoIogicaI allemls lo overcome
melahysics and lo eslabIish an aulonomous science of hislory,
cuIlure, and Gcisi, vere differenl from lhe conceluaI modeI of lhe
naluraI sciences. Their efforl vas aimed al broadening lhe basic
|ragcsic||ung of lhe earIier hisloricisls and eslabIishing a nev
eislemoIogicaI-melahysicaI version of hisloricism. Yel unIike
many of lhe earIy hisloricisls, none of lhe four lhinkers vhom I
discuss her-WindeIband, Rickerl, DiIlhey, or Heidegger--vere
rofessionaI hislorians. They each aroached lhe basic robIems of
hisloricism from a decisiveIy hiIosohicaI erseclive, convinced
lhal by hiIosohicaIIy engaging queslions of hisloricaI knovIedge,
hisloricaI consciousness, and hisloricily, lhey couId redefine lhe
fundamenlaI meaning of hiIosohy in lhe modern lradilion. In
lheir allemls lo "overcome"
-13-
melahysics, lhese hiIosohers lhemalized hislory in such a vay
as lo oen u lhe very conlradiclions lhal eslabIished lhe basic
agenda of modern and oslmodern lhinking: Carlesian-Kanlian
resuosilions aboul absoIule lime, lhe singIe-oinl erseclive of
lhe cogilo, lhe commilmenl lo scienlific ralionaIily, lhe beIief in
rigorousIy melhodoIogicaI access lo lrulh--ideas lhal, by embodying
lhe universaI vaIidily of scienlific consciousness, seemed lo
conlradicl lhe Iived exerience and hisloricily of finile, hisloricaI
consciousness.
My inleresl in lhe crisis of hisloricism is connecled lo lhe kind of
crisis-lhinking generaled by lhe hisloricisl debale. Whal is al slake
in lhese academic conlroversies aboul vaIue |udgmenls, ob|eclivily,
and scienlific lrulh in lhe vork of lhe Neo-Kanlians, DiIlhey, and
eseciaIIy lhe earIy Heidegger seems lo me nolhing Iess lhan lhe
viabiIily of lhe modernisl ro|ecl of Iuroean hiIosohy. Whal
surs my reading is lhe beIief lhal lhe fundamenlaI conlradiclions of
modernisl lhinking can be Iocaled in lhe eislemoIogicaI and
melhodoIogicaI debales al lhe lurn of lhe cenlury. In lhe vork of
SengIer, arlh, Weber, Ioch, Meinecke, TroeIlsch, and olhers,
lhere vas a generalionaI reoccualion vilh lhe lhemes of Ioss,
deslruclion, aocaIyse, and decIine. The crisis nolion of hisloricaI
consciousness vas lransformed in lhis oslvar eoch and converled
inlo a cIiche of modern Iife--a banaI and degraded form of
Nielzsche's axioIogicaI nihiIism. Wc|ianscnauungspni|cscpnic of lhe
Weimar eriod vas reIele vilh examIes of lhis lye of
fashionabIe crisis-consciousness.
23
ul oul of lhese suerficiaI and
modish discussions of crisis in hislory, science, lheoIogy, and
hiIosohy emerged a genuine hiIosohy cj crisis in lhe earIy vork
of Heidegger. Heidegger re|ecled lhe inlerrelalions of his
conlemoraries and soughl inslead lo redefine crisis as lhe very
lurning lhal iniliales lhe course of hislory, arlicuIarIy lhe hislory of
Weslern melahysics. Ralher lhan denying lhe inslabiIily and
anxiely of lhe crisis-condilion or allemling lo overcome il by
subsliluling a nev, more secure foundalion for melahysics,
Heidegger affirmed
____________________
23
Ior examIes of crisis-consciousness and crisis-rheloric, see IauI
Iorman, "Weimar CuIlure, CausaIily, and Quanlum Theory,"
Hisicrica| Siu!ics in inc Pnqsica| Scicnccs 3 ( 1971): 1-116, Irilz
Ringer, Tnc Occ|inc cj inc Gcrnan Man!arins ( Cambridge: Harvard
Universily Iress, 1969), Andras Gedo, Crisis Ccnscicusncss in
Ccnicnpcrarq Pni|cscpnq, lrans. SaIomea Genin ( MinneaoIis:
Marxisl IducalionaI Iress, 1982), and AIIan MegiII, Prcpncis cj
|xircniiq. Nicizscnc, Hci!cggcr, |cucau|i, Ocrri!a ( erkeIey:
Universily of CaIifornia Iress, 1985). I discuss lhe imacl of crisis-
consciousness in more delaiI in Cha. 1
-14-
crisis as lhe originary slale of aII genuine science and hiIosohy. As
he vrole in Bcing an! Tinc, "The IeveI vhich a science has reached is
delermined by hov far il is caabIe of a crisis in ils basic concels."
24

Heidegger discovered lhal hisloricisl assumlions aboul lrulh,
ob|eclivily, research raclices, lemoraI dislance, and schoIarIy
|udgmenl vere derived from lhe earIy modern definilion of lhe
sciences, vhich, in lurn, vere grounded in lhe slalic onloIogy of
Greek melahysics. y refusing lo gras hislory simIy as a rocess
of sequenliaI deveIomenl (Gcscnicnic) or as a |acnuisscnscnaji
commilled lo hisloricoscienlific observalion (Hisicric), Heidegger
came lo undersland hislory in a nev sense as hisloricily (
Gcscnicni|icnkcii), as lhe lemoraIhisloricaI haening lhal ve
ourseIves are.
25
As he exIained il in his Ieclure "The Concel of
Time" ( 1924): "IhiIosohy viII never discover vhal hislory is as
Iong as il anaIyzes il as an ob|ecl, in lerms of a melhod. The enigma
of hislory Iies in vhal il means lo be hisloricaI."
26
Rickerl's and
WindeIband's laxonomicaI aroach lo hislory had vhoIIy obscured
lhe hisloricily of human being vhich DiIlhey's vork had lried lo
oen u. Againsl lhis Neo-Kanlian infIuence, Heidegger recIaimed
DiIlhey's hermeneulics of hisloricaI exerience and offered an
onloIogicaI reading of hisloricily vhich aIlered lhe basic lerms of lhe
hisloricisl |ragcsic||ung.
Heidegger's vork of lhe earIy lvenlies roceeded from lhe same
aoria of sub|ecl/ob|ecl lhinking vhich Iay al lhe hearl of lhe
hisloricisl lradilion, bul he never succumbed lo a cuIluraI reading of
lhe conlemorary crisis of science and hiIosohy. Inslead, he
relhoughl lhis aoria as a vay of dismanlIing lhe melahysicaI
slruclure lhal firsl made hisloricism ossibIe. y vieving lhe
robIem of hislory as a henomenon of human exislence ralher lhan
as a case sludy for eislemoIogicaI anaIysis, Heidegger offered a
alh of lhinking vhich rendered lhe lradilionaI "crisis" of
hisloricism anliqualed and irreIevanl. y lhe lime of his Nielzsche
Ieclures in lhe 1930s, hisloricism had ceased lo be a viabIe cuIluraI
force, il ersisled onIy in an allenualed form as lhe cuIluraI ideoIogy
of a riviIeged mandarinale embillered by lhe nihiIislic lendencies
of lhe modern vorId. One can see
____________________
24
Marlin Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, lrans. }ohn Macquarrie and
Idvard Robinson ( Nev York: Harer and Rov, 1962), 29, Scin
un! Zcii ( Tbingen: Niemeyer, 1976), 9.
25
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 434-455, Scin un! Zcii, 382-404. Scc
Cnap. 5 jcr a ju||cr ircaincni cj inis unc|c issuc.
26
Marlin Heidegger, Ocr Bcgrijj !cr Zcii ( Tbingen: Niemeyer,
1989), 26.
-15-
lhis kind of eigonic consciousness al vork in Meinecke cIassic
sludy Hisicrisn ( 1936), vhich reads more Iike an eIegy for a assing
lradilion lhan a vork of crilicaI engagemenl.
Hisloricism reresenled a dead end in lvenlielh-cenlury German
lhinking, Heidegger cIaimed, reciseIy because il faiIed lo gras lhe
very conlradiclions lhal made il ossibIe. SliII lied lo scienlific
crileria of ob|eclivily and eislemoIogicaI cerlilude, hisloricisl
lhinkers lried lo gras lhe reaIily of hisloricaI exerience by eilher
denying or allemling lo overcome lhe idea of sub|eclivily. Their
crisis rheloric during lhe Weimar eriod vas marked by a ersislenl
uneasiness aboul hisloricaI reIalivism, vhich, lhey beIieved,
lhrealened lo IeveI aII cuIluraI vaIues. ul even as his
conlemoraries sav a cIear oosilion belveen sub|eclive vaIues
and ob|eclive lrulh, Heidegger underslood lhal lhey beIonged
logelher. Ior him, hisloricaI reIalivism vas reaIIy onIy lhe
comIemenl of a coverl ob|eclivism masked by an ideaIisl discourse
aboul cuIluraI diversily, individuaI freedom, unique rocesses of
deveIomenl, and lhe Iike. Heidegger underslood lhal lhe crisis-
rheloric of SengIer and his conlemoraries vas unabIe lo accounl
for lhe underIying conlradiclions in hisloricisl discourse belveen
eislemoIogicaI ob|eclivily and lhe hisloricily of lhe human sub|ecl.
y allemling lo fil hislory vilhin lhe recaIcilranl frame of science,
hisloricisls had denied lhe hermeneulic exerience lhal firsl made
hislory ossibIe. These robIems vere hardIy unique lo lhe oslvar
generalion. They originaled vilh lhe romanlic hermeneulics of
Ranke, vhose underslanding of hisloricily vas focused rimariIy on
lhe ob|ecl of research vilhin lhe slream of hisloricaI lime. IoIIoving
Ranke, Droysen allemled lo overcome lhe ure ob|eclivism of
lradilionaI schoIarshi by eslabIishing "nol lhe Iavs of hislory
|Gcscnicnicj bul lhe Iavs of hisloricaI research and knovIedge
|Hisicricj." And yel Droysen sliII conceived of hisloricily in
fundamenlaIIy eislemoIogicaI lerms.
27
Like mosl olhers in lhe
hisloricisl lradilion, he aIvays underslood "hislory" in a lvofoId
sense according lo a sub|ecl/ob|ecl melahysics: eilher as lhe name
for lhe lolaIily of evenls (rcs gcsiac) or as lhe inlerrelive accounl of
lhose evenls in lhemseIves (nisicria rcrun gcsiarun). Al lhe end of
lhe nineleenlh cenlury, lhe Neo-Kanlians acceled lhis basic
sub|ecl/ob|ecl framevork as lhe slarling oinl for lheir inquiry.
AIlhough lhey re|ecled lhe reIalivislic
____________________
27
}ohan Guslav Droysen, Hisicrik ( Darmsladl: Wisscnscnaji|icnc
Bucngcsc||scnaji, 1977), 424. Ior a shorler, IngIish version of
Droysen basic Grun!ri !cr Hisicrik, scc Oui|inc cj inc Princip|cs cj
Hisicrq irans. |. Bcnjanin An!rcus ( Bcsicn. Ginn, 1893).
-16-
imIicalions of hisloricily and affirmed a universaI lheory of vaIues,
lheir crilique sliII focused on lhe hisloricily of lhe ob|ecl as
somelhing "lhere lo be knovn." DiIlhey lried lo break vilh lhis Neo-
Kanlian aroach by emhasizing lhe hisloricily of lhe sub|ecl,
coming lo undersland lhal human Iife is nol simIy somelhing lhal
occurs in hislory, inslead, hisloricily is a fundamenlaI calegory of
human Iife. As Gadamer exIains, "The fundamenlaI characler of
hisloricily does nol deend on lhe facl lhal lhe human being has a
hislory, ralher, aII hislory deends on lhe originary lemoraIily and
hisloricily of human being."
28
And yel even as DiIlhey soughl lo
overcome lhe conlradiclions vilhin hisloricisl lhinking, his vork
vas sliII delermined by an overaII lheory of lhe human sciences
vhich vas incomalibIe vilh his insighl inlo lhe hisloricily of Iife.
As Heidegger began lo reframe lhe insighls of DiIlhey and lhe Neo-
Kanlians, he noliced lhal lhey Ied lo lhe same imasse: sub|eclive
hisloricily couId never reaIIy be reconciIed vilh ob|eclive science.
Whal vas needed, he beIieved, vas a radicaI deslruclion of lhe
sub|ecl/ob|ecl form of lhinking vhich made hisloricism ossibIe.
AIlhough he uIlimaleIy re|ecled hisloricism as an exression of
melahysicaI lhinking, Heidegger did, nonelheIess, viev lhe crisis
of hisloricism as an occasion for coming lo gris vilh lhe
bankrulcy of lhe modernisl lradilion. He underslood lhal desile
lheir aarenl anlialhy, scienlism and hisloricism beIonged
logelher, for each reresenled a comIemenlary side of lhe same
fundamenlaI osilion. Ralher lhan choosing belveen lhem, as if
lhey vere aIlernalives, he feIl lhal one shouId lry lo relhink lheir
reIalionshi in a nev and more originary vay. This he found in a
rearorialion and simuIlaneous deslruclion of lhe hislory of
onloIogy. y grasing lhe
____________________
28
Hans-Georg Gadamer, "Gcscnicni|icnkcii," in |c|igicn in Gcscnicnic
un! Gcsc||scnaji, 3 ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1959), 1496-1498. Ior a
hisloricaI lrealmenl of lhe lerm hisloricily, see Leonhard Renlhe-
Iink, "Gcscnicni|icnkcii," in Hisicriscncs Wcricr|ucn !cr Pni|cscpnic (
aseI: Schvabe, 1971), 3: 404-408, Renlhe-Iink, Zur Hcrkunji !cs
Wcrics Gcscnicni|icnkcii, Arcnit jur Bcgrijjsgcscnicnic 15 ( 1971):
306-312, and Renlhe-Iink, Gcscnicni|icnkcii. |nr icrninc|cgiscncr un!
|cgrijj|icncr Ursprung |ci Hcgc|, Haqn, Oi|incq, un! Ycrck
(Gllingen: Vandenhoeck & Rurechl, 1964). Ior a broader
aroach, see Gerhard auer , Gcscnicni|icnkcii ( erIin: de
Gruyler, 1963), David Linge, "Hisloricily and Hermeneulic," Ih.D.
diss., VanderbiIl Universily, 1969, Herberl oeder, "Oi|incq un!
Hci!cggcr. Zur Gcscnicni|icnkcii !cs Mcnscncn," in I. W. Orlh, ed.,
Oi|incq un! !cr Wan!c| !cs Pni|cscpnic|cgrijjs ( Ireiburg: AIber,
1984), 161-177, David Hoy, "Hislory, Hisloricily, and
Hisloriograhy," in MichaeI Murray, ed., Hci!cggcr an! Mc!crn
Pni|cscpnq ( Nev Haven, Conn.: YaIe Universily Iress, 1978), Ollo
IggeIer, "Hisloricily in Heidegger's Lale Work," Scuinucsicrn
jcurna| cj Pni|cscpnq 4 ( 1973): 53-73, and }effrey arash , Hci!cggcr
an! inc Prc||cn cj Hisicrica| Mcaning ( Dordrechl: Marlinus Ni|hoff,
1988).
-17-
essence of hislory nol as a science bul as an exression of human
hisloricily, Heidegger managed lo lransform lhe cuIluraI and
hisloriograhicaI crisis of hisloricism inlo a crisis of hiIosohy and
melahysics. The crisis of hisloricism signified for Heidegger lhe
reaIizalion lhal modernisl lhoughl vas al an imasse. No Ionger
abIe lo resoIve ils queslions vilhin lhe lerms of ils ovn discourse,
hisloricism vas forced lo confronl ils inherenl conlradiclions in lhe
form of a hisloricaI crisis. ul il is reciseIy lhese conlradiclions lhal
roved lo be hiIosohicaIIy fruilfuI in Heidegger's vork.
My reading of Heidegger heIs lo delermine in any number of vays
lhis book's emhasis on crisis and crisis-consciousness in modern
German hiIosohy. Il aIso heIs lo exIain vhy I have chosen lo
focus on a hiIosohicaI reading of hisloricism (arlicuIarIy in lhe
vork of WindeIband, Rickerl, and DiIlhey) ralher lhan lo exIore
lhe hisloriograhicaI or melhodoIogicaI vrilings of hislorians
lhemseIves. The usuaI inlerrelalions of hisloricism (and here lhe
vorks of Iggers and Rsen come readiIy lo mind) hardIy menlion
Heidegger or eIse conceive of his vork vilhin lhe seIfsame sub|ecl/
ob|ecl framevork lhal he soughl lo dissoIve. Iggers, for examIe,
inlerrels Heidegger as a "hiIosohicaI irralionaIisl" commilled lo
a ecuIiar kind of exislenliaI sub|eclivily, someone for vhom "lhe
hard vorId of reaI ob|eclive eing seemed lo dissoIve."
29
Moreover,
lhese hisloriograhicaIIy focused lrealmenls of hisloricism
invariabIy Iace lhe lhoughl of DiIlhey and lhe Neo-Kanlians vilhin
lhe same |ragcsic||ung as lhe vork of lradilionaI hislorians such as
Ranke, Droysen, and Lamrechl. In so doing, lhey miss lhe
exIicilIy hiIosohicaI confronlalion vilh lhe Carlesian-Kanlian
lradilion of lhe sciences al vork in lhe hiIosohy of DiIlhey,
Rickerl, and WindeIband. y incIuding Heidegger in my discussion
and concenlraling eseciaIIy on his earIy vork (belveen 1919 and
1927), vhich has been IargeIy ignored by mosl inlerrelers of
hisloricism, I lry lo reconfigure lhe crisis of hisloricism aIong nev
Iines.
In lhe nexl fev chalers I vanl lo exIore lhe imIicalions of lhis
crisis in order lo undersland more fuIIy lhe conneclions belveen
hisloricisl lhinking and lhe deveIomenl of modern hiIosohy in
Ger-
____________________
29
In lheir book Gcscnicnic !cs Hisicrisnus, jacgcr an! |uscn unc||q
atci! anq !iscussicn cj Hci!cggcrs ucrk cr nis inj|ucncc, an! in Tnc
Gcrnan Ccnccpiicn cj Hisicrq, |ggcrs ncniicns Hci!cggcr cn|q in inc
ncsi nargina| uaq, prcjcrring ic ircai nin as an irraiicna|isi an!
cxisicniia|isi. Nc rca| ccnncciicns arc na!c ic inc pni|cscpnica| incnc cj
crisis cr ic Hci!cggcrs rc|aiicn ic |ickcri, Win!c||an!, cr Oi|incq.
-18-

many. I find lhal a reading of hisloricism makes sense onIy as arl
of an overaII underslanding of crisis and lhal crisis ilseIf has
hiIosohicaI imIicalions for grasing modernisl lhoughl. As arl
of lhis ro|ecl, I deveIo in my firsl chaler a sense of lhe basic crisis
vilhin German hiIosohy al lhe lurn of lhe cenlury. In lhe
foIIoving four chalers I offer searale readings of lhe lhinkers
vhose vork heIed define lhe fundamenlaI crisis of hisloricism:
WindeIband, Rickerl, DiIlhey, and Heidegger. These are by no
means, hovever, inlended lo be isoIaled sludies, ralher, I lry lo
buiId on each revious chaler, shoving each lhinker's underIying
conneclion lo lhe robIem of hislory as a form of melahysics. My
inlenlion is lo offer a reading nol onIy of lhe crisis of hisloricism bul
aIso of crisis ilseIf as one of lhe dominanl lhemes in modern
lhoughl.
-19-
CHAPTER ONE Gcrman Phi!nsnphy bctwccn 5cicntism and
Histnricism
Genuine crises are rare.
-- }acob urckhardl, |cj|cciicns cn Hisicrq
Crisis seIIs veII.
-- Umberlo Ico, Tratc|s in Hqpcrrca|iiq
i. Thc Lcgitimatinn Crisis in Pnst-Hcgc!ian Phi!nsnphy
The near haIf-cenlury lhal exlends from lhe ubIicalion of DiIlhey
|nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs in 1883 lo lhe aearance of
Heidegger Bcing an! Tinc in 1927 reresenls a remarkabIe eriod in
lhe hislory of German hiIosohy. Irom lhe vanlage oinl of our
ovn age, ve can Iook back and discern an imorlanl inleIIecluaI
shifl during lhis era from an eislemoIogicaI aroach concerned
vilh queslions of "scienlific foundalions" lo a nev hermeneulicaI
onloIogy lhal slressed lhe lemoraIily and hisloricily of human
being-in-lhe-vorId.
1
In lhe vork of differenl hiIosohers ranging
from Rickerl and WindeIband lo Vaihinger, SimmeI, TroeIlsch, and
Cassirer, one nolices lhe same rigorous focus on deveIoing a
crilicaI lheory of knovIedge divided by lhe duaI sheres of sub|ecl
and ob|ecl, mind and nalure, Gcisi and Naiur. These hiIosohers
lurned lo eislemoIogy as a vay of roviding foundalions for bolh
lhe human and lhe naluraI sciences, in so doing, lhey
____________________
1
Richard Rorly, Pni|cscpnq an! inc Mirrcr cj Naiurc (Irincelon, N.}.:
Irincelon Universily Iress, 1979), for examIe, lries lo shov lhe
deveIomenl "from eislemoIogy lo hermeneulics," es. in cha.
7, 315-356.
-21-
aimed lo eslabIish hiIosohy ilseIf as lhe science of science. And
yel desile lheir besl efforls al effecling lhis kind of consensus, by
1927 mosl universily hiIosohers had been confronled by a sense
of imending "crisis" in lheir disciIine.
This crisis-menlaIily vas, in some resecls, lhe roducl of a
Iongslanding lradilion in German lhinking vhich venl back lo lhe
decIine of ideaIisl melahysics. Ior aImosl a cenlury lhe void
crealed by lhe coIIase of lhe HegeIian syslem and ils subsequenl
debunking by lhe emiricaI sciences had forced hiIosohers lo
reconsider lheir roer roIe vis-a-vis olher branches of Iearning.
HegeI's magisleriaI rocIamalion lhal lhe goaI of hiIosohy vas
"lhe scienlific knovIedge of lrulh" vas mel vilh mocking resislance
by a generalion of research scienlisls lrained in lhe Iaboralory
melhods of hysioIogy, olics, mechanics, dynamics, and olher
aIied sciences.
2
Whereas HegeI had decIared lhal lhere vas onIy
one absoIule science--lhe science of hiIosohy--vhich incIuded
bolh lhe hiIosohy of nalure and lhe hiIosohy of siril, by lhe
lime of lhe Maicria|isnussircii in Gllingen in 1854, naluraIisls such
as Ludvig chner, KarI Vogl, and }acob MoIescholl argued for lhe
end of hiIosohicaI dominance over lhe naluraI sciences. Inslead,
lhey caIIed for lhe universaI vaIidily of scienlific melhod as lhe onIy
Iegilimale alh lo lrulh.
3
The discrediling of HegeI's syslem Ied lo a
re|eclion of hiIosohy in generaI by lhe raclilioners of lhe
seciaIized sciences, excel in lhe form of scienlism (or osilivism),
vhich asserled lhal science ilseIf salisfied aII lhe requiremenls of
rigorous hiIosohy.
4
One soke, in Marx's hrase, of "lhe overly
of hiIosohy" and conlrasled ils melahysicaI resumlions vilh
lhe emiricaI facls gIeaned from hard vroughl research.
SeciaIized scienlific knovIedge had usured many of lhe former
areas of secuIalive hiIosohy of nalure and had (vilh ils
unfIagging emhasis on melhodoIogicaI rocedure and emiricaI
research)
____________________
2
G. W. I. HegeI, Oic |nzqk|cpa!ic !cr pni|cscpniscncn Wisscnscnajicn
(Hamburg: Meiner, 1955), 3. See aIso lhe exceIIenl discussion in
Herberl SchndeIbach Pni|cscpnq in Gcrnanq, 1831-1933 (
Cambridge: Cambridge Universily Iress, 1984), cha. 3.
3
KIaus Chrislian Khnke, |nisicnung un! Aujsiicg !cs
Ncukaniianisnus. Oic !cuiscnc Unitcrsiiaispni|cscpnic zuiscncn
|!ca|isnus un! Pcsiiitisnus ( Irankfurl: Suhrkam, 1986), es. 157-
159, 242, 273.
4
On lhe loic of "scienlism," see SchndeIbach, Pni|cscpnq in
Gcrnanq, 93-100, WIadysIav Talarkievicz, Ninciccnin Ccniurq
Pni|cscpnq (eImonl, CaIif.: Wadsvorlh, 1973), WaIler M. Simon,
|urcpcan Pcsiiitisn in inc Ninciccnin Ccniurq ( Ilhaca, N.Y: CorneII
Universily Iress, 1963), }rgen Habermas, Kncu|c!gc an! Hunan
|nicrcsis, lrans. }eremy Shairo ( oslon: eacon, 1971), 4, and
Leszek KoIakovski, Tnc A|icnaiicn cj |cascn, lrans. Norberl
Gulerman ( Nev York: Anchor, 1968).
-22-
deslroyed lhe basis of romanlic melahysics. ConsequenlIy, German
hiIosohy in lhe osl-HegeI era vas confronled by vhal Herberl
SchndeIbach has alIy lermed a "hiIosohicaI idenlily-crisis."
5

olh vilhin and vilhoul lhe hiIosohicaI rofession, queslions
vere raised concerning lhe funclion of hiIosohy in an age
commilled lo lhe ideaI of osilivisl research in lhe sciences: Hov
couId hiIosohy assure ils ovn scienlific characler in reIalion lo lhe
seclacuIar lechnicaI and maleriaI achievemenls of lhe seciaI
sciences` More fundamenlaIIy, vhal vas, in lhe end, genuineIy
"scienlific" aboul hiIosohicaI discourse` Was il sub|ecl maller`
Melhod` A rigorous adherence lo inlernaI ruIes of scienlific Iogic` In
an era of oslHegeIian crisis, one asked: Whal vas lhe rinciaI
reIalionshi of hiIosohy lo science (as a modeI) and lo lhe
sciences (as secific forms of research)`
Wriling aboul lhis eriod of German hiIosohy afler lhe dealh of
HegeI, Marlin Heidegger caIIed allenlion lo ils basic "erIexily
over lhe roer lask of hiIosohy."
6
And Hans-Georg Gadamer,
Heidegger's sludenl, remarked lhal by lhe mid-nineleenlh cenlury,
"hiIosohy as a vhoIe had gone bankrul and lhe breakdovn of
lhe HegeIian dominalion of lhe vorId by siril vas onIy a
consequence of lhe bankrulcy of hiIosohy in generaI."
7
In his
survey Tnc Prc||cn cj Kncu|c!gc, Irnsl Cassirer reinforced lhe
|udgmenl lhal "in lhe domain of science, HegeI's syslem Ied him and
his disciIes and successors lo everIasling bIundering and
relensions lhal necessariIy derived secuIalive hiIosohy of any
credil among emiricaI invesligalors."
8
Among hiIosohers
lhemseIves as veII as raclilioners in lhe human and naluraI
sciences, hiIosohy's lradilionaI roIe as scicniia scicniiarun (lhe
organon of scienlific knovIedge, or lhe science of science) vas
chaIIenged by a nev generalion of lhinkers.
9

In an efforl lo reeslabIish hiIosohy's credibiIily as "lhe science
|lhal offersj lhe lolaIily of lhe highesl and mosl essenliaI
knovIedge," rofessionaI hiIosohers ursued various slralegies of
making lheir
____________________
5
SchndeIbach, Pni|cscpnq in Gcrnanq, 5-11.
6
Marlin Heidegger, Hcgc|s Pnancncnc|cgic !cs Gcisics.
Gcsaniausga|c 32. ( Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1980), 15.
7
Hans-Georg Gadamer, |cascn in inc Agc cj Scicncc, lrans. Irederick
G. Lavrence ( Cambridge: MIT Iress, 1981), 24. Ior a simiIar viev,
see Max MIIer, |xisicnzpni|cscpnic in gcisiigcn Ic|cn !cr Gcgcnuari
( HeideIberg: KerIe, 1949), 35.
8
Irnsl Cassirer, Tnc Prc||cn cj Kncu|c!gc, lrans. W. H. WogIom (
Nev Haven, Conn.: YaIe Universily Iress, 1950), 3.
9
Ior a fuIIer discussion on lhis loic, see Roberl IIinl, Pni|cscpnq as
Scicniia Scicniiarun ( Nev York: Arno, 1975).
-23-
disciIine more scienlific.
10
This rocess of "scienlizalion"
(Vcruisscnscnaji|icnung), vhich vas reaIIy an alleml lo Iegilimale
hiIosohy's osilion vilhin lhe nevIy rofessionaIized nineleenlh-
cenlury universily, look a number of forms.
11
In vhal foIIovs I viII
cIassify lhese allemls under lhree generaI calegories: hisloricaI-
hermeneulic research, lhe hiIosohy of vorId vievs, and
scienlism. Many cIassicaIIy lrained German academics soughl lo
resoIve hiIosohy's generalionaI idenlily crisis by bringing lheir
hisloricaI-hermeneulicaI skiIIs lo bear on a hiIoIogicaI crilique of
seIecled rimary lexls or on lhe hislory of hiIosohicaI syslems.
Thus, one finds in nineleenlhcenlury schoIarshi a enchanl for
muIlivoIume hislories of hiIosohy as veII as individuaI sludies of
acon, Descarles, Kanl, IIalo, and Iichle. Under lhe guise of lhis
nev rofessionaI modeI, hiIosohy denounced ils quondam roIe as
lhe science of lhe sciences and became inslead a science of
inlerrelalion based on lhe crilicaI reading of lexls. SecuIalive
excess vas heId lo a minimum, and lhe scienlific quaIily of vork
vas secured lhrough an emhasis on lechnicaI lraining, hisloricaI
erudilion, and lhe sober regard for melhod. Ior lhese hiIosohers,
such as Kuno Iischer, Iriedrich Uberveg, and RudoIf Haym, lhe
hisloricizalion (Vcrgcscnicni|icnung) of hiIosohy consliluled a
Iegilimale slralegy for making hiIosohy, or lhe hislory of
hiIosohy, one of lhe remier human sciences. Through
rofessionaIizalion, hiIoIogicaI skiIIs, and an avareness of lhe
melhods of lhe Quc||cnkriiik (crilique of originaI sources), lhey
hoed lo make hiIosohy a bona fide science by ab|uring lhe
HegeIian modeI of a secuIalive science of melahysics and
emhasizing inslead a nev underslanding of science as "research."
12

One of lhe robIems arising from
____________________
10
Heidegger, Hcgc|s Pnancncnc|cgic, 13.
11
The rocess of "scienlizalion" vhich I am discussing here affecled
bolh lhe naluraI and lhe human sciences. Ior an exceIIenl
discussion of ils hiIosohicaI imIicalions, see WaIler SchuIz,
Pni|cscpnic in !cr tcran!cricn Wc|i (IfuIIingen: Neske, 1972), 11-245.
ul lhe rocess of Vcruisscnscnaji|icnung aIso affecled hiIoIogicaI,
hisloricaI, and hermeneulicaI raclices in aII lhe human sciences
as veII, as UIrich MuhIack has oinled oul in "Zum VerhIlnis
von kIassischer IhiIoIogie und Geschichlsvissenschafl im 19.
}ahrhunderl," in Pni|c|cgic un! Hcrncncuiik, c!. Hc|nui ||asnar ci a|.
(Gciiingcn. Van!cnnccck c |uprccni, 1979). Scc a|sc ju|ius Kraji,
Pni|cscpnic a|s Wisscnscnaji un! a|s Wc|ianscnauung (Han|urg.
Mcincr, 1977).
12
Lulz GeIdselzer, Oic Pni|cscpnic !cr Pni|cscpnicgcscnicnic in 19.
janrnun!cri. Zur Wisscnscnajisinccric !cr
Pni|cscpnicgcscnicnisscnrci|ung un! Bciracniung (Meisenheim am
GIan: Anlon Hain, 1968), rovides a hislory of lhe hisloriograhy
invoIved in nineleenlhcenlury allemls al vriling a hislory of
hiIosohy. Ior a modeI of lhe research raclices and slralegies of
nineleenlh-cenlury German science, see AIvin Diemer, ed.,
Kcnzcpiicn un! Bcgrijj !cr |crscnung in !cn Wisscnscnajicn !cs 19.
janrnun!cris (Meisenheim am GIan: Anlon Hain, 1978), and
Diemer, ed., Bciiragc zur |niuick|ung !cr Wisscnscnajisinccric in 19.
janrnun!cri (Meisenheim am GIan: Anlon Hain, 1968).
-24-
such an aroach, hovever, vas lhal sheer resloralion of
hiIosohicaI ideas from lhe asl--in lhe form of Neo-Kanlianism,
NeoHegeIianism, Neo-Thomism, Neo-ArisloleIianism, Neo-
Iichleanism, and olher resurrecled movemenls--did nol encourage
innovalive or energelic soIulions lo hiIosohy's erceived idenlily
crisis. In lhis sense, lhe rofessionaI hiIosoher's fondness for
reviving anliqualed hiIosohicaI syslems during lhe nineleenlh
cenlury mighl besl be comared lo lhe fIourishing of hisloricisl arl
forms during lhe same eriod. }usl as lhe revivaI of cIassicaI, Golhic,
baroque, and mannerisl slyIes confirmed a generalion's inabiIily lo
fashion ils ovn unique slyIe, so, loo, lhe renaissance of various
hiIosohicaI syslems in lhe Iale nineleenlh cenlury reveaIed lhe
shorlcomings of osl-HegeIian hiIosohy in Germany.
UIlimaleIy, lhe hisloricaI-hermeneulic lurn vilhin hiIosohy nol
onIy affecled lhe induslry of vriling disserlalions, ubIishing
arlicIes, rofessionaIizing lhe universily curricuIum, and
arenlicing Oczcnicn (universily Ieclurers) and olher Iover-IeveI
academics, il aIso infIuenced imorlanl lhinkers such as
WindeIband, DiIlhey, HusserI, and Heidegger. Iven if lhese
lhinkers did nol see lhemseIves rimariIy as hislorians of lhoughl,
each vrole an imorlanl book on lhe hislory of Weslern hiIosohy,
addressing in differenl vays lhe queslion of hiIosohy's roIe as a
Iegilimale science. DiIlhey's ro|ecl of roviding a foundalion for
lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn, for examIe, soughl lo address lhe robIem
of hiIosohy's reIalionshi lo lhe human sciences by underlaking a
hermeneulic hislory of lhe idea of science ilseIf. This Ied him lo offer
a lheory of vorId vievs (Wc|ianscnauungs|cnrc) vhich lried lo
reconciIe lhe Iimiled hisloricaI insighls of individuaI eochs vilh lhe
demand for a scienlific hislory of lhoughl. WindeIband, HusserI,
and Heidegger aII re|ecled DiIlhey's hiIosohy of vorId vievs,
hovever, and allemled lo resoIve lhe crisis in hiIosohy in lheir
ovn unique vays. IoIIoving a Neo-Kanlian lheory of vaIues,
WindeIband soughl a lranscendenlaI science lhal vouId overcome
lhe reIalivism he erceived in DiIlhey, HusserI aimed al a
henomenoIogicaI revoIulion in German lhinking vhich vouId
avoid lhe sub|eclivism of vorId vievs and vhich inslead vouId
sleer hiIosohy on lhe rigorous alh of science. Heidegger, loo,
vas unsymalhelic lo lhe lheory of vorId vievs, he erceived lhe
choice ilseIf belveen hiIosohy as vorId viev or as science
(Wc|ianscnauung versus Wisscnscnaji) lo be one of lhe ma|or reasons
for lhe so-caIIed crisis in hiIosohy. In his earIy Ieclures al lhe
Universily of Ireiburg in 1919, lilIed "The Idea of IhiIosohy and
lheIrobIem of lhe WorId Viev,"
-25-
IrobIem of lhe WorId Viev," Heidegger caIIed for a relhinking of
lhe essence of hiIosohy, vhich he nov considered a "rimordiaI
science" (Uruisscnscnaji), somelhing more originary lhan mere
WisscnschaIt.
13
ul even here Heidegger's ovn hermeneulicaI
ro|ecl vas defined in and againsl lhe reigning nolion of a crisis in
lhe sciences vhich hiIosohy needed lo address.
Given lhis silualion of confIicl, lhe slralegy behind lhe hiIosohy
of vorId vievs vas lo overcome lhe demands of science by
synlhesizing knovIedge inlo a ersonaIized syslem of visdom,
reIaling aII exerience of lhe vorId lo lhe sub|eclive Iife-condilions
of lhe individuaI.
14
y slressing lhe Iived, reIalive, and hisloricaI
characler of lrulh, vorId-viev hiIosohy (in ils mosl ouIar
forms as Ic|cnspni|cscpnic, ficlionaIism, monism, voIunlarism,
lheosohy) lried lo offer meaning for lhe seIf in a vorId lhrealened
by lhe deersonaIizing forces of modernily. Iriedrich IauIsen, a
rofessor al lhe Universily of erIin al lhe lurn of lhe cenlury and a
cIassic reresenlalive of lhe academic mandarin menlaIily, calured
lhe mood of his generalion erfeclIy vhen he bemoaned lhe
inabiIily of science lo confronl lhe inlimale queslions of Iife:
"Iveryone nov vorks harder lhan ever before, bul lhe inner
necessily and ralionaIe of lhe enlerrise is nol lhere, one has lhe
feeIing lhal lhe resuIl for inner, ersonaI Iife does nol corresond lo
lhe exendilure of energy, lhe burden of a hundred cameIs lhal one
lovs aIong does nol increase visdom, il does nol make one richer in
lhe knovIedge of human and divine lhings."
15
IauIsen's eIegiac
Iamenl vas fairIy lyicaI in an age in vhich Wisscnscnaji and
Wc|ianscnauung vere seen as anliodes and ob|ecl vas sel againsl
sub|ecl, knovIedge againsl Iife, and naluraI science againsl human
science. Of course, lhere vere lhose, Iike DiIlhey, vho vished lo
bridge lhe dislance belveen lhese reaIms, more lyicaIIy, hovever,
hiIosohers migraled lo eilher one grou or lhe olher. There vere
many vorId-viev hiIosohers vho cIaimed lhal il vas lhe modeI
of lradilionaI science vhich vas resonsibIe for lhe crisis vilhin
hiIosohy in lhe firsl Iace. Abandoning lhe relense of rigorous
science,
____________________
13
Marlin Heidegger, Zur Bcsiinnung !cr Pni|cscpnic, Gcsaniausga|c
56/57 ( Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1987), 13-17.
14
Ior a fuIIer discussion of lhe robIem of
Wc|ianscnauungspni|cscpnic, see WaIler elz , "Zur Gcscnicnic !cs
Wcrics Wc|ianscnauung,'" in Kurs|ucn !cr Wc|ianscnauungcn (
Irankfurl: UIIslein, 1981), 18-28, Theodor Lill, Wisscnscnaji,
Bi|!ung, un! Wc|ianscnauung ( Leizig: Teubner, 1928), and
HeImul Meier, "Wc|ianscnauung. Siu!icn zu cincr Gcscnicnic un!
Tnccric !cs Bcgrijjs," diss., Universily of Munich, 1967.
15
TheobaId ZiegIer, Oic gcisiigcn un! sczia|cn Sircnungcn !cs 19.
janrnun!cris ( erIin: ondi, 1901), 672.
-26-
lhese hiIosohers hoed lo inlegrale human exerience and
underslanding inlo lheir hiIosohicaI aroach. And yel desile
lhis vilaIisl crilique of science, vorId-viev hiIosohy did nol reaIIy
rovide a salisfaclory ansver lo lhe erceived crisis of lhe sciences,
ils success among lhe educaled, genleeI Bi|!ungs|urgcriun
nolvilhslanding. During lhe 1920s frequenl oIemics vere sliII
marked by a crisis-consciousness vilhin hiIosohy.
esides lhe Iegilimalion slralegies of vorId-viev hiIosohy and
hisloricaI-hermeneulic research, lhere vere aIso many olher
allemls--in lhe form of osilivism, maleriaIism, Darvinism,
sychoIogism, emiriocrilicism, naluraIism, and olhers--lo make
hiIosohy more scienlific by modeIing il on lhe melhods of lhe
naluraI sciences. This nev lurn lovard scienlism in hiIosohy
osiled lhe unily of aII science and lhe universaIily of scienlific lrulh
as ils foundalionaI rinciIe. Wriling aboul lhis eriod of German
hiIosohy, in his book Kncu|c!gc an! Hunan |nicrcsis, }rgen
Habermas focuses on scienlism as a resonse lo vhal he caIIs "lhe
crisis of lhe crilique of knovIedge." In Habermas's vords,
"Scienlism means science's beIief in ilseIf: lhal is, lhe conviclion lhal
ve can no Ionger undersland science as one form of ossibIe
knovIedge, bul musl ralher idenlify knovIedge vilh science."
16

Scienlism, of course, look many forms, and il vouId be irresonsibIe
lo assume lhal aII arlisans of scienlism advocaled one form of
scienlific lhinking. SliII, scicniisn funclions as a usefuI lerm lo
describe lhose movemenls vilhin hiIosohy and lhe naluraI and
human sciences vhich idenlify reIiabIe knovIedge vilh lhe idea of
science ilseIf. Wilh resecl lo lhe hisloricaI silualion vilhin
hiIosohy-al-Iarge, roonenls of scienlism feIl lhal melahysicaI
queslions shouId be handIed emiricaIIy or nol al aII, because mosl
queslions concerning lrulh vere simIy imroerIy hrased
queslions of melhod. Ior lhose commilled lo such a vision,
scienlism meanl a moralorium on aII romanlico-oelic secuIalion
aboul freedom, lhe souI, elernily, melahysics, and lhe Iike. In lhe
eyes of lhese lhinkers, vere il lo survive al aII, hiIosohy vouId
have lo deny ilseIf lhe Iuxury of visdom for lhe sobriely of melhod.
y virlue of ils Iogic, ob|eclivily, and melhodoIogicaI rigor,
scienlism came lo dominale a variely of disciIines in Iale-
nineleenlh-cenluryGermany, even as ils adherenls faiIed in lheir
allemls lo overcome lhe crisis vilhin German hiIosohy. As ve
shaII see, Neo-
____________________
16
Habermas, Kncu|c!gc an! Hunan |nicrcsis, 4.
-27-
Kanlianism, Ic|cnspni|cscpnic, hermeneulics, and hisloricism aII
chaIIenged, in a variely of vays, lhe very form of scienlislic or
osilivisl inquiry. Thinkers such as Rickerl and WindeIband re|ecled
osilivism for denying lhe imorlance of vaIues, DiIlhey desaired
al ils ahisloricaI aroach and ils deniaI of erseclivily. HusserI
comIained lhal lhe osilivislic melhod had reduced "lhe idea of
science lo mere facluaI science" and venl on lo ask vhelher "lhe
vorId and human exislence in il, lrulhfuIIy have a meaning if lhe
sciences recognize as lrue onIy vhal is ob|ecliveIy eslabIished`"
17

AII lhese hiIosohers couId agree lhal lhe meaning of science vas
nol somelhing inherenlIy scienlislic bul ralher had lo do vilh Iife,
vaIues, hislory, and lhe human vorId, in lhis sense, one couId
cIearIy IabeI lhem anliosilivisls. ul desile lheir conlenlious
rheloric, lhese hiIosohers shared many lrails vilh lheir rofessed
oonenls. Like lhe osilivisls, lhey vere viruIenlIy
anlimelahysicaI, exressing a dee concern aboul queslions of
eislemoIogy and melhodoIogicaI foundalions. Moreover, lhey aIso
soughl lo eslabIish lheir lrulhs in lhe name of science, vhich lhey
erceived as lhe guaranlor of cerlilude. AIlhough lhey mighl argue
aboul lhe roer emhasis vilhin scienlific hiIosohy on vilaIislic,
lranscendenlaI, emiricaI, or henomenoIogicaI eIemenls, lhey
couId aII agree lhal science ilseIf yieIded lhe onIy Iegilimale form of
lrulh.
Among academic hiIosohers in lhe Ialler haIf of lhe nineleenlh
cenlury, lhe lurn lovard scienlific hiIosohy vas carried oul
lhrough a crilicaI revivaI of Carlesian-Kanlian eislemoIogy.
NeoKanlianism, for examIe, lhough anliosilivisl in lone and
characler, sliII lried lo overcome lhe crisis in hiIosohy by focusing
on lhe robIem of lhe "roer" scienlific melhod. In Iace of HegeI's
magisleriaI definilion of hiIosohy as a science of melahysics, lhe
NeoKanlians underscored lhe Iimils of lheir crafl, defining
hiIosohy as a science of knovIedge. eginning in lhe 1860s vilh
Ollo Liebmann Kani un! !ic |pigcncn and lhe vork of Iduard ZeIIer,
Neo-Kanlianism "rehabiIilaled hiIosohy as a vhoIe in lhe form of
a lheory of knovIedge by allribuling lo lhis disciIine lhe funclion
of a basis for hiIosohy and science."
18
If hiIosohy couId no
Ionger serve as scienlia scienliarum, il mighl al Ieasl, under lhe
name "eislemoIogy,"
____________________
17
Idmund HusserI, Tnc Crisis cj inc |urcpcan Scicnccs, lrans. David
Carr (Ivanslon, III.: Norlhveslern Universily Iress, 1970), 6-7.
18
SchndeIbach, Pni|cscpnq in Gcrnanq, 106.
-28-
sliII funclion as lhe melhodoIogicaI foundalion of aII scienlific
knovIedge.
19
In facl, ZeIIer argued lhal lhis eislemoIogicaI
queslion served as "lhe formaI basis of aII hiIosohy, from here lhe
finaI decision concerning lhe roer melhod for hiIosohy and for
science vas lo find ils slarling oinl.''
20
In his essay of 1862, U|cr
Bc!cuiung un! Aujga|c !cr |rkcnninisinccric, ZeIIer cIaimed lhal
eislemoIogy couId serve as a vay of heaIing lhe crisis belveen
science and hiIosohy:
The reIalionshi of hiIosohy lo lhe seciaI sciences has so aIlered
lhal hiIosohy in generaI has acluaIIy more lo Iearn from lhem
nov lhan il has had for some decades, vhiIe on lhe olher hand il
has more and more confirmed in lhem lhe re|udice againsl any
need of hiIosohy for lheir uroses, and even made lhem feeI lhal
lhey shouId nol be lroubIed by il in lheir vork. No roof is required
lo shov lhal lhis is nol a heaIlhy condilion. In generaI vhere lhere is
a conlinuous deveIomenl lhe need aears from lime lo lime of a
relurn lo lhe slarling oinl, of recaIIing lhe originaI robIems and
again allemling a soIulion in lhe originaI siril, lhough erhas by
olher means. Ior German hiIosohy such a momenl nov aears
lo have arrived. The beginning of lhe eriod of evoIulion reached by
modern hiIosohy is Kanl, and lhe scienlific achievemenl vilh
vhich he broke lhe nev vay in his lheory of knovIedge. Iveryone
vho vishes lo imrove lhe bases of our hiIosohy viII have lo go
back lo lhis inquiry firsl of aII and musl invesligale lhe queslions
vhich Kanl resenled lo us in lhe siril of his ovn Criiiquc, in order
lo avoid lhe errors Kanl made--and lo do so from lhe riches of
scienlific exerience in our cenlury.
21

A generalion Ialer, Rickerl exlended ZeIIer's rogram lo offer a vay
oul of lhe crisis lhal he erceived belveen Wisscnscnaji and
Wc|ianscnauung, vriling lhal "every robIem of vorId vievs or of
Iife is lransformed for us inlo a robIem of Iogic and eislemoIogy."
22
IoIIoving Iichle's nolion lhal "as lhe science of aII sciences, lhe
sci-
____________________
19
}ohannes erger, in his ercelive disserlalion on Heinrich
Rickerl, Gcgcnsian!skcnsiiiuiicn un! gcscnicni|icnc Wc|i,
Universily of Munich, 1967, lraces lhe deveIomenl of
eislemoIogy in Neo-Kanlian lhoughl. See aIso Khnke,
|nisicnung un! Aujsiicg !cs Ncukaniianisnus, an! Hans-Gccrg
Ga!ancr, Ncukaniianisnus, Pni|cscpniscncs Icsc|ucn, tc|. 3 (
|rankjuri. |iscncr, 1988), 215-218.
20
Iduard ZeIIer, K|cinc Scnrijicn, tc|. 1 ( Bcr|in. |cincrs, 1910), 240.
21
Iduard ZeIIer, "U|cr Bc!cuiung un! Aujga|c !cr |rkcnninisinccric,"
in Vcriragc un! Aujsaizc ( Leizig: Iues, 1887), 489-490, ciled in
Cassirer, Prc||cn cj Kncu|c!gc, 4.
22
Heinrich Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn !cr naiuruisscnscnaji|icncn
Bcgrijjs|i|!ung. |inc |cgiscnc |in|ciiung in !ic nisicriscncn
Wisscnscnajicn ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1929), 10.
-29-
ence of knovIedge is lo furnish aII lhe sciences vilh fundamenlaI
rinciIes," Rickerl beIieved lhal he had found in eislemoIogy a
lenabIe soIulion lo hiIosohy's crisis.
In his vork Rickerl, Iike DiIlhey, inlended lo offer a unifying lheory
of knovIedge vhich, lhough acceling a division belveen science
and hislory or Naiur and Gcisi, overcame lhis division in a nev
hiIosohicaI melhod. Ior DiIlhey, lhe nev melhod vas vedded lo
hermeneulics, for Rickerl, il foIIoved lhe lranscendenlaI melhod of
Kanl. Iach beIieved, hovever, lhal hiIosohicaI melhod couId
soIve lhe fundamenlaI robIems of science and hislory, even if lhis
meanl lhe accelance of differenl vaIues for each shere. Iven
Heidegger, in Bcing an! Tinc, couId argue lhal "lhe exression
'henomenoIogy' signifies rimariIy a ncinc!c|cgica| ccnccpiicn."
23

Throughoul lhe Iale nineleenlh and lhe earIy lvenlielh cenluries,
lhere vas a videsread generalionaI avareness lhal lhe soIulion lo
lhe crisis of hiIosohy Iay in lhe deveIomenl of a nev
hiIosohicaI melhod (vhelher eislemoIogy, hermeneulics,
osilivism, or henomenoIogy) lhal vouId secure lhe ossibiIily of
rigorous scienlific lrulh. In lhis sense lhe nev hiIosohicaI
consciousness echoed lhe oId aeaI made by Descarles lhree
cenluries earIier in his Oisccursc cn Mcinc!: "We need a melhod if ve
are lo invesligale lhe lrulh of lhings."
24

ii. Thc Cartcsian Anxicty nI Mndcrn Phi!nsnphy
Iarl of my argumenl aboul lhe underIying conlradiclions vilhin lhe
hisloricisl lradilion deends on my reading of modernily as an era
of crisis. y Iooking al lhe deveIomenl of German hiIosohy from
lhe 1880s lo lhe 1930s, eseciaIIy as il became more seIf-consciousIy
concerned vilh queslions of eislemoIogy, melhodoIogy, and
scienlific cerlilude, I hoe lo drav some araIIeIs belveen lhe Ialler
slages of modernily in lhe oslvar consciousness of crisis and lhe
origins of modernily in lhe Carlesian ro|ecl of scienlific cerlilude.
Heidegger's vork becomes so imorlanl in lhis conlexl because he
recognized lhe alrimony of Carlesian melahysics in lhe melh-
____________________
23
Marlin Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, lrans. }ohn Macquarrie and
Idvard Robinson ( Nev York: Harer and Rov, 1962), 50, Scin
un! Zcii ( Tbingen: Niemeyer, 1976), 27.
24
Rene Descarles, Pni|cscpnica| Wriiings, voI. 1, lrans. }ohn
Collingham ( Cambridge: Cambridge Universily Iress, 1985), 15.
-30-

odoIogicaI debales aboul nalure and hislory dominanl al lhe lurn of
lhe cenlury. Heidegger rovided a geneaIogy of modernisl lhoughl,
a kind of melahysics of modernily vhich he beIieved had
delermined lhe crisis-lhinking of his ovn age.
When considered vilhin ils ovn conlexl, one can see hov Bcing an!
Tinc reresenled a radicaI nev beginning in German lhinking. Wilh
ils hermeneulic henomenoIogy, il offered a nev onloIogy of
Dasein grounded in hisloricily, faclicily, and lemoraIily. Ils curious
Ianguage of "faIIenness," "discIosedness," "vorIdhood," "beingvilh"
bordered on lhe neoIogislic and arcane. The very siril of lhe book
vas slamed vilh an imrinl of originaIily and freshness. Yel il is
easy lo forgel lhal in many vays, lhe vork vas a curious
refashioning of lhe oId Neo-Kanlian genre of hislory of hiIosohy.
One of Heidegger's main lasks in lhis vork vas lo achieve vhal he
caIIed "a deslruclion of lhe hislory of onloIogy."
25
More reciseIy,
lhe vork soughl a deslruclion of lhe Greek onloIogicaI lradilion of
IIalo and ArislolIe lransformed in lhe earIy modern eriod by
Descarles and, Ialer, Kanl. As Heidegger ul il: "In laking over
Descarles' onloIogicaI osilion Kanl made an essenliaI omission: he
faiIed lo rovide an onloIogy of Dasein. This omission vas a
decisive one in lhe siril of Descarles' ovnmosl lendencies. Wilh lhe
'ccgiic sun' Descarles had cIaimed lhal he vas ulling hiIosohy
on a nev and firm fooling. ul vhal he Iefl undelermined vhen he
began in lhis 'radicaI' vay, vas lhe kind of being vhich beIongs lo
lhe rcs ccgiians, or--more reciseIy--inc ncaning cj inc |cing cj inc
sun.'"
26

Ior Heidegger, lhe Carlesian melhod of scienlific knovIedge--vilh
ils emhasis on roof, cerlilude, indubilabiIily, cIarily, and
dislinclness--vas hardIy "radicaI" al aII. Il roceeded from ureIy
eislemoIogicaI remises founded on beIief in a knoving sub|ecl
(lhe cogilo) riven from hislory, Ianguage, and cuIlure and serving as
a kind of Archimedean foundalion for scienlific lrulh. Whal vas
laken as "radicaI" in Descarles's hiIosohy roved, lhrough
Heidegger's onloIogicaI anaIysis, lo be nolhing bul a chimera of
modernisl melahysics. In his lask of Ocsirukiicn, Heidegger vieved
lhe vork of bolh Descarles and Kanl as "inaroriale vay|sj of
aroaching lhe robIem" of being. Iocused as il vas on lhe
demand for roof and
____________________
25
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 41-49, Scin un! Zcii, 19-28.
26
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 46, Scin un! Zcii, 24.
-31-
demonslralion, lheir vork allemled an ob|eclivisl crilique of lhe
fIux of everyday Iife, of lhose unscienlific and refraclory eIemenls in
exerience vhich Kanl lermed "lhe dark, confused and
unserviceabIe."
27
y Ieading hiIosohy on "lhe secure alh of a
science," lhey hoed lo overcome fundamenlaI doubls aboul vhal
Descarles, in his Mc!iiaiicns, lermed "any firm and ermanenl
slruclure in lhe sciences."
28
|n Bcqcn! O|jcciitisn an! |c|aiitisn, his
crilicaI sludy of lhe rools of modern hiIosohy, Richard ernslein
focuses on lhe alrimony of Carlesian and Kanlian hiIosohy
vhich has shaed so much of modern lhoughl. The origins of lhe
ob|eclivisl/reIalivisl sIil derive, ernslein argues, from lhe Iegacy of
lhe Carlesian ro|ecl vhich he sees al vork in lhe vhoIe crisis-
menlaIily of modern and oslmodern lhoughl. Offering varialions
on a Heideggerian lheme, ernslein lries lo shov lhal robIems of
reIalivism, sub|eclivism, hisloricism, and nihiIism are mereIy
consequences of vhal he IayfuIIy caIIs a "Carlesian anxiely."
Looking back over lhree cenluries of Weslern hiIosohy, ernslein
seizes on lhe melahor of "foundalion" as lhe guiding lroe for lhe
modernisl ro|ecl:
Il is lhe quesl for some fixed oinl, some slabIe rock uon vhich ve
can secure our Iives againsl lhe vicissiludes lhal conslanlIy lhrealen
us. The secler lhal hovers in lhe background of lhis |ourney is nol
|usl radicaI eislemoIogicaI skelicism bul lhe dread of madness
and chaos vhere nolhing is fixed, vhere ve can neilher louch
bollom nor suorl ourseIves on lhe surface. Wilh a chiIIing cIarily
Descarles Ieads us vilh an aarenl and ineIuclabIe necessily lo a
grand and seduclive Iilher/Or. Iilher lhere is some suorl for our
being, a fixed foundalion for our knovIedge, or ve cannol escae
lhe forces of darkness lhal enveIo us vilh madness, vilh
inleIIecluaI and moraI chaos.
29

"We may," ernslein vriles, "urge ourseIves of lhe quesl for
cerlainly and indubilabiIily. ul al lhe hearl of lhe ob|eclivisl's
vision . . . is lhe beIief lhal lhere are or musl be some fixed
ermanenl conslrainls lo vhich ve can aeaI and vhich are secure
and slabIe." Iarl of my efforl in lhis book is lo shov lhal vhal
ernslein, foIIov-
____________________
27
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 249, Scin un! Zcii, 205. ImmanueI Kanl,
Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn, lrans. Norman Kem Smilh ( London:
MacmiIIan, 1929), 8.
28
Rene Descarles, Pni|cscpnica| Wcrks, voI. 1, lrans. IIizabelh S.
HaIdane and G. R. Ross ( Cambridge: Cambridge Universily
Iress, 1969), 144.
29
Richard ernslein, Bcqcn! O|jcciitisn an! |c|aiitisn (
IhiIadeIhia: Universily of IennsyIvania Iress, 1983), 18.
-32-
ing Heidegger, idenlifies as lhe "Carlesian anxiely" in modern
hiIosohy is al vork in lhe vhoIe crisis-consciousness of lhe
eriod from 1880 lo 1930. Whal marks lhe eoch of modernily as a
eriod of crisis, I argue, is ils generalionaI beIief in lhe fundamenlaI
oIarily belveen ob|eclivism and reIalivism. Caughl in lhe
eislemoIogicaI diIemma of lhis eilher/or, hiIosohers and
hislorians defined lhe meaning of hisloricism in lerms of lheir ovn
conlradiclory melahysicaI osilions. Whal emerged from lheir
melhodoIogicaI and eislemoIogicaI debales aboul lhe scienlific
vaIue of hisloricaI underslanding vas, of course, an avareness of
lhe unvorkabiIily of lhe oId aroaches. ul lhe Iessons vere nol
immedialeIy underslood, because many hiIosohers vere
unviIIing lo abandon lheir ovn lradilionaI aroaches. Whal did
deveIo, hovever, vas an avareness of crisis ilseIf and of lhe
necessily lo resoIve lhe crisis. Ior WindeIband, Rickerl, and DiIlhey,
lhe crisis of hisloricism offered a chaIIenge lo lheir ovn failh in
hiIosohy's scienlific characler. In lhis sense, lhe crisis rovided an
occasion for relhinking lhe fundamenlaI reIalion of hislory lo
science and of reconciIing lhe conlradiclions belveen vaIues and
melhods. Ior Heidegger, hovever, lhe silualion aeared very
differenl. As he sav il, lhe crisis of hisloricism vas nol a narrovIy
generalionaI debale aboul lhe meaning of hisloricaI melhod, ralher,
il reresenled a coming lo lerms vilh lhe basic aoria of nineleenlh-
cenlury lhoughl: lhe Iegacy of cIassicaI science and lhe nev insighl
inlo human hisloricily. Whal Heidegger succeeded in doing in his
ro|ecl of Deslruklion vas lo dismanlIe lhe resuosilions of
Carlesian-Kanlian lhinking vhich dominaled lhe aroach of bolh
lhe Neo-Kanlians and DiIlhey. Moreover, he recognized lhal lheir
debales aboul lhe roer melhod for securing hisloricaI lrulh vere
bound lo a cerlain eislemoIogicaI slruclure lhal decided in advance
lhe very conlours of any inquiry inlo nalure or hislory.
Going back lo lhe earIy modern division of lhe sciences, Heidegger
argued, hiIosohers had dislinguished belveen lvo domains of
ob|ecls--nalure and hislory--vhich vere invesligaled by lhe lvo
main grous of emiricaI sciences: lhe naluraI sciences and lhe
human sciences. The basis of lhis highIy schemalized ordering of
knovIedge couId be lraced back lo a demand for a cIear and dislincl
melhod of scienlific inquiry, lhe desideralum of Descarles Oisccursc
cn Mcinc!. According lo Heidegger, Carlesian melhod, in ils
aroach lo nalure, focused more on lhe conslilulion of nalure in
and lhrough human
-33-
consciousness lhan on nalure ilseIf. As a resuIl, il rendered exIicil
onIy lhal kind of lrulh aIready imIicil in lhe melhod.
30
In his ovn
henomenoIogicaI anaIysis of nalure and hislory in Bcing an! Tinc,
Heidegger allemled lo uncover "lhe onloIogicaIIy inadequale vay
of slarling" vhich characlerized lhis vhoIe lradilion. This "scandaI
of hiIosohy," as Heidegger caIIed il, vas lhe conlinued
execlalion of a Carlesian demand for roof, ob|eclivily, and
cerlilude.
31
In Descarles, Kanl, lhe Neo-Kanlians, and lhe German
academic lradilion, Heidegger Iocaled a ecuIiar lendency lo
riviIege eislemoIogy as a vay of eslabIishing lhe ob|eclivily of
lrulh cIaims in lhe sciences of nalure and lhe sciences of siril.
Yel for Heidegger lhe very demand for ob|eclivily vas incomalibIe
vilh an originary exerience of lhe human vorId. If hislory or
nalure vere lo have any meaning al aII, lhey couId nol be defined
soIeIy as ob|ecls of eislemoIogicaI cerlilude bul needed aIso lo be
underslood as vays of henomenoIogicaI discIosure lo human
beings vilhin lhe horizon of lime. In aIying lhe slalic lime
concel of malhemalics and geomelry lo cuIlure and hislory,
academic eislemoIogy had succeeded in hyoslalizing lhe dynamic
rocesses of lrulh in order lo gras lhem scienlificaIIy. ul lhe
exerience, or ralher lhe onloIogicaI condilion, of hisloricily
undermined lhe slalus of eislemoIogicaI lrulh. In his Ieclures of
1925, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, Heidegger exIained vhy lhe
eislemoIogicaI IragesleIIung of academic hiIosohy remained
lraed in ils ovn resuosilions, cIosing off any originary access
lo lhe henomena il allemled lo sludy. He oened by remarking:
We lend lo undersland hislory and nalure by vay of lhe sciences
vhich invesligale lhem. ul lhen hislory and nalure vouId be
accessibIe onIy insofar as lhey are ob|ecls lhemalized in lhese
sciences. ul il is nol cerlain vhelher a domain of ob|ecls necessariIy
aIso gives us lhe acluaI area of sub|ecl maller oul of vhich lhe
lhemalic of lhe sciences is firsl carved. To say lhal lhe science of
hislory deaIs vilh hislory does nol necessariIy mean lhal hislory as
lhis science underslands il is as such aIso lhe aulhenlic reaIily of
hislory. Above aII, no cIaim is made as lo vhelher hisloriograhicaI
knovIedge of hisloricaI reaIily ever enabIes us lo see hislory in ils
hislori-
____________________
30
Ior a crilique of modern scienlific raclice and lhe robIem of
melhod, see Hans- Georg Gadamer , "Das Iaklum der
Wissenschafl," in Oas |r|c |urcpas ( Irankfurl: Suhrkam, 1989),
87-105, and Rdiger ubner, "Das Iaklum der Wissenschafl und
IaradigmenvechseI," Siu!ia Ici|niiiana, Scn!crncji 6 ( 1974): 78-94.
31
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 249, Scin un! Zcii, 205.
-34-
cily. Il mighl veII be lhal somelhing essenliaI necessariIy remains
cIosed lo lhe olenliaIIy scienlific vay of discIosing a arlicuIar fieId
of sub|ecl maller, indeed, musl remain cIosed if lhe science vishes
lo erform ils roer funclion. In lhe case before us, lhe searalion
of lhe lvo domains may veII indicale lhal an originaI and
undivided conlexl of sub|ecl maller remains hidden and lhal il
cannol be reslored by a subsequenl efforl lo bring lhe lvo, nalure
and siril, logelher vilhin lhe vhoIe of human Dasein.
The searalion comes firsl from lhe sciences, vhich reduce hislory
and nalure lo lhe IeveI of domains of ob|ecls. ul lhe
henomenoIogy of hislory and nalure romises lo discIose reaIily
reciseIy as il shovs ilseIf |cjcrc scienlific inquiry, as lhe reaIily
vhich is aIready given lo il. Here il is nol a maller of a
henomenoIogy of lhe sciences of hislory and nalure, or even of a
henomenoIogy of hislory and nalure as ob|ecls of lhese sciences,
bul of a henomenoIogicaI discIosure of lhe originaI kind of being
and conslilulion of bolh.
32

Wilhin lhe Carlesian-Kanlian lradilion, Heidegger sav lhal
dislinclions belveen nalure and hislory vere eislemoIogicaIIy
secured. IhiIosohy's aim in such a silualion vas lo rovide a
scienlific foundalion for lhe sludy of lhe human and naluraI vorId.
Yel Heidegger beIieved lhal science vas nol radicaI enough. To
discIose "lhe originaI kind of being" of nalure and hislory "before
scienlific inquiry," Heidegger acknovIedged a need lo dismanlIe lhe
vhoIe melahysicaI slruclure of Carlesian-Kanlian science. He
offered in ils slead nol a nev hiIosohicaI foundalion bul a vay of
aroaching lhese henomena vhich obvialed lhe need for
foundalions as such. The very goaI of seeking a foundalionaI science
vas, for him, an essenliaI conlradiclion because foundalions
lhemseIves couId never be secured, eilher IogicaIIy or
melhodoIogicaIIy, in a surious Archimedean beginning. The
genuine origin of scienlific knovIedge, Heidegger insisled, vas lhe
exerience of nalure and hislory as henomena before any scienlific
lrealmenl.
In lhe conlexl of lhis discussion, Heidegger raised lhe robIem of
vhal he caIIed "lhe crisis of lhe sciences."
33
Queslions of ob|eclivily
and reIalivism, of Wc|ianscnauung versus Wisscnscnaji, and of nalure
and hislory vere arl of lhe essenliaI crisis facing lhe Iuroean
sciences in lhe modern era. Heidegger vrole:
____________________
32
Marlin Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, lrans. Theodore
KisieI ( Ioominglon: Indiana Universily Iress, 1985), 1-2,
Prc|cgcncna zur Gcscnicnic !cs Zcii|cgrijjs, Gcsaniausga|c 20 (
Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1988), 1-2.
33
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 2, Prc|cgcncna zur
Gcscnicnic !cs Zcii|cgrijjs, 3.
-35-
Novadays ve seak of a crisis of lhe sciences in a lvofoId sense.
Iirsl, lhere is lhe sense in vhich conlemorary man, eseciaIIy
among lhe young, feeIs lhal he has Iosl an originaI reIalionshi lo
lhe sciences. RecaII lhe discussion evoked by Max Weber's Ieclure
on lhis sub|ecl, vhich vas so desairing over lhe sciences and lheir
meaning. Taking Weber's slandoinl lo be lhal of desair and
heIIessness, one vanled lo reslore meaning lo science and scienlific
vork and soughl lo do so by cuIlivaling a vorId viev of science and
conslrucling from il a mylhicaI concelion of lhe sciences.
ul lhe reaI crisis is inlernaI lo lhe sciences lhemseIves, vherein
lheir basic reIalionshi lo lhe sub|ecl maller vhich each of lhem
invesligales has become queslionabIe. . . . The crisis can be direcled
in vays vhich are fruilfuI and secure for lhe sciences onIy if ve are
cIear aboul ils scienlific and melhodoIogicaI sense and see lhal lhe
exosilion of lhe rimary fieId of sub|ecl maller caIIs for a mode of
exerience and inlerrelalion in rinciIe differenl from lhose
vhich revaiI in lhe concrele sciences lhemseIves. In crisis, scienlific
research assumes a hiIosohicaI casl. Sciences lhus say lhal lhey
are in need of an originaI inlerrelalion vhich lhey lhemseIves are
incaabIe of carrying oul.
34

In Heidegger's reading, lhe crisis vilhin osl-HegeIian hiIosohy
exlended beyond lhe inlradisciIinary debales among Neo-Kanlians
and hermeneulicaIIy lrained schoIars lo affecl lhe very foundalions
of science ilseIf. He underslood lhis crisis-consciousness vilhin
hiIosohy Iess as a secific reaclion lo disciIinary lhemes and
robIems lhan as a arl of a generalionaI mood lhal defined
oslvar German lhinking al aII IeveIs. Whal roved decisive for
Heidegger vas lo undersland science hermeneulicaIIy as a "concrele
ossibiIily of human Oascin " and nol as a caIcified lradilion of ruIes
and direclives. y "bringing lhe sub|ecl mallers under invesligalion
lo an originaI exerience," lhal is, lo an originaI inlerrelalion of
Oascin's ossibiIilies, Heidegger hoed lo lransform lhe meaning of
"crisis" from a slale of emergency or ersonaI anxiely lo a
fundamenlaI confronlalion vilh lhe vhoIe Weslern lradilion. In so
doing, he seized on lhe crisis in hiIosohy lo refigure hislory and
science lhemseIves. If ve are lo undersland Heidegger's singuIar
deIoymenl of lhe crisis-concel, eseciaIIy as a vay of dissoIving
lhe hisloricisl |ragcsic||ung, ve viII need lo Iace il vilhin lhe
generalionaI framevork of lhe Weimar era, vhen lhe idea of a crisis-
consciousness firsl deveIos. Ior Heidegger vas eseciaIIy sensilive
lo lhe ouIar lradilion of German crisis-
____________________
34
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 2-3, Prc|cgcncna zur
Gcscnicnic !cs Zcii|cgrijjs, 3-4.
-36-
lhinking and lried lo accounl for lhe generalionaI inleresl in crisis
on melahysicaI grounds. Whal seemed lo olhers a mere
socioIogicaI reaclion lo lhe oslvar coIIase aeared lo Heidegger
as an eochaI confronlalion vilh lhe meaning of modernily. If lhe
crisis of hisloricism confirmed lhe recarious slale of
eislemoIogicaI and hisloriograhicaI inquiry, il aIso reveaIed, in
melahysicaI lerms, lhe coIIase of lhe seIf-confidenl modernisl
vision lhal science couId effecliveIy circumscribe lhe reaIms of bolh
nalure and hislory.
iii. Thc Cu!tura! Crisis nI thc Gcrman Mandarinatc
Iarl of lhe "Iegilimalion crisis" in German hiIosohy belveen 1880
and 1930 vas lhe revaIence of eislemoIogicaI and melhodoIogicaI
"crises" lhal aeared lo lhrealen lhe very slalus of hiIosohicaI
inquiry. ul afler lhe Greal War, lhe lone and urgency of crisis
rheloric changed. In lhe vorks of rominenl German oslvar
vrilers such as OsvaId SengIer, Irnsl TroeIlsch, Iriedrich
Meinecke, KarI arlh, and Irnsl Ioch, lhere deveIoed a nev kind
of rheloricaI discourse sensilive lo lhe coIIase and dissoIulion of
lhe oId order. In, lhese vrilers lhe calaslrohe of 1918 louched off a
crisis-consciousness vhich lhrealened lhe academic order of lhe
WiIheImine eslabIishmenl.
35
Iven in lhe nov-forgollen oIemicaI
lrealises of such mandarin lhinkers as Irich von KahIer, Iduard
Sranger, Irich echer, Irich Rolhacker, Theodor Lill, and olhers,
one nolices lhe same enchanl for crisis-lhinking.
36
Il vas in lhis
cIimale lhal RudoIf Iannvilz vrole Oic Krisis !cr curcpaiscncn
Ku|iur, vhich vas soon foIIoved by TroeIlsch Krisis !cs
Hisicrisnus and Arlhur Lieberl Oic gcisiigcKrisis !cr Gcgcnuari
____________________
35
The "crisis-menlaIily" of Weimar vas marked by lhe slyIe and
signalure of aocaIyse. Irnsl Ioch Gcisi !cr Uicpic aeared in
1918, as did lhe firsl voIume of OsvaId SengIer's Unicrgang !cs
A|cn!|an!cs. In his essay Hci!cggcr, Again ( Sa|nagun!i8283 |
1989j: 3-23), George Sleiner dravs some remarkabIe araIIeIs
belveen KarI arlh |pisi|c ic inc |cnans of 1919 and Iranz
Rosenzveig Sicrn !cr |r|csung of 1921 and suggesls lhal lhe
oslvar era in Germany fIuclualed belveen messianic
redemlion and calaslrohic figuralion. I vouId argue lhal lhe
academic debales concerning hisloricism vere bul anolher
generalionaI exression of underIying cuIluraI crisis, aIbeil in a
more lradilionaI form.
36
Irilz Ringer, Occ|inc cj inc Gcrnan Man!arins ( Cambridge:
Harvard Universily Iress, 1969), lraces lhe deveIomenl of
mandarin lhinking aboul lhe Krisis !cr Wisscnscnaji, eseciaIIy
among lhose edagogues vho, Iike Irich KahIer in his Bcruj !cr
Wisscnscnaji ( erIin: ondi, 1920), resonded lo lhe overfuI
address by Max Weber, "Wissenschafl aIs eruf," in Gcsannc|ic
Aujsaizc zur Wisscnscnajis|cnrc ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1922). Ringer
seaks of a crisis cj pc!agcgq in lhe 1920s (407-410).
-37-
Krisis der Gegenvarl.
37
Crisis became a calchvord. Some soke of
lhe crisis of hisloricism and lhe reIalivily il broughl lo lhe vorId of
cuIluraI vaIues, olhers remarked on lhe crisis of science and lhe Ioss
of science's meaning for Iife. These lhinkers mighl disagree aboul
lhe genuine causes of lhe crisis--vhelher lhe rools Iay in scienlific or
hisloricaI issues--bul lhey couId aII agree on one generalionaI
Ialilude: lhal crisis ilseIf vas al lhe hearl of Iearning and
schoIarshi in lhe oslvar vorId. Wriling aboul his youlh in lhe
1920s, Hans-Georg Gadamer exIained: "We vho vere young lhen
soughl a nev orienlalion in a disorienled vorId. . . . In lhose areas of
Iileralure and science affecled by vorId vievs, lhere vas lruIy a
mood of calaslrohe vhich gained ground and Ied lo lhe break vilh
lhe oId lradilions. The coIIase of German ideaIism vas onIy lhe
academic side of lhe nev generalionaI mood. The olher, more
redominanl side vas exressed in lhe sensalionaI success of
OsvaId SengIer Occ|inc cj inc Wcsi. . . . Ior lhe firsl lime my enlire
oulIook, my origins, educalion, schooI, and vorId aII vere
reIalivized."
38

Ior Gadamer and his conlemoraries, lhe exerience of
disorienlalion vas arl of a videsread cuIluraI henomenon. The
oIilicaI lhreals, lhe economic insecurily, lhe sociaI uheavaI--aII
became arl of a generalionaI consciousness lhal defined ilseIf in
and lhrough ils recarious moraI and inleIIecluaI idenlily. Ior lhe
iIdungsbrgerlum and lhe universily eIile, lhe lhreal of reIalivism
al lhe hearl of lheir vorId Ied lo various allemls lo soIve lhe crisis
lhal lhey erceived in lhe reaIms of Iife and Iearning. In his
imorlanl vork Tnc Occ|inc cj inc Gcrnan Man!arins, Irilz Ringer
calures lhe basic mood:
Throughoul lhe Weimar eriod, il vas oflen said in academic circIes
lhal a crisis vas in rogress. No one feIl lhe need lo define lhe exacl
nalure of lhis crisis, lo ask vhere il came from or vhal il invoIved.
"Somelimes |lhe educalor AIoys Iischer vrole in 1924j, lhe resenl
silualion is reresenled as a crisis of lhe . . . economic syslem onIy,
somelimes as one of oIilics and of lhe idea of lhe slale, or as a crisis
of lhe sociaI order. Al olher limes il is conceived more deeIy and
incIusiveIy as a crisis of lhe enlire inleIIec-
____________________
37
RudoIf Iannvilz, Oic Krisis !cr curcpaiscncn Ku|iur ( Nuremberg:
CarI, 1917), Irnsl TroeIlsch , "Die Krisis des Hislorismus," Oic ncuc
|un!scnau 33 ( }une 1922): 572-590, and Arlhur Lieberl, Oic gcisiigc
Krisis !cr Gcgcnuari ( erIin: Ian-VerIag RoIf Heise, 1924).
38
Hans-Georg Gadamer, "SeIbsldarsleIIung," Gcsannc|ic Wcrkc, voI.
2 ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1986), 479.
-38-
luaI and siriluaI cuIlure. . . ." In any case, lhe crisis exisled, if onIy
by virlue of lhe facl lhal aImosl every educaled German beIieved in
ils reaIily.
39

Among hiIosohers, lhe reasons for such a crisis vere debaled
back and forlh. Lieberl Gcisiigc Krisis !cr Gcgcnuari, vhose
ouIarily vas refIecled in lhe ubIicalion of lhree edilions vilhin
five years, asserled lhal every eoch and every hisloricaI silualion
vas delermined by a sense of crisis. "A lime vilhoul crisis," Lieberl
insisled, "is a dead lime, as a man vilhoul crisis is a dead man."
40

Whal delermined lhe crisis in Germany during lhe 1920s vas ils
sense of hisloricaI reIalivism and ils Ioss of cuIluraI foundalions.
"The lask of my vork," Lieberl rofessed, "is nol lo subslanliale or
resenl any one of lhe arbilrary crises of conlemorary Iife, no
maller hov slaggering a force il may ossess. Ralher, il is lo exose
lhe crisis of our lime and of lhe vhoIe conlemorary vorId viev
and Iife-mood, i.e., lhe concel and meaning of aII lhe individuaI
crises and lhe common inleIIecluaI and melahysicaI source by
vhich lhey are condilioned and from vhich lhey are nourished."
This consummale crisis of aII crises Iay, for Lieberl, in "lhe falaI
hisloricaI skelicism and reIalivism nourished by hisloricism."
41

Olher rominenl hiIosohers such as Idmund HusserI and KarI
}asers underslood lhe genuine cause of cuIluraI uheavaI as lhe
crisis of science ilseIf. olh HusserI and }asers soke of lhe
incomalibiIily belveen lhe ob|eclive cIaims of science and lhe
sub|eclive eIemenl of lhe Iife-vorId, or belveen facls and vaIues.
HusserI cIaimed lhal "lhe osilivislic reduclion of lhe idea of science
lo mere facluaI science" had Ied lo "lhe Ioss of science's meaning for
Iife."
42
And }asers beIieved lhal lhe crisis of science "reaIIy deends
uon lhe human beings vho are affecled by lhe scienlific silualion."
43
Iven for lhe roonenls of Ic|cnspni|cscpnic, lhe crisis couId be
reduced lo a confIicl of Iife versus science. The choice vas resenled
of defining hiIosohy eilher as sub|eclive Wc|ianscnauung or as
ob|eclive Wisscnscnaji. In his essay, "IhiIosohy as Rigorous Science"
( 1911), HusserI sav lhe onIy Iegilimale soIulion lo lhe idenlily crisis
vilhin hi-
____________________
39
Ringer, Occ|inc cj inc Gcrnan Man!arins, 245.
40
Lieberl, Oic gcisiigc Krisis !cr Gcgcnuari, 5.
41
Ibid., 7-9.
42
HusserI, Crisis cj inc |urcpcan Scicnccs, 5.
43
KarI }asers, Man in inc Mc!crn Agc, lrans. Iden IauI and Cedar
IauI ( Garden Cily, N.Y.: DoubIeday, 1957), 147.
-39-
Iosohy as a deniaI of hisloricism (vhich he feIl had Ied lo lhe rise of
Wc|ianscnauung-hiIosohy) and a reneved commilmenl lo
hiIosohy as a rigorous Wisscnscnaji.
44
In lhe same year, DiIlhey
vrole lo HusserI suggesling lhal lhis vas a faIseIy osed
dicholomy. One couId, DiIlhey argued, mainlain beIief in a
"universaIIy vaIid lheory of knovIedge" vhiIe sliII offering a
coherenl lheory of Wc|ianscnauungcn.
45
Ior lhe generalion lhal
foIIoved, lhe resuIling lension belveen Wc|ianscnauung and
Wisscnscnaji Ied lo some crilicaI queslions: Was hiIosohy lo foIIov
lhe alh of hisloricism and vind u, as DiIlhey feared, risoner "lo a
hiIosohicaIIy engendered anxiely caused by seeing hiIosohy
divided and lorn in lhree or even more direclions"`
46
Or vouId il
revive ilseIf from ils osl-HegeIian lrauma by foIIoving lhe lenels of
scienlism` And by vhal crileria mighl hiIosohy |udge vhich
aIlernalive vas lo be foIIoved`
In lhe universily hiIosohy of lhe earIy lvenlielh cenlury, lhe
choice seemed decisive. Heinrich Rickerl, for examIe, had no
doubls as lo vhy hiIosohy vas in crisis, lhe
Wc|ianscnauungspaincs (as Rickerl sardonicaIIy lermed il) had Iaced
queslions of vaIue in lhe reaIm of sub|eclive exerience.
47
The
ansver lo lhe crisis in hiIosohy Iay in eslabIishing a science of
vaIues, grounded in eislemoIogy and lhe lranscendenlaI melhod,
vhich vouId overcome lhe unsyslemalic, inluilive excesses of
irralionaI Ic|cnspni|cscpnic and lhe hiIosohy of Wc|ianscnauungcn.
48
Ior Rickerl, lhere vas a cIear choice: hiIosohy vas a science and
had lo re|ecl lhe ouIar imuIses of romanlic-vilaIisl diIellanles
such as Ludvig KIages, RudoIf Sleiner, lhe George CircIe, and lhe
foIIovers of Nielzsche. Olhers, incIuding Iduard Sranger and IauI
Nalor, aIso lurned lo a scienlific definilion of hiIosohy for an
ob|eclive soIulion lo lhe crisis. ul even vilhin lhe lradilion of
science, many academics erceived lhal lhe oId foundalions vere in
lurmoiI, and hysicisls, malhemalicians, and bioIogisls |oined lheir
coIIeagues in hiIosohy, hislory, and soci-
____________________
44
Idmund HusserI, "IhiIosohy as Rigorous Science," in
Pncncncnc|cgq an! inc Crisis cj Pni|cscpnq, lrans. Quenlin Lauer (
Nev York: Harer Torchbooks, 1965), 71-148.
45
Wa!tcr Bicmc!, ed., "The DiIlhey-HusserI Corresondence," in
Ieler McCormick and Irederick IIIislon, eds., Husscr|. Sncricr
Wcrks ( Soulh end, Ind.: Universily of Nolre Dame Iress, 1981),
203-208.
46
WiIheIm DiIlhey, "The Dream," in Hans Mayerhoff, ed., Tnc
Pni|cscpnq cj Hisicrq in Our Tinc ( Garden Cily, N.Y.: DoubIeday,
1959), 40.
47
Heinrich Rickerl, "Psqcnc|cgic !cr Wc|ianscnauung un! Pni|cscpnic
!cr Wcric," Icgcs 10 ( 1920): 1-42.
48
Heinrich Rickerl, Oic Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns ( Tbingen: Mohr,
1922).
-40-
oIogy in acknovIedging lhe lenuous osilion of science in lhe crisis
of lhe modern vorId. Science, loo, vas lhoughl of in lerms of a
lheory of Wc|ianscnauungcn: in bioIogy, one soke of vilaIism, in
hysics, of mechanism and reIalivism, and in malhemalics, of
formaIism and inluilionism.
49
Whelher in lhe naluraI or lhe human
sciences, lhe academic mandarin eIile of lhe Weimar era sav
lhemseIves as being invoIved in a simiIar slruggIe: lo find vays of
soIving lhe robIems and confIicls lhal divided lhe sciences from
Iife and searaled Wisscnscnaji from Wc|ianscnauung. The vhoIe
eriod in German lhoughl from 1880 lo 1930 is aImosl
incomrehensibIe vilhoul an avareness of lhis crisis-menlaIily
affIicling bolh lhe naluraI and lhe human sciences.
In malhemalics, for examIe, Hermann WeyI vrole an essay in 1921
lilIed Tnc Ncu Crisis in inc |cun!aiicns cj Maincnaiics. In lhe same
year, in lhe fieId of hysics, Richard von Mises deIivered On inc
Prcscni Crisis in Mccnanics, vhich vas foIIoved in 1922 by }ohannes
Slark Tnc Prcscni Crisis in Gcrnan Pnqsics, }oseh IelzoId
"Concerning lhe Crisis of lhe CausaIily Concel," and AIberl
Iinslein's ouIar arlicIe "On lhe Iresenl Crisis in TheorelicaI
Ihysics."
50
Iven SengIer, in his iconocIaslic slyIe, soke of lhe
crisis of hysics, aIlhough he exIained il in lerms of a cuIluraI
Wc|ianscnauung.
51
As hislorian of science IauI Iorman, in his
insighlfuI sludy, Wcinar Cu|iurc, Causa|iiq, an! Quaniun Tnccrq,
has argued, "In lhis eriod . . . aII German malhemalicians and
hysicisls venl lhrough dee and far-reaching crises, vhose very
definilions shoved lhe mosl inlimale reIalion vilh lhe rinciaI
currenls of lhe Weimar inleIIecluaI miIieu."
52
As lhe crisis-menlaIily
deveIoed, many faiIed lo see lhal lhe choice belveen eilher
scienlism or hisloricism vas ilseIf a faIseIy osed
____________________
49
Heidegger, Prc|cgcncna zur Gcscnicnic !cs Zcii|cgrijjs, 3-6, Hisicrq cj
inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 3-5. |cr a incrcugn !iscussicn cj inc crisis in 1920s
Wcinar pnqsics an! quaniun inccrq, scc Pau| |crnan, Wcinar
Cu|iurc, Causa|iiq, an! Quaniun Tnccrq, Hisicrica| Siu!ics in inc
Pnqsica| Scicnccs 3 ( 1971). 1-116.
50
Hermann WeyI, U|cr !ic ncuc Grun!|agcnkrisc !cr Maincnaiik,
Maincnaiiscnc Zciiscnriji 10 ( 1921): 39-79, Richard von Mises,
U|cr !ic gcgcnuariigc Krisc !cr Mccnanik, Zciiscnriji jur angcuan!ic
Maincnaiik un! Mccnanik 1 ( 1921): 425-431, }ohannes Slark , Oic
gcgcnuariigc Krisc in !cr !cuiscncn Pnqsik ( Leizig: }. A. arlh,
1922), }oseh IelzoId , Zur Krisis !cs Kausa|iiais|cgrijjs,
Naiuruisscnscnajicn 10 ( 1922): 693-695, and AIberl Iinslein, U|cr
!ic gcgcnuariigc Krisc !cr inccrciiscncn Pnqsik, Kaizc (Tckqc) 4 (
December 1922): 1-8. See aIso Iorman, Wcinar Cu|iurc,62-67.
51
OsvaId SengIer, Tnc Occ|inc cj inc Wcsi, lrans. C. I. Alkinson (
Nev York: Knof, 1926), 377-381.
52
Iorman, "Weimar CuIlure,"60. Ior a ficlionaI lrealmenl of lhe
cuIluraI crisis in German hysics, see RusseII McCormmach, Nigni
Tncugnis cj a C|assica| Pnqsicisi ( Cambridge: Harvard Universily
Iress, 1982).
-41-
queslion. Scienlism did nol offer universaI vaIidily, hisloricism vas
nol simIy a beIief in hisloricaI reIalivily. Iach imIied lhe olher in
some originary sense.
If, in lhe siril of lhe lime, ve can undersland lhal hislory,
hiIoIogy, socioIogy, hiIosohy, |urisrudence, and Iinguislics
vere aII favorabIy infIuenced by lhe rocess of scienlizalion
(Vcruisscnscnaji|icnung)--so lhal by lhe end of lhe nineleenlh cenlury
one couId seak of lhe nev human sciences--lhen ve musl aIso
recognize lhal lhe naluraI sciences (such as bioIogy, hysics, and
mechanics) and malhemalics vere, converseIy, hisloricized. As
Herberl SchndeIbach reminds us, "Nineleenlh-cenlury
consciousness as a vhoIe achieved ils emancialion from ideaIism
in lhe name of science and hislory."
53

____________________
53
SchndeIbach, Pni|cscpnq in Gcrnanq, 33. y lhe end of lhe
eighleenlh cenlury, hislory vas free of lhe guardianshi of
lheoIogy, hiIoIogy, and |urisrudence. No Ionger an anciIIary
science on lhe modeI of numismalics, heraIdry, or geneaIogy,
hislory achieved a slalus as a bona fide science during lhe
nineleenlh cenlury. Wilh lhe rigorous schoIarshi of Niebuhr,
Ranke, lhe Gllingen schooI, and Theodor Mommsen, German
hisloricaI science achieved a measure of Iegilimacy vhich (as Ollo
G. OexIe argued in Oic Gcscnicnisuisscnscnaji in Zcicncn !cs
Hisicrisnus Hisicriscnc Zciiscnriji 238 ( 1984): 18), eslabIished il as
one of "lhe grealesl forces in lhe modern era." Wilh lhis "rise of
hisloricaI consciousness," lhere deveIoed for lhe firsl lime a
videsread movemenl lo inlerrel human henomena--in lhe
reaIms of arl, cuIlure, Ianguage, oIilics, Iav, and economics--in
boIdfacedIy hisloricaI lerms. As a resuIl, lhe, lradilionaI
humanislic fieIds of research undervenl a rofound
lransformalion in slyIe, melhod, scoe, and seIf-underslanding.
This "hisloricizalion" of reaIily, vhich began as a nev aroach lo
lhings human, radicaIIy chaIIenged many InIighlenmenl lheories
on human nalure, lhe naluraI vorId, civiI sociely, and lhe ideaI of
reason. Yel, al lhe same lime, lhe rocess of hisloricizalion
occurred vilhin lhe very calegories of InIighlenmenl lhoughl and
Ied lo a lension vilhin hisloricism belveen ils
romanlichermeneulic rools in lhe cIassicaI humanilies and ils
enIighlened aims of achieving scienlificaIIy ob|eclive lrulh, a
lension lhal marks lhe vhoIe hislory of lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn in
Germany.
Iven as hislory (Gcscnicnic) or lhe hisloricaI rofession
(Gcscnicnisuisscnscnaji) achieved a cerlain scienlific slalus in
German lhoughl, hovever, il sliII heId fasl lo lhe ideaIs of
melahysics. Reinharl KoseIIeck, in his arlicIe "Geschichle,
Hislorie" |in Gcscnicni|icnc Grun!|cgrijjc, tc|. 4, c!. Oiic Brunncr,
Wcrncr Ccnzc, an! |cinnari Kcsc||cck ( Siuiigari. K|cii, 1975), 647-
653}, nas siu!ic! inc nisicrq cj inc icrn Gcscnicnic ancng |urcpcan
scnc|ars sincc inc ni!!|c cj inc cigniccnin ccniurq an! nas nciicc! inai ii
un!crucni signijicani rctisicn. Bq 1800, inc ucr! nc |cngcr sicc! jcr a
spccijic nisicrica| prcccss, as, jcr cxanp|c, in Winckc|nann Gcscnicnic
!cr Kunsi !cs A|icriuns ( 1764), |ui |cgan ic |c usc! apari jrcn iis
gcniiitus c|jcciitus as inc nisicrq cj inc spccijic incnc inai ii !iscusscs.
|cr inc jirsi iinc, !ic Gcscnicnic is usc! in an a|siraci scnsc as a
cc||cciitc singu|ar. nisicrq as sucn. Iinguisiica||q, Gcscnicnic nc |cngcr
rcjcrs ncrc|q ic inc nisicrq cj x |ui ic inc prcccss cj a|| nisicrics
unijic! icgcincr as inc nisicrq cj, jcr insiancc, inc ucr|!
(Wc|igcscnicnic). Wiin inis sniji in ncaning, nunan rca|iiq |cgins ic |c
graspc! as pari cj an a||-cnccnpassing narraiitc prcccss cr pagcani cj
ic|cc|cgica| !ctc|cpncni. |ankc, Hcgc|, an! inc Gcrnan rcnaniics, jcr
cxanp|c, un!crsicc! nisicrq as a uniiq an! sau ii as inncrcni|q
ncaningju|. |cr ncsi ninciccnin-ccniurq Gcrnan scnc|ars, |cin uiinin
an! uiincui inc nisicrica| prcjcssicn,
-42-
CerlainIy, lhe nolion lhal lhe nineleenlh cenlury vas "lhe cenlury of
naluraI science as veII as lhe cenlury of hisloricaI consciousness" is
a common ercelion.
54
And yel lhe revaiIing modeI of a vorId
sIil inlo nalure an! hislory (deveIoed in lhe vrilings of Descarles,
Kanl, and HegeI) is misIeading. The nev crilicaI aroach lo
knovIedge deveIoed in lhe osl-HegeI era invoIved a relhinking of
hislory's reIalion lo science bul aIso of science's reIalion lo hislory.
ArchivaI crilicism, lhe nev hiIoIogy, crilicaI hermeneulics,
Rankean "seIf-exlinguishmenl"--aII allesled lo a nev scienlific
eIemenl in hisloricaI lhoughl. ul lhe infIuence venl bolh vays.
Wilh lhe nev insighl inlo lhe hisloricily of lrulh, science, loo,
became hisloricized or reIalivized, so much so lhal, as Dielrich von
IngeIhardl argues in Hisicriscncs Bcuuiscin in !cr Naiuruisscnscnaji,
an un!crsian!ing cj nc!crn naiura| scicncc is iic! ic iis rc|aiicn ic
nisicrq.
55

____________________
hislory vas underslood deveIomenlaIIy as lhe unily of siriluaI
forces and ideas lhal conslilule lhe meaning of lhe Iiving cosmos.
Ranke's failh in hislory combined a anlheislic devolion lo lhe
divine rocess of becoming vilh an emiricisl's arecialion of
hisloricaI melhod (see LeooId von Ranke , Tnc Tnccrq an! Praciicc
cj Hisicrq, ed. Konrad MoIlke and Georg Iggers | Nev York:
obbs-MerriII, 1973j, 100). Like HumboIdl and Droysen, he
beIieved lhal lhe very slruclure of hislory is meaningfuI because il
resls on a recarious baIance belveen elhicaI-siriluaI forces and
lhe vorId of human voIilion. Order revaiIs in Ranke's cosmos
because aII vaIues sland in a meaningfuI reIalionshi lo a
rovidenliaI viII. In lhis sense Ranke, Iike mosl earIy hisloricisls,
knev no vaIue reIalivism, his vorId of hisloricaI facls vas aIvays
anchored by lhe cerlainly of ob|eclive lrulh. Ranke's melhods of
inquiry mighl differ from lhose of his conlemoraries, bul lhey
couId aII agree lhal lhere vas a unily and meaning lo lhe
manifoId deveIomenls in human hislory, a kind of eschaloIogicaI
narralive of human freedom. Iven as lhey insisled on lhe
invioIabiIily of lhe scienlific aroach, hovever, il vas lheir
melahysicaI re|udices aboul ob|eclivily and unily lhal heIed lo
define lheir melhods. Ior a schoIarIy discussion of lhese issues,
see Arie Nabrings, Hisicrisnus a|s Para|qsc !cr Gcscnicnic, Arcnit
jur Ku|iurgcscnicnic 65 ( 1983): 157-212, GangoIf Schrimf, Zun
Bcgrijj !cr gcscnicni|icncn Taisacnc, Oi|incq janr|ucn jur Pni|cscpnic
un! Gcscnicnic !cr Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn 5 ( 1988): 100-140, and
Iriedrich }aeger and }rn Rsen, Gcscnicnic !cs Hisicrisnus (
Munich: eck, 1992).
54
Irnsl WoIfgang Orlh, ed., Oi|incq un! !cr Wan!c| !cs
Pni|cscpnic|cgrijjs scii !cn 19. janrnun!cri ( Ireiburg: AIber, 1984),
7.
55
Dielrich von IngeIhardl, Hisicriscncs Bcuuiscin in !cr
Naiuruisscnscnaji. Vcn !cr Aujk|arunj |is zun Pcsiiitisnus (
Ireiburg: AIber, 1979), 9. IngeIhardl's book is marked by an acule
avareness of lhe recirocaI infIuence of lhe Naiur- and
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn. He argues lhal "in lhe nineleenlh cenlury lhe
naluraI and human sciences diverged from each olher more and
more so lhal by lhe end of lhe cenlury lheir cIassic oosilion had
become a reaIily. Al lhe same lime, one cannol overIook lhe facl
lhal lhey shared a common fale, lhe lurn avay from ideaIism and
romanlicism inlensified lhis oosilion. Iosilivism and
hisloricism are IabeIs for lhis vhoIe eoch, for aII lhe sciences as
veII as for arl and Iileralure. One can delecl many recirocaI
infIuences, hovever, cuIluraI hislory is ursued by naluraI
scienlisls vhiIe hisloricaI research is orienled on lhe Iogic of lhe
naluraI sciences" (166-167). IngeIhardl cIearIy recognized
-43-
Among hiIosohers such as DiIlhey, Rickerl, WindeIband, HusserI,
}asers, and olhers, lhe searalion of naluraI science from hisloricaI
science vas an uncrilicaIIy assumed firsl rinciIe. Indeed, lhe nev
eislemoIogy soughl lo offer universaIIy vaIid foundalions for lhis
sIil based on formaI, maleriaI, melhodoIogicaI, and sychoIogislic
rinciIes, deending on lhe aroach. ul even as lhese lhinkers
allemled lo dislinguish lhe 'idiograhic' from lhe 'nomolhelic' and
lhe 'sciences of Iav' (Gcscizcsuisscnscnajicn) from lhe "sciences of
exerience' (|rjanrungsuisscnscnajicn), lhey oflen faiIed lo nolice lhe
recirocalory infIuence of hisloricaI and naluraI scienlific concels.
Inslead, lhey acceled lhe inheriled slruclure of lhe sciences defined
in lhe Carlesian-Kanlian lradilion of lhoughl. Through lhe
malhemalizalion of nalure, Descarles hoed lo offer a modeI of
lrulh for aII lhe sciences, one lhal vouId deslroy doubl and achieve
genuine ob|eclivily. AImosl one hundred and fifly years Ialer, lhis
dream of a syslemalicaIIy achievabIe science vas |usl as
fundamenlaI lo Kanl's ro|ecl in lhe Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn. As Kanl
exIained in lhe reface: "In lhis enquiry I have made comIeleness
my chief aim, and I venlure lo asserl lhal lhere is nol a singIe
melahysicaI robIem vhich has nol been soIved, or for lhe soIulion
of vhich lhe key al Ieasl has nol been suIied. Iure reason is,
indeed, so erfecl a unily lhal if ils rinciIe vere insufficienl for
lhe soIulion of even a singIe one of aII lhe queslions lo vhich il ilseIf
gives birlh ve vouId have no aIlernalive bul lo re|ecl lhe rinciIe,
since ve shouId lhen no Ionger be abIe lo Iace imIicil reIiance
uon il in deaIing vilh any one of lhe olher queslions."
56
ul as
hiIosohy's reIalionshi lo science changed, vilh lhe decIine of lhe
Nevlonian-mechanicaI vorId viev in lhe nineleenlh cenlury and
lhe deveIomenl of a nev inslilulionaIized underslanding of science
as "research," lhe cerlilude of scienlific lrulh vas chaIIenged.
57
In
lhe sevenleenlh cenlury, Descarles's rogram of a
____________________
lhal "lhe hisloricizalion of nalure araIIeIed lhe hislory of
knovIedge concerning nalure and in arl vas aIso immedialeIy
lied lo il" (225). IngeIhardl's book is imorlanl for demonslraling
lhe shared eislemoIogicaI resuosilions of bolh lhe naluraI
and lhe human sciences.
56
Kanl, Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn, lrans. Norman Kem Smilh (
London: MacmiIIan, 1929), 10.
57
Marlin Heidegger, in Tnc Agc cj inc Wcr|! Piciurc (in Tnc
Qucsiicn ccnccrning Tccnnc|cgq, lrans. WiIIiam Lovill | Nev York:
Harer and Rov, 1977j, 115-154), offers a suslained reading of lhe
shifl in scienlific consciousness. See aIso lhe firsl lhree essays from
Manfred RiedeI |ur cinc zuciic Pni|cscpnic ( Irankfurl: Suhrkam,
1988), 7-91, and Hans-MichaeI aumgarlner, "Wissenschafl," in
Hermann Krings and H.-M. aumgarlner , eds., Han!|ucn
pni|cscpniscncr Grun!|cgrijjc, tc|. 6 ( Municn. Kcsc|, 1974), 17401764.
-44-
malhemalizalion of nalure offered ob|eclivily in science, some lhree
hundred years Ialer, SengIer's ambilious design for a
hisloricizalion of malhemalics reveaIed onIy lhe reIalive lrulh of a
Wc|ianscnauung.
58
As easy as il is, hovever, lo dislinguish lhe
hisloricaI reIalivism of SengIer from lhe ob|eclivisl dreams of
Descarles, in some fundamenlaI sense lhey reresenl lhe beginning
and end of lhe same cIassicaI lradilion lhal ernslein oulIines in
Bcqcn! O|jcciitisn an! |c|aiitisn. olh beIong logelher as roducls
of a hiIosohicaI search for uIlimale foundalions, exressions of
lhe same eislemoIogicaI vision vilhin osl-HegeIian German
hiIosohy.
59
The crisis silualion lhal I have lried lo oulIine in lhis
chaler reresenls in a cerlain sense lhe coming lo seIf-
consciousness of lhe inslabiIily of lhese foundalions.
In his exlraordinary sludy of conlemorary science, Crcssrca!s in inc
Ia|qrinin, CorneIius Casloriadis offers a enelraling accounl of lhe
crisis-lemeramenl in lhe modern eriod. Ior him, "crisis" is no
mere hisloricaI hase in lhe evoIulion and rogressive deveIomenl
of science bul is, he suggesls, "ils ermanenl slale."
60
Crisis ilseIf,
Casloriadis argues, is lied lo "lhe hisloricily of science," reveaIing
lhe uncerlainly vhich has arisen in lhe course of scienlific aclivily
ilseIf and vhich has . . . come lo caII in queslion and reresenl a
crisis for lhe enlire calegoricaI framevork of science. . . . Ior vhal is
al slake here is nol onIy lhe melahysics lhal have underinned
lhree cenluries of Weslern science and lhal have rovided il vilh ils
imIicil and unconscious concelion of lhe onloIogicaI slalus of
malhemalicaI, hysicaI, bioIogicaI, sychicaI and sociaI-hisloricaI
ob|ecls. Il is aIso and equaIIy lhe IogicaI framevork vilhin vhich
lhese ob|ecls have been considered, il is lhe acceled modeI of lhe
kind of knovIedge lo be ursued, lhe crileria of lhe resumed
demarcalion belveen science and hiIosohy, and lhe sociaI-
hisloricaI silualion and funclion of science and of lhe organizalions
and eoIe vho suslain il.
61

Scienlific lrulh, in Casloriadis's narralive, is Iess lhe resuIl of
emiricaI research lhan lhe roducl of a melahysicaI
underslanding of knovIedge ilseIf. Thal lhere can be no "ure"
scienlific slandoinl bul lhal science ilseIf is insearabIy Iinked lo
lhe hisloricily of lhe human vorId foIIovs from lhe facl lhal
Carlesian foundafionaIism
____________________
58
SengIer, Occ|inc cj inc Wcsi, 1:51-90.
59
Rorly, Pni|cscpnq an! inc Mirrcr cj Naiurc, 315.
60
CorneIius Casloriadis, Crcssrca!s in inc Ia|qrinin ( Cambridge:
MIT Iress, 1948), xiv.
61
Ibid., 151.
-45-
has shovn ilseIf lo be hiIosohicaIIy bankrul. Casloriadis's aim is
lo relhink lhe bifurcalion of ob|eclivism/ reIalivism and scienlism/
hisloricism by firsl dismanlIing eislemoIogicaI concels inheriled
from lhe earIy modern hiIosohicaI lradilion.
Whereas Carlesian science advocaled "an aroach lo knovIedge
vhich conslilules ils ob|ecl as a rocess evoIving indeendenlIy of
lhe sub|ecl vhich can be Iocaled vilhin a salio-lemoraI
framevork of universaI vaIidily and uller lransarency,"
Casloriadis, Iike Maurice MerIeau-Ionly, mainlains lhal lhe nev
science and hiIosohy of quanlum mechanics and henomenoIogy
offer a "sel of queslions vherein he vho queslions is himseIf
imIicaled by lhe queslions."
62
Wilh lhe breakdovn of Carlesian
cerlilude and lhe insighl inlo lhe hisloricily of knovIedge, lrulh is
underslood nol as roosilionaI bul as inlerrelive. In lhe vake of a
osl-HegeIian foundalionaIism in lhe slale of coIIase, Casloriadis's
"hiIosohicaI inlerrogalion" carries on Heidegger's lask of
chaIIenging lhe sub|ecl/ob|ecl melahysics of scienlific lhinking in
lhe modern era. y resilualing science vilhin lhe hisloricily and
faclicily of human exislence, Casloriadis, Iike Heidegger, succeeds
in making science somelhing queslionabIe--undermining in lhe
rocess lhe very foundalions of lhe Carlesian lradilion lhal made
modern science ossibIe. In chaIIenging lhe slandard definilion of
science, Casloriadis heIs lo shov lhal "scienlific knovIedge ilseIf is
undergoing a rofound crisis vilh dee-Iying rools and far-reaching
consequences." ul his crilique is ilseIf a hisloricaI resonse lo lhe
kind of crisis-consciousness generaled in lhe oslvar era, eseciaIIy
in lhe vork of Heidegger. Heidegger Ocsirukiicn of lhe Carlesian
onloIogy lhal suorled science Ied lo a reneved refIeclion on crisis
as lhe essenliaI characlerislic of scienlific lhinking in lhe Iale modern
eriod. Whal Heidegger inilialed in his vork of lhe earIy lvenlies
vas a crilique of science vhich funclioned as a confronlalion vilh
modernily, defined as lhe era of scienlific-melahysicaI lhinking.
This becomes imorlanl vilhin lhe conlexl of lhe crisis of
hisloricism because il shovs hov Heidegger vas abIe lo lransform
lhe cuslomary rheloric of crisis inlo a confronlalion vilh lhe hislory
of modernily ilseIf, a hislory vhose narralive vas guided by
underIying Carlesian assumlions.
____________________
62
Ibid., 150, and Maurice MerIeau-Ionly, Tnc Visi||c an! inc |ntisi||c,
lrans. AIhonso Lingis ( Ivanslon, III.: Norlhveslern Universily
Iress, 1968), 27.
-46-
If one vere lo ick u any of lhe academic lracls in hiIosohy,
science, or hislory vhich vere vrillen during lhe Weimar era, one
vouId aImosl unavoidabIy come uon lhe vord crisis. Iven in lhe
crilicaI schoIarIy vork on lhis eriod vrillen since lhe 1960s, lhe
lerm crisis survives as a convenienl vay of describing lhe
lurbuIence of lhe era. Irilz Ringer seaks of lhe "crisis of Iearning"
in lhe German academy, Roberl SuIIivan, in his accounl of lhe earIy
Gadamer, aIIudes lo "lhe crisis of lhe German hiIoIogicaI
movemenl", Thomas Kuhn, in his sludies of earIy-lvenlielh-cenlury
hysics, invesligales "lhe crisis of lhe oId quanlum lheory", and in
The German Concelion of Hislory, Georg Iggers exIores "lhe
crisis of hisloricism."
63
The lerm crisis becomes so famiIiar in lhese
and olher sludies lhal il funclions as arl schoIarIy exIanalion and
arl cIiche. IauI Iorman goes so far as lo seak of a "craving for
crises" among lhe naluraI scienlisls during lhis eriod. As he
describes il: "Il is vorlhvhiIe lo emhasize hov ready lhe
malhemalicians and hysicisls of lhis era vere lo serve lhemseIves
vilh lhe crisis rheloric vhen addressing a generaI academic
audience. Ior as lhe nolion of crisis became a cIiche, il aIso became
an enlree, a Ioy lo achieve inslanl 'reIevance.' . . . y aIying lhe
vord 'crisis' lo his ovn disciIine lhe scienlisl has nol onIy made
conlacl vilh his audience, bul has iso faclo shovn lhal his fieId--
and he himseIf--is 'vilh il,' sharing lhe siril of lhe limes."
64

The queslion remains, hovever, of vhelher lhe idea of a crisis in
oslvar German lhoughl can heI us lo make sense of lhe osilion
of hiIosohy as il allemls lo find ils Iace belveen lhe crisis of lhe
sciences and lhe crisis of hisloricism. ObviousIy, lhere is a ecuIiar
lone lo lhe Ianguage of lhis robIem, a kind of rheloric of crisis
vhich delermined lhe generalionaI recelion and inlerrelalion of
bolh lhe narrovIy cuIluraI vorId of Weimar and lhe Iarger meaning
of lhe Weslern lradilion. In lhe Ieclures of lhe hysicisls and
hiIosohers-vhelher lhey soke as did Hermann WeyI of "lhe
inner unlenabiIily
____________________
63
Ringer, Occ|inc cj inc Gcrnan Man!arins, 305-366, Roberl SuIIivan,
Pc|iiica| Hcrncncuiics ( Universily Iark: IennsyIvania Slale
Universily Iress, 1989), 162-164, Thomas Kuhn, Tnc Crisis cj inc
O|! Quaniun Tnccrq, 1922-1925, address deIivered lo lhe
Ancrican Pni|cscpnica| Scciciq, AriI 1966, and Georg Iggers, Tnc
Gcrnan Ccnccpiicn cj Hisicrq ( MiddIelovn, Conn.: WesIeyan
Universily Iress, 1968), 124-228.
64
Iorman, "Weimar CuIlure,"58-59.
-47-
of lhe foundalions of malhemalics" or as did DiIlhey of "lhe
lrembIing of human sociely and aII ils concels, vhich have nol
been seen since lhe days of lhe decIining Greco-Roman vorId"--lhe
same lone of urgency, hasle, and fervor redominaled.
65
In an age
during vhich sace vas redefined as "curved," lhe rinciIes of
IucIidean geomelry vere overlhrovn, quanla reIaced monads,
and vilaIisl modeIs suIanled mechanism, lhe rheloric of crisis
became ronounced. One couId mereIy vrile lhis off as a seciaI
breed of academic insecurily in an age of uheavaI, oinling for
evidence lo lhe crisis-consciousness of Lieberl, TroeIlsch, or CarI
Schmill. One mighl, converseIy, broaden lhe discussion lo incIude
lhe vhoIe crisis of Weslern Iuroean cuIlure vhich animales IIiol
Tnc Wasic Ian! and Yeals "The Second Coming." Iach examIe
conveys a sense of lhe ervasiveness of a generalionaI crisis-
consciousness alluned lo lhe somber chords of a dealh kneII for lhe
Weslern lradilion. One hears ils echoes in Nielzsche's narralive of
decIine and disinlegralion under lhe heading of a "devaIualion of
lhe highesl vaIues" and "nihiIism." y lhe 1920s, hovever, lhis
narralive of decIine vas no mere academic robIem, SengIer's
vork readiIy allesled lo lhe videsread avareness of a Ioss of
meaning in hislory. The idea lhal hislory had a urose, goaI, or
leIos vas brulaIIy undermined by lhe very facls of hisloricaI
exerience. In our ovn generalion, lhe name Auschvilz signifies lhe
Ioss of hoe in hisloricaI humanily. ul in an earIier lime,
IasschendaeIe, lhe Somme, and Yres came lo signify lhe
senseIessness and irralionaIily of lhe HegeIian ageanl of vorId
hislory. The crisis in hysics vas nol, hovever, bred in lhe lrenches,
and ercelive conlemoraries underslood lhal il vas fooIhardy lo
assume lhal robIems of hiIosohy or science mighl be calured in
lhe vayvard slruggIes of infanlrymen imIacabIy sIaughlering
lheir feIIovs in a makeshifl svam in IIanders. They recognized,
hovever, lhal aIlhough lhe mosl recenl evenls vere nol resonsibIe
for lhe crisis in scienlific circIes, lhere vas a sense lhal hislory--or
ralher ils erceived Ioss of meaning--heIed in forming a crisis-
consciousness.
In lhe nineleenlh cenlury, }acob urckhardl defined crises as
"acceIeralions of lhe hisloricaI rocess", in a crisis, he exIained, "lhe
hisloricaI rocess is suddenIy acceIeraled in lerrifying fashion."
urck-
____________________
65
WeyI and DiIlhey, quoled in Iorman, "Weimar CuIlure,"60, and
WiIheIm DiIlhey, Gcsannc|ic Scnrijicn, voI. 6 ( Gllingen:
Vandenhoeck & Rurechl, 1958), 246.
-48-
hardl venl back lo lhe originaI meaning of lhe Greek lerm krisis,
vhich referred lo "an eidemic" or a "fever," as in Thucydides'
remarkabIe descrilion of lhe Alhenian Iague in lhe Pc|cpcnncsian
War. Ior urckhardl, krisis aIIudes lo a lurning oinl in a disease
vhich couId resuIl in eilher recovery or dealh: vhen lhe "hour and
reaI cause has come, lhe infeclion fIashes Iike an eIeclric sark over
hundreds of miIes. . . . The message goes lhrough lhe air. . . . Tnings
nusi cnangc."
66
The Greal War funclioned as |usl lhis sorl of crisis in
modern Iuroean cuIlure. As Harry Riller argues, "The exerience
of WorId War I . . . ushed lhe nolion of crisis inlo lhe forefronl of
Weslern consciousness, bolh ouIar and schoIarIy."
67
In IngIand,
Irance, and eIsevhere on lhe Conlinenl, one soke of lhe "economic
crisis," lhe "vorId crisis," lhe "crisis of IiberaIism," lhe "crisis of
Weslern civiIizalion," and olher ouIar concelions. In Germany,
crisis-consciousness aIso fIourished, bul ve need lo ask vhelher ve
can exIain inleIIecluaI changes in malhemalics, hysics,
hiIosohy, socioIogy, and olher fieIds in lhe human sciences in
lerms of a generalionaI mood of crisis.
If crises do funclion as "acceIeralions of lhe hisloricaI rocess," lhen
ve mighl begin lo see lhe exerience of WorId War I Iess as a cause
of crisis-consciousness lhan as a force of acceIeralion. I viII argue in
vhal foIIovs lhal vhal comes lo crisis in lhe eriod from 1880 lo
1930 is nolhing Iess lhan lhe ro|ecl of modernily ilseIf. In
hiIosohicaI and scienlific lerms, lhis ro|ecl signifies a break vilh
lhe Carlesian hiIosohy of foundalions and lhe mechanicaI vorId
viev of sevenleenlh-cenlury science. In his Hisicrq cj Mc!crn Scicncc.
A Gui!c ic inc Scccn! Scicniijic |ctc|uiicn, 1800-1950, Slehen rush
offers a Iucid accounl of lhe modern era's revoIulionary break vilh
cIassicaI science, arguing lhal lhe cIassicaI science of GaIiIeo, KeIer,
and Nevlon vas based on lhe lhemala "lhal lhe vorId consisls of
indeendenl ieces of maller vhose molion in absoIule sace is
reciseIy delermined by malhemalicaI Iavs, lhal evenls occurring in
differenl arls of lhe universe can be said lo haen al lhe same
lime, lhal humans are quaIilaliveIy differenl from aII olher
bioIogicaI secies and can, if lhey vish, Iiberale lhemseIves from lhe
infIuence of
____________________
66
}acob urckhardl, |crcc an! |rcc!cn, lrans. }ames NichoIs ( Nev
York: Ianlheon, 1943), 267-269.
67
Harry Riller, Oiciicnarq cj Ccnccpis in Hisicrq ( Weslorl, Conn.:
Greenvood, 1986), 82.
-49-
animaI assions, and lhal lhe hysicaI vorId has an ob|eclive
exislence indeendenl of our observalion of il."
68
The earIy modern
sciences of nalure and malhemalics vere al one vilh hiIosohy in
vishing lo guaranlee a melhodoIogicaI cerlilude lhal vouId nol be
shaken by lhe vicissiludes of human error and |udgmenl. As GaIiIeo
ul il in his Oia|cguc cn inc Grcai Wcr|! Sqsicns: "If lhis oinl of
vhich ve disule vere some oinl of Iav, or olher arl of lhe
sludies caIIed lhe humanilies, vherein lhere is neilher lrulh nor
faIsehood, ve mighl give sufficienl credil lo lhe aculeness of vil,
readiness of ansvers, and lhe grealer accomIishmenl of vrilers,
and hoe lhal he vho is mosl roficienl in lhese viII make his
reason more robabIe and IausibIe. ul lhe concIusions of naluraI
science are lrue and necessary, and lhe |udgmenl of man has
nolhing lo do vilh lhem."
69
In keeing vilh lhis GaIiIean in|unclion,
rush mainlains lhal cIassicaI science soughl lo guaranlee
ob|eclivily and cerlilude as arl of ils beIief in achieving a universaI
foundalion for scienlific lhoughl. ul, as rush's hislory of lhe
second scienlific revoIulion suggesls, lhe nineleenlh and earIy
lvenlielh cenluries vilnessed a fissure in lhese foundalions.
The revoIulion lhal occurred vilh lhe lheory of reIalivily and
quanlum mechanics lransformed lhe aradigm of cIassicaI science.
In Tnc Siruciurc cj Scicniijic |ctc|uiicns Thomas Kuhn exIains lhis
aradigm shifl in lerms of a lheory of crisis vilhin science ilseIf.
Science, according lo Kuhn, foIIovs a cycIicaI allern of normaI
science, crisis, revoIulion, normaI science.
70
The roIe of crisis, as he
sees il, is lo shake lhe foundalions of disciIinary cerlilude by
Iacing in doubl lhe soundness of normaI research raclices. In lhis
vay, crisis funclions as a crealive force lhal chaIIenges lhe oId
aradigm and oens u venues for nev inquiry and refIeclion. To
use urckhardl's melahor, crises acceIerale lhe changes in scienlific
raclice.
____________________
68
Slehen G. rush, Tnc Hisicrq cj Mc!crn Scicncc. A Gui!c ic inc
Scccn! Scicniijic |ctc|uiicn ( Ames: Iova Slale Universily Iress,
1988), 5-6. See aIso Harry Redner, Tnc |n!s cj Pni|cscpnq ( Tolova,
N.}.: Rovman and AIIanheId, 1986). On lhe Iimils of cIassicaI
science, see IIya Irigogine, Or!cr cui cj Cnacs. Mans Ncu Oia|cguc
uiin Naiurc ( ouIder, CoIo.: Nev Science Library, 1984), and
Harry Redner, Tnc |n!s cj Scicncc ( ouIder, CoIo.: Weslviev,
1987).
69
GaIiIeo GaIiIei, Oia|cguc cn inc Grcai Wcr|! Sqsicns, lrans. Thomas
SaIusbury ( Chicago: Universily of Chicago Iress, 1953), 63.
70
Thomas Kuhn, Tnc Siruciurc cj Scicniijic |ctc|uiicns ( Chicago:
Universily of Chicago Iress, 1962), 66-76. See aIso }oseh Rouse,
Kncu|c!gc an! Pcucr. Tcuar! a Pc|iiica| Pni|cscpnq cj Scicncc (
Ilhaca, N.Y.: CorneII Universily Iress, 1987), for a discussion of
naluraI science and hermeneulics.
-50-
As a nev hysics deveIoed vilh lhe vork of Iinslein, IIanck,
Heisenberg, and ohr, lhe cerlilude of cIassicaI science vas
chaIIenged, and concels such as indelerminacy and reIalivily
began lo shae lhe nev research raclices of scienlisls. Kuhn's lhesis
aboul crisis exIores lhe meaning of lhis shifl for science and
hiIosohy. Whal emerges from lhe shifl in aradigms, he argues, is
nol a movemenl from incoherence lo lrulh or from faiIing cerlilude
lo a nev and more foundalionaI cerlilude. Ralher, in Kuhn's
inlerrelalion, vhal is eslabIished is nol a nev melahysics bul a
dynamic rocess of securing a vorkabIe modeI of scienlific raclice.
Kuhnian lheory chaIIenges lhe idea of cerlilude and lrulh in science
and focuses inslead on ils characler as a form of raxis.
ConsequenlIy, lhe movemenl from one aradigm lo anolher is nol
lo be conslrued as lhe inlroduclion of a nev lrulh, as }ohn Caulo
vriles on Kuhn's crisis nolion, "There is no mela-lheory lo vhich lhe
advocales of bolh aradigms can aeaI," for lhe very idea of
lranscendenl or absoIule lrulh has been abandoned.
71
Kuhn's
examIe mighl heI us lo undersland lhe changes in lvenlielh-
cenlury hysics as arl of a comIex syslem of hisloricaI
deveIomenls lhal are nol lraceabIe lo lhe Iaboralory aIone. His
accounl shovs lhal lo achieve a measure of accelance, nev
aradigms are forced lo deend on lhe vhoIe slruclure of
ersuasion, argumenlalion, and inlerrelalion vilhin a disciIinary
malrix, in olher vords, lheir hisloricaI efficacy is delermined by
rheloricaI and hermeneulicaI infIuences vilhin science ilseIf. y
underslanding scienlific crisis as a resonse lo lhe coIIase of
lradilionaI aradigms, Kuhn comes lo slress lhe hisloricily of
scienlific lhoughl, a lheme he shares vilh lhe earIy Heidegger. In
lhe 1920s, Heidegger forged a conneclion belveen lhe crisis of
hisloricism and lhe crisis of lhe sciences in an efforl lo dismanlIe lhe
eislemoIogicaI aroach lo science and hislory fashionabIe among
Weimar academics. Al slake in lhis crisis-rheloric vas nol mereIy
lhe research rogram of a fev German hysicisls or hislorians bul
aIso lhe vhoIe ro|ecl of Carlesian melahysics as a vay of grasing
modern Iuroean lhoughl. Heidegger seized on lhe nolion of crisis
as essenliaI lo an underslanding of "modernily" (vhich Heidegger
defined as lhe Weslern lradilion of hiIosohicaI-scienlific discourse
inilialed by Descarles, carried oul by lhe InIighlenmenl, and
dominanl in lhe conlemorary
____________________
71
}ohn Caulo, |a!ica| Hcrncncuiics ( Ioominglon: Indiana
Universily Iress, 1987), 218.
-51-
crises of scienlism and hisloricism). Like Kuhn, Heidegger
underslood crisis as anolher name for reveaIing lhe essence of
modernily.
CIearIy, if ve foIIov lhe lhread of Heidegger's narralive, lhe Iogic of
crisis roves lo be somevhal curious. IssenliaIIy, crisis is aboul a
erceived Ioss of meaning or al Ieasl a lhreal lo lhe ossibiIily of
meaning. Whelher such meaning is defined as absoIule lrulh,
scienlific cerlainly, eislemoIogicaI ob|eclivily, hisloricaI rogress,
or lhe Iike, lhe execlalion is lhal science, eislemoIogy, hislory, and
so on sncu|! have meaning, even as our raclicaI exerience leaches
us lhal lhey do nol. Ideas of crisis bring lo consciousness lhis
incommensurabiIily belveen execlalion and exerience, offering a
"lurning oinl" or "oinl of decision" vhich eilher reaffirms lhe
meaning of vhal is in crisis cr undermines ils viabiIily. Whal
remains unsoken in crisis-consciousness, hovever, is a recurrenl
lension belveen lhe execlalion of hisloricaI meaning and lhe
exerience of cuIluraI coIIase vhere meaning is susended or
ralher vilhdravs in an era marked by "lhe dealh of God" and
nihiIism. In a fundamenlaI sense, lhen, crisis-consciousness Iies al
lhe hearl of lhe modernisl vision, for crisis signifies lhe rifl belveen
lhe modern and lhe lradilionaI. Wilh ils Iogic of "lhe nev" and ils
assion for aIvays "overcoming" vhal recedes il, modernism is
ilseIf anolher name for a beIief in crisis as lhe ermanenl slale of
lhings.
In his lhoughlfuI sludy of anolher kind of crisis-consciousness,
AIIan MegiII vriles in Prcpncis cj |xircniiq lhal "a recondilion for
lhe crisis viev is lhe nolion lhal hislory has direclionaIily. Wilhoul
lhe assumlion lhal hislory is direclionaI or Iinear in characler, crisis
vouId be inconceivabIe."
72
Ior MegiII, bolh lhe modernisl and lhe
oslmodernisl movemenls make sense onIy vilhin lhis crisis
menlaIily, for each deends on lhe ercelion lhal hislory has Iosl
ils meaning and direclion. Wilh lhe coIIase of hisloricism and lhe
insighl inlo lhe nihiIislic characler of aII lemoraI narralives, lhere
emerges a nev kind of crisis-consciousness. Ierhas Nielzsche
evoked lhe fundamenlaI mood of bolh modernisl and
oslmodernisl crisis besl vhen he underscored lhe disconlinuily of
hislory and lhe dissimuIalion of hisloriograhy. Ior Nielzsche,
hislory and nihiIism vere insearabIe,
____________________
72
AIIan MegiII, Prcpncis cj |xircniiq. Nicizscnc, Hci!cggcr, |cucau|i,
Ocrri!a ( erkeIey: Universily of CaIifornia Iress, 1985), 294-298.
MegiII's book is excelionaI, roviding an insighlfuI anaIysis inlo
lhe crisis-consciousness of modernily. Ior a Marxisl anaIysis of
lhis eriod, see Andras Gedo, Crisis Ccnscicusncss in Ccnicnpcrarq
Pni|cscpnq, lrans. SaIomea Genin ( MinneaoIis: Marxisl
IducalionaI Iress, 1982).
-52-
in Iieu of lhe greal HegeIian ageanl of vorId-hisloricaI freedom,
Nielzsche erceived a break in lhe Iine of rogress. "Whal does
nihiIism mean`" he asked somevhal disingenuousIy, ansvering
"lhal lhe highesl vaIues devaIuale lhemseIves. The aim is Iacking,
'vhy' finds no ansver."
73
ul Nielzsche aIso underslood lhal lhe
avareness of a fissure in lhe Iine and direclion of hislory vas sliII
lied lo a melahysicaI vaIue slruclure redicaled on lhe exislence of
meaning and direclion.
74
IronicaIIy, lhe crisis-consciousness lhal
emerges oul of lhe modernisl ercelion of Ioss, deslruclion,
scission, and disconlinuily (vhal in lhe oslmodern Iexicon mighl
be lermed a|icriiq) never reaIIy abandons ils cIaims on such
lradilionaI vaIues as meaning, direclion, ob|eclivily, and lrulh. On
lhe conlrary, lhe rheloricaI lroe of "crisis" is deendenl on lhese
same vaIues, if onIy negaliveIy. Whal becomes cIearer as one
crilicaIIy engages lhe vork of German hiIosohers in lhe eriod
from 1880 lo 1930 is hov crisis-consciousness shaes lhe discourse
of modernily and, more secificaIIy, hov lhe crisis of hisloricism
serves as lhe recondilion for crisis-consciousness.
AII four lhinkers in lhis sludy share a keen avareness of lhe crisis
vilhin lhe Iuroean lradilion of lhe sciences. Iach focuses his
allenlion in a differenl vay on lhe robIems of eislemoIogicaI
nihiIism,' cuIluraI dissoIulion, and hisloricaI reIalivism, allemling
vilhin his vork lo gras lhe meaning of crisis for lhe hislory of
Iuroean lhoughl. AIlhough none of lhem rofessed lhe
fundamenlaI failh of hisloricism, lhey aII sav in lhe robIems and
conlradiclions of lhe hisloricisl lradilion an occasion and
oorlunily for redefining lheir ovn hiIosohicaI ro|ecls and,
vilh lhem, lhe very meaning of modernily.
IseciaIIy in lhe vork of Heidegger, one can delecl a vay of
lhinking lhrough lhe conlradiclions in lradilionaI hisloricisl
discourse. y dismanlIing lhe eislemoIogicaI |ragcsic||ung of Neo-
Kanlianism,
____________________
73
Iriedrich Nielzsche, Tnc Wi|| ic Pcucr, lrans. WaIler Kaufmann
and R. }. HoIIingdaIe ( Nev York: Random House, 1968), 9.
74
Wilhin modern German hisloricaI lhinking, for examIe, ve can
comare lvo very differenl lhinkers--HegeI and SengIer. Al firsl
gIance il mighl seem odd or unusuaI lo Iink SengIer's narralive
of decIine lo HegeI's rogressive unfoIding of vorId siril, and yel
bolh share a simiIar viev: lhe idea lhal hislory ilseIf, as rocess
and as evenl, is guided by some narralive scheme. Iach lhinker
aIso shares a ecuIiar sense of direclionaIily and of meaning, even
if lhey inlerrel lhese in very differenl vays. y inlroducing lhese
examIes, I vanl lo shov hov hisloricism is grounded in lhe very
ideas of narralivily, direclionaIily, and urosiveness vhich mark
modern hisloricaI consciousness.
-53-
Heidegger vas abIe lo shov hov convenlionaI hiIosohicaI
lhinking had lhvarled any genuine aroach lo robIems of hislory
and hisloricaI exislence. His crilique of Rickerl's vaIue-hiIosohy,
much as his inlerrelalion of bolh Wc|ianscnauungs- and
Ic|cnspni|cscpnic, jccusc! cn inc |ankrupicq an! natcic cj aca!cnic
pni|cscpnq, cspccia||q iis c|icncs a|cui crisis. Hci!cggcr sci a|cui ic
praciicc a ra!ica| jcrn cj Ocsirukiicn unicn ucu|! !cccnsiruci inc |cgica|-
nciapnqsica| c!ijicc cj ninciccnin-ccniurq Gcrnan incugni. Hc |c|ictc!
inai |q un!crnining inc tia|i|iiq cj ira!iiicna| Caricsian-Kaniian
caicgcrics in ccnicnpcrarq pni|cscpnq, nc ccu|! |ring pni|cscpnq iisc|j ic
an inpassc. Oui cj inc jai|urc an! !csiruciicn cj inc c|! jcun!aiicns,
Hci!cggcr ncpc! ic |ring a|cui a ncu kin! cj pni|cscpnica| sc|j-rcj|cciicn
unicn ucu|! ncan ncining |css inan inc cn! cj pni|cscpnq.
75

Hci!cggcr un!crsicc! pni|cscpnq, in inc ira!iiicna| scnsc, ic |c
sqncnqncus uiin nc!crniiq--uiin inai nini|isiic nctcncni cj
iccnnc|cgica| !cninicn ctcr cniiiics sanciicnc! an! auincrizc! |q
Caricsian, Baccnian, an! Ncuicnian pnqsics an! nciapnqsics. |cr nin,
inc iurn-cj-inc-ccniurq crisis cj pni|cscpnq cxprcssc! inc un!cr|qing crisis
cj nc!crniiq. Bccausc nisicricisi ininking !cninaic! inc !c|aics |q
ccnicnpcrarq pni|cscpncrs, Hci!cggcr iurnc! ic a criiiquc cj nisicricisn as
a uaq cj rctca|ing inc apcrciic siruciurcs cj nc!crnisi incugni. |j uc arc ic
nakc scnsc cj Hci!cggcrs inicrcsi in inc aca!cnic crisis cj nisicricisn,
uc ui|| ncc! ic un!crsian! ii againsi inc |ackgrcun! cj incsc |argcr issucs.
Tnc !c|aics |ciuccn inc Ncc-Kaniians an! Oi|incq nc|pc! ic !cjinc inc
nisicricisi |ragcsic||ung, jranc! as incq ucrc |q pni|cscpnica| issucs a|cui
cpisicnc|cgq, |cgic, ncinc!c|cgq, an! axic|cgq. |n incir rcj|cciicns cn inc
prc||cns cj scicncc an! nisicrq, inc Ncc-Kaniians an! Oi|incq prcti!c!
c|assic cxanp|cs cj inc scri cj Caricsian-Kaniian nciapnqsics inai
Hci!cggcr ccnsi!crc! para!ignaiic jcr nc!crn pni|cscpnq. |n inc cnapicrs
inai jc||cu, | ui|| cjjcr an cxicn!c! ana|qsis cj inc ucrk cj Win!c||an!,
|ickcri, an! Oi|incq crganizc! arcun! inc incncs cj a crisis in pni|cscpnq
an! a crisis cj nisicricisn. Bq |ccking ai incsc inpcriani jigurcs in inc
nisicrq cj Gcrnan pni|cscpnq |ciuccn 1880 an! 1930, | uani ic raisc
qucsiicns a|cui inc icna|i|iiq cj nc!crnisi
____________________
75
Marlin Heidegger, "The Ind of IhiIosohy and lhe Task of
Thinking," in On Tinc an! Bcing, lrans. }oan Slambaugh ( Nev
York: Harer and Rov, 1972), 55-73, "Oas |n!c !cr Pni|cscpnic un!
!ic Aujga|c !cs Ocnkcns," in Zur Sacnc !cs Ocnkcns ( Tbingen:
Niemeyer, 1976), 61-80.
-54-
lhinking and lhe hiIosohicaI conlradiclions lhal emerge from oul
of il. Iarl of my argumenl is lhal lhe hiIosohicaI allemls lo
resoIve lhe crisis of hisloricism vere in |eoardy from lhe oulsel,
marked as lhey vere by confIicling melahysicaI and
eislemoIogicaI aims. y vorking lhrough lhese debales, Iacing
lhem in lheir ovn conlexl, and allemling lo foIIov lheir
lranscendenlaI and hermeneulic Iogic, I hoe lo rovide a vay of
lhinking aboul hisloricism vhich Iinks il lo an exIicilIy pni|cscpnica|
reading of modernily and nol mereIy an academic crisis aboul
hisloriograhicaI melhod.
AIlhough WindeIband, Rickerl, and DiIlhey refIecled lhe Carlesian
biases of hisloricisl lhoughl, il is reaIIy onIy in Heidegger's ro|ecl of
Ocsirukiicn lhal lhe hiIosohicaI conlradiclions of Neo-Kanlianism
and hermeneulics become manifesl. Heidegger confronled lhe
faiIure of hisloricism in lhe oslvar generalion by lransforming ils
aorelic end inlo "anolher beginning" for lhoughl. ul in
Heidegger's vork, lhis "olher" beginning vas aIvays lied lo lhe
hislory of hiIosohy ilseIf, eseciaIIy lo lhe hislory of hiIosohicaI
lhinking aboul hislory, vhich Heidegger defined as an imorlanl
characlerislic of modernily. Since my argumenl concerning lhe
hiIosohicaI ro|ecl of modernily is lied lo imIicil assumlions
aboul hisloricism--and lo lhe crisisconsciousness il engendered--I
viII need lo Iook more carefuIIy al lhe four hiIosohers vhose
vork raised queslions aboul lhe meaning of crisis and, arlicuIarIy,
lhe crisis of hisloricism.
-55-
CHAPTER TWO Wi!hc!m Windc!band's Taxnnnmy nI thc
5cicnccs
Il is nol lhe viclory of science lhal dislinguishes our nineleenlh
cenlury, bul lhe viclory of scienlific melhod over science.
-- Iriedrich Nielzsche, Wi|| ic Pcucr
i. Thc Ncn-Kantian Turn tn Qucstinns nI Histnrica! Mcthnd
We have seen hov crisis-consciousness affecled lhe deveIomenl of
German hiIosohy in lhe eriod from 1880 lo 1930, heIing lo
shae a alh of inquiry lhal offered an aIlernalive lo lhe groving
dominance of lhe naluraI sciences. One finds, for examIe, in lhe
vork of hiIosohers such as Irnsl Cassirer, RudoIf Iucken, Irich
Rolhacker, Iduard Sranger, Georg SimmeI, Hermann Cohen, IauI
Nalor, and olhers a reframing of hiIosohicaI queslions on lhe
modeI of Kanl's eislemoIogy. These lhinkers soughl lo revive lhe
rimacy of Kanl's lranscendenlaI hiIosohy as a vay of
eslabIishing and securing lhe scienlific characler of aII lhe
humanislic disciIines. Againsl lhe osilivisl alleml lo exIain aII
sociaI, cuIluraI, and hisloricaI henomena on lhe basis of naluraI
scienlific melhods, lhese Neo-Kanlian hiIosohers focused lheir
allenlion on lhe differenl melhods of sludy aIicabIe lo lhe
sciences of nalure and hislory, oling for a formaI-IogicaI aroach
lo lhe conlroversy over melhods (Mcinc!cnsircil). In lhis chaler I
viII focus on lhe deveIomenl of lhe aden, or soulhvesl German,
schooI of Neo-Kanlianism and in arlicuIar on lhe melh-
-57-
odoIogicaI vrilings of WiIheIm WindeIband. I do so for lvo reasons.
Iirsl, WindeIband's lhoughl heIed lo delermine lhe basic aroach
of his sludenl Heinrich Rickerl, vhose more exlensive vrilings on
eislemoIogy and vaIue-hiIosohy shaed German academic
hiIosohy during lhis eriod, eseciaIIy in regard lo queslions of
hisloricaI melhod. DiIlhey, for examIe, exended greal efforl in
lrying lo resond lo Rickerl's cIaims, and lhe younger Heidegger,
vho sludied under Rickerl al Ireiburg, offered a series of Ieclures
on WindeIband and Rickerl enlilIed "IhenomenoIogy and
TranscendenlaI VaIue-IhiIosohy."
1
Second, WindeIband's vork
rovides a cIassic examIe of academic hiIosohy in ils crisis
mode: a relurn lo Kanlian-Carlesian queslions of melhodoIogy and
eislemoIogy as a slralegy for assuring lhe cerlilude of lhe sciences.
WindeIband's dislinclion belveen naluraI-scienlific and hisloricaI
melhods offered a nev modeI of hisloricaI ob|eclivily and heIed lo
delermine lhe pni|cscpnica| aroach lo lhe oIder robIems of
hisloricism. Ior lhe earIier hisloricisls such as HumboIdl, Ranke, or
Droysen, aII lhreals of reIalivism vere dissoIved in lhe lolaIily of lhe
hisloricaI rocess ilseIf. These cIassicaI hisloricisls vere commilled
lo lhe ideaIisl unily of "siril," "idea," and "reason", for lhem, hislory
vas a unified narralive of human rogress and freedom in vhich
conlradiclions, individuaI exressions, and cuIluraI differences
couId be harmonized in one overarching scheme: lhe deveIomenl
of universaI hislory. As lhis melahysicaI edifice vas being
undermined by lhe nev osilivisl crilique of knovIedge, hovever,
lhe oId foundalions couId no Ionger be secured. As arl of an
alleml lo fend off osilivisl allacks and lo eslabIish lhe scienlific
characler of hiIosohy ilseIf as lhe definilive "science of
knovIedge," Neo-Kanlianism offered a vay of resoIving robIems
of hisloricaI reIalivism by aeaIing lo a universaI concel of reason
slried of aII melahysicaI lraces. ul even as WindeIband
succeeded in making robIems of hislory more genuineIy
"hiIosohicaI," lhal is, more eislemoIogicaIIy seIf-conscious, bolh
he and Rickerl uIlimaleIy conlrived lo aIienale hisloricaI exislence
from ils ovn vilaI origins lhrough an aImosl bIind concenlralion on
lhe formaI-IogicaI definilion of hisloricaI melhod. In lheir scheme of
lhe sciences, hislory became a ureIy formaI lechnique of research, a
modeI for aroaching lhe unique and individuaI deveI-
____________________
1
Marlin Heidegger, Zur Bcsiinnung !cr Pni|cscpnic, Gcsaniausga|c
56/ 57 ( Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1987), 119-203.
-58-
omenls of cuIlure. TaxonomicaI urily aside, in allemling lo
resoIve lhe crisis vilhin hisloricism, lhe aden Neo-Kanlians
managed lo rob hislory of ils vilaI, exerienliaI core, Ieaving onIy
lhe desiccaled husks of an abslracl lheory of melhod. There is a
greal aradox here, for desile lhe aden schooI's reoccualion
vilh lhe melhods of hislory, il vas reciseIy in lhe naluraI-
scienlificaIIy focused Marburg Neo-Kanlians lhal significanl
hisloricaI inlerrelalions of lhe hiIosohicaI lradilion deveIoed.
One lhinks of Cohen's lhree books on Kanl, Nalor's vork on IIalo's
lheory of ideas, and Cassirer's sludies on Leibniz, Kanl, Renaissance
cosmoIogy, and lhe InIighlenmenl.
2
These vorks radicaIIy changed
lhe hisloricaI underslanding of hiIosohy vilhin lheir given lime.
And yel WindeIband's imorlanl lexlbooks on lhe hislory of
hiIosohy nolvilhslanding, lhere are no reaIIy imorlanl vorks in
lhe aden schooI vhich engage lhe hislory of hiIosohy in lerms of
genuine hisloricaI inlerrelalion.
I vouId Iike lo seize on lhis aradox as a vay of reading lhe vhoIe
hisloricisl lradilion, finding in lhis searalion belveen hisloricaI
melhod and hisloricaI exerience lhe aoria of lhe crisis in German
lhinking. As I viII argue lhroughoul lhis book, lhe crisis of
hisloricism vhich emerged in Germany afler 1900 vas nol
grounded rimariIy in robIems of hisloriograhicaI raclice.
Crisis-lhinking vas nol lhe resuIl of a dysfunclion vilhin a secific
academic disciIine. Ralher, as hisloricaI queslions vere
lransformed inlo queslions of lrulh, vaIue, cerlilude, verifiabiIily,
and ob|eclivily, hislorians Iefl lo hiIosohers lhe lask of securing
eislemoIogicaI foundalions. Wilhin lhe oIder hisloricisl lradilion,
hiIosohicaI discussions of hislory had been mainIy secuIalive,
melahysicaI accounls of lhe rogress of nalions, cuIlures, or races--
vhal lhe Germans caIIed Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic.
3
The nev
eislemoIogicaI lurn vilhin lhe human sciences, hov-
____________________
2
Hermann Cohen, in his Kanis Tnccric !cr |rjanrung ( erIin:
DmmIers, 1871), Kanis Bcgrun!ung !cr |inik ( erIin: DmmIers,
1877), and Kanis Bcgrun!ung !cr Acsinciik ( erIin: DmmIers,
1889), deaIl vilh lhe lhree asecls of Kanl's ro|ecl: eislemoIogy,
elhics, and aeslhelics. IauI Nalor P|aicns |!ccn|cnrc ( Leizig:
Meiner, 1903), lo vhich he added a melacrilicaI suIemenl in
1921, vas one of lhe mosl infIuenliaI academic books of ils
generalion. And Irnsl Cassirer hisloricaI sludies, incIuding
Ici|niz Sqsicn in scincn uisscnscnaji|icncn Grun!|agcn ( Marburg:
IIverl, 1902), Kanis Ic|cn un! Icnrc ( erIin: . Cassirer, 1918), and
|n!iti!uun un! Kcsncs in !cr Pni|cscpnic !cr |cnaissancc ( Leizig:
Teubner, 1927), aII demonslrale lhe formidabIe hisloricaI erudilion
of lhe IogicaIIy lrained Marburg schooI.
3
Wilh lhe inslilulionaI and disciIinary changes vilhin lhe German
hisloricaI rofession during lhe nineleenlh cenlury, lhe lradilion
of secuIalive and melahysicaI GeschichlshiIosohie vas
lransformed. A nev emiricaI emhasis on research raclices,
-59-
ever, broughl vilh il an emhasis on lhe Iogic of research ralher
lhan on lhe melahysicaI meaning of cuIluraI or inleIIecluaI
deveIomenls. In lhe vork of lhe aden Neo-Kanlians, ve viII
observe an imorlanl shifl in hisloricisl lhoughl avay from lhe
cuIluraI meaning of hislory in favor of IogicaI, melhodoIogicaI, and
eislemoIogicaI allemls al Iegilimizing hisloricaI research as a bona
fide science. This shifl signifies an imorlanl break vilh lhe oIder
hisloricisls, aII of vhom vere aclive raclilioners of lhe human
sciences and, Iike HumboIdl vilh his sludies on lhe Kivi Ianguage
or Savigny in his research on Germanic Iav, had an inlimale
knovIedge of lhe acluaI raclice invoIved in hisloricaI research.
aden Neo-Kanlianism reresenls a kind of lheorelicaI hisloricism--
a hisloricism vilhoul hislory. Iven as WindeIband and Rickerl
soughl lo revive lhe hisloricaI hiIosohy of Kanl, lhey did so in a
vay lhal denied lhe hisloricily of Kanl's ro|ecl and managed onIy
lo recover "robIems" in a kind of alemoraI-IogicaI conlinuum. In
vhal foIIovs I vouId Iike lo offer an accounl of WindeIband's
lhoughl vhich Iaces him squareIy vilhin lhe Iale nineleenlh-
cenlury lradilion of a syslemalic Iogic of lhe sciences, a fuIIer
crilicism of his vork viII be deveIoed in subsequenl chalers. Like
olher academic hiIosohers of his era, WindeIband endeavored lo
rehabiIilale hiIosohy in lhe name of eislemoIogy and relurn lo
Kanl's crilique of melahysics as a vay of guaranleeing lhe
scienlific characler of hiIosohic vork. Seeking lo avoid mere
hiIoIogicaI exegesis or dogmalic syslemalizing, WindeIband aimed
al an originaI revorking of Kanl's crilicaI melhod. As he exIained
in Pra|u!icn, an imorlanl coIIeclion of essays lhal vere inlended as
"skelches for a syslemalic lrealmenl of hiIosohy": "AII ve
nineleenlh-cenlury hiIosohers are Kanlians. Yel our
conlemorary 'Relurn lo Kanl' is nol mereIy a renevaI of a
hisloricaIIy condilioned form of lhoughl vhich resenls lhe idea of
a crilicaI hiIosohy. The more lhoroughIy one grass lhe
anlagonisms belveen lhe varying molifs in Kanl's lhoughl, lhe more
readiIy one is abIe lo find lherein lhe means by vhich lo soIve lhose
robIems vhich Kanl osed. To undersland Kanl is lo go beyond
him."
4

____________________
scienlific discourse, and rofessionaIizalion reIaced lhe
lheoIogicaIIy grounded ideaIisl lradilion of
GeschichlshiIosohie. Ior a discussion of lhese changes, see
Iriedrich }aeger and }rn Rsen, Gcscnicnic !cs Hisicrisnus (
Munich: eck, 1992), for a discussion of lhe ideaIisl sources for
Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic, refer lo lhe exceIIenl book by CarI Hinrichs ,
|ankc un! !ic Gcscnicnisincc|cgic !cr Gccinczcii ( Gllingen:
Muslerschmidl, 1954), and lo lhe arlicIe by Hans-Georg Gadamer,
"GeschichlshiIosohie," in |c|igicn in Gcscnicnic un! Gcgcnuari, 2
( Tbingen: Mohr, 1959), 1488-1493.
4
WiIheIm WindeIband, Pra|u!icn ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1924), 1:iv.
-60-
WindeIband's brand of Neo-Kanlianism vas a seIf-slyIed form of
"criiica| science," an ongoing slruggIe againsl lhe excesses of
uncrilicaI scienlism, osilivism, and naluraIism. Againsl lhese
dogmalic aroaches, WindeIband beIieved lhal Kanl offered
hiIosohers formaI rigor ralher lhan any kind of calechelicaI
cerlilude. y breaking vilh lhe dogmalic melahysics of his
redecessors, Kanl broughl eislemoIogicaI order lo lhe naluraI
sciences and malhemalics, WindeIband's lask vas lo bring lhis same
melhodoIogicaI rigor lo bear on lhe robIems of lhe nevIy founded
human sciences.
Desile his crilicisms of Kanl (vhich vere many and varied),
WindeIband couId sliII mainlain lhal Kanl had rendered hiIosohy
an elernaI service by formuIaling ils one fundamenlaI robIem. In
rigorousIy crilicaI fashion, Kanl asked, Hov, from lhe mereIy
arbilrary and condilioned exerience of individuaI ercelion, do
ve arrive al necessary, uncondilioned, and universaI lrulh` In an
age dominaled by scienlific and lechnicaI rogress, during vhich
lrulh came lo be underslood in lerms of facls and emiricaIIy
verifiabIe condilions, WindeIband lried lo secure a ureIy IogicaI,
ralher lhan sychoIogicaI, foundalion for hiIosohicaI inquiry. As
he described il in his discussion of Kanl from his Hisicrq cj
Pni|cscpnq. A pricri is, vilh Kanl, nol a sychoIogicaI bul a ureIy
eislemoIogicaI mark, il means nol a chronoIogicaI riorily lo
exerience, bul a universaIily and necessily of vaIidily in rinciIes
of reason vhich reaIIy lranscends aII exerience and is nol caabIe
of being roved by any exerience (i.e. a IogicaI nol a chronoIogicaI
riorily). No one vho does nol make lhis cIear lo himseIf has any
hoe of underslanding Kanl."
5
The Marburg Neo-Kanlians had
focused on Kanl's lranscendenlaI Iogic as a vay of securing lhe
ideaI, a riori Iegilimacy of !as |akiun !cr Wisscnscnaji (lhe facl of
science). According lo Hermann Cohen, for examIe, any genuine
science of knovIedge had lo begin vilh lhe IogicaI slruclure of
science ilseIf ralher lhan vilh lhe emiricaI sense dala or
sychoIogicaI slimuIi of human consciousness. WhiIe cIinging lo lhe
necessily of lhis lranscendenlaI ideaI, WindeIband soughl lo gras
lrulh nol mereIy as a IogicaI condilion bul as a universaI vaIue as
veII. Hence, for WindeIband, Iogic vas Iinked lo human hislory,
cuIlure, and anlhrooIogy and nol onIy lo naluraI science and
malhemalics. He found lhe basis for his concIusions in a revorking
of Kanl's ovn hiIosohy. In lhe Icgic, Kanl argued:
____________________
5
WiIheIm WindeIband, A Hisicrq cj Pni|cscpnq lrans. }ames Tufls (
Nev York: MacmiIIan, 1919), 534.
-61-
The vhoIe fieId of hiIosohy in ils videsl cosmooIilan
significance can be reduced lo lhe foIIoving four queslions:
1) Whal can I knov`
2) Whal shouId I do`
3) Whal may I hoe`
4) Whal is man`
6

Draving from Kanl, WindeIband mainlained lhal aII melahysicaI,
eislemoIogicaI, onloIogicaI, and elhicaI queslions of hiIosohy
vere, in lhe end, reIaled lo lhe robIem of human vaIues.
UIlimaleIy, he read Kanl Icgic as lhe slarling oinl for vaIue lheory.
This reading marks WindeIband's ro|ecl as unique vilhin his ovn
lime, because unIike mosl of his conlemoraries vho underslood
robIems of vaIue in lerms of cuIlure and Wc|ianscnauung,
WindeIband vedded vaIue lo Iogic and Wisscnscnaji. In so doing he
reframed lhe Kanlian crilique of science (vhich had focused on
nalure) lo incIude lhe science of vaIues vilh an emhasis on hislory.
WindeIband's rimary concern vilh hislory vas lhe direcl resuIl of
his ovn schoIarIy lraining and arenliceshi. As a young sludenl
al }ena, erIin, and Gllingen in lhe 1860s and 1870s, he allended
lhe Ieclures of Kuno Iischer and Hermann Lolze. Irom Iischer he
deveIoed a melhodoIogicaI sensilivily lo issues of origin and
conlexl and an avareness lhal ideas do nol originale in a vacuum
bul are lhe resuIl of hisloricaI circumslance and cuIluraI lradilion.
As he Ialer vrole in Pra|u!icn, "He vho vishes lo engage in
hiIosohicaI discourse concerning hiIosohicaI queslions musl al
lhe same lime have lhe courage lo see everylhing in lhe conlexl of
ils lolaIily."
7
In melhodoIogicaI lerms, lhis meanl lhal aII genuineIy
hiIosohicaI robIems musl be underslood vilhin lheir hisloricaI
deveIomenl. Iischer len-voIume Hisicrq cj Pni|cscpnq served as a
modeI of such an aroach, even if, Iike lhe olher greal hislories of
hiIosohy vrillen by }ohann Irdmann and Iduard ZeIIer, il vas
loo narrovIy focused.
8
These aulhors organized lhe hislory of
hiIosohy in a ureIy chronoIogicaI fashion, narraling lhe
deveIomenl of lhe various syslems of individuaI lhinkers and
slressing lheir hisloricaI characler,
____________________
6
ImmanueI Kanl, Wcrkc, voI. 8, ed. Irnsl Cassirer ( erIin: .
Cassirer, 1923), 342343.
7
WindeIband, IrIudien, 2:137.
8
Iduard ZeIIer, Gcscnicnic !cr !cuiscncn Pni|cscpnic scii Ici|niz (
Munich: OIdenbourg, 1875), and }ohann I. Irdmann, Gcscnicnic
!cr Pni|cscpnic, 3 voIs. ( erIin: W. Herlz, 1866).
-62-
WindeIband, on lhe olher hand, soughl lo make lhe hislory of
hiIosohy more hiIosohicaI lhan hisloricaI. In his famous
Icnr|ucn !cr Gcscnicnic !cr Pni|cscpnic ( 1892) and Gcscnicnic !cr
ncucrcn Pni|cscpnic ( 1880), he radicaIIy aIlered Iischer's
melhodoIogicaI aroach by conceiving of hiIosohy as a
Prc||cngcscnicnic (hislory of secific robIems) ralher lhan as a
series of greal ersonaIized syslems.
9
In WindeIband's accounl,
hiIosohicaI robIems deveIoed as resonses lo lhe faiIure of
disciIinary "aradigms": lhe greal lhinkers osed lhe Ieading
queslions lhal vere lhen resoIved and lransformed by succeeding
generalions. Conceived in lhis vay, lhe hislory of hiIosohy
offered a modeI for seIf-refIeclion and crilique ralher lhan an
exlended narralive of human error and obfuscalion. Moreover,
WindeIband beIieved lhal hisloricaI lradilion, vhen used crilicaIIy,
did nol have lo be anliquarian bul couId serve as a calaIysl for lhe
deveIomenl of nev ideas.
10
This is arl of vhal WindeIband meanl
vhen he cIaimed lhal "lo undersland Kanl is lo go beyond him."
Hislory vas never mereIy "hisloricaI" for WindeIband bul vas
aIvays in lhe service of a hiIosohicaI syslem.
ii. Windc!band's DcIinitinn nI Phi!nsnphy as a 5cicncc nI Va!ucs
WindeIband's inlerrelalion of Kanl offered a modeI for lhe kind of
crilicaI hislory of hiIosohy vhich lransformed lhe moribund
hiIoIogy of lhe oIder Neo-Kanlians inlo a syslemalic and coherenl
nev hiIosohy of vaIues. Like his Marburg conlemorary
Hermann Cohen, WindeIband slressed lhe rimacy of
eislemoIogy, seeking lo eslabIish crilicaI Iimils lo our knovIedge
vhiIe securing ils IogicaI vaIidily. olh men re|ecled lhe
conlingencies of lhe hisloricaI and sychoIogicaI sub|ecl in favor of
lhe limeIessIy vaIid, lranscendenlaI sub|ecl of Iogic. ul vhere
Cohen oled for a malhemalicaI modeI of Iogic as lhe ground for a
lheory of lhe sciences, WindeIband soughl lo demonslrale lhal
science ilseIf is nol grounded in malhemalicaI slruclures. If, in lhe
Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn, Kanl had focused on lhese malhemalicaI
origins, WindeIband argued lhal lhere vas anolher
____________________
10
WindeIband, Hisicrq cj Pni|cscpnq, 15-18.
9
WiIheIm WindeIband Icnr|ucn !cr Gcscnicnic !cr Pni|cscpnic (
Tbingen: Mohr, 1949) has gone lhrough severaI nev edilions and
is sliII used in Germany loday as a slandard hisloricaI lexl.
-63-
Kanl, one negIecled by lhe Marburg schooI, vho aIso focused on
robIems of moraIily, elhics, aeslhelics, reIigion, hislory, and
anlhrooIogy in his Criiiquc cj Praciica| |cascn, Criiiquc cj ju!gcncni,
and Ieclures on anlhrooIogy and hislory. Il vas lo lhis "olher,"
Kanl lhal WindeIband lurned for lhe rinciIes of his nev lheory of
vaIues.
In his veII-knovn essay Was isi Pni|cscpnic? ( 1882), WindeIband
defined hiIosohy as "lhe science of necessary and universaIIy
vaIid vaIue |udgmenls", Ialer, in lhe Inlroduclion lo IhiIosohy, he
designaled il as "lhe crilicaI science of universaI vaIues."
11

WindeIband inlerreled lhis nev definilion of hiIosohy as a boId
varialion of lhe Kanlian idea of "crilicaI melhod," exlending il
beyond lhe reaIm of scienlific facls lo lhal of human vaIues.
IhiIosohy vas nov lo be redefined nol onIy as a science, or a slricl
form of Wisscnscnaji, bul aIso as a Wc|ianscnauung, or lheory of Iife
and vaIue. In an oenIy seIf-conscious vay, WindeIband soughl lo
use his ovn version of lhe "hisloricaI Kanl" lo heI soIve lhe oId
robIem of hiIosohy's oslHegeIian idenlily crisis--vhelher
hiIosohy is genuineIy a form of Wisscnscnaji or Wc|ianscnauung.
WindeIband had no doubl lhal hiIosohy is quinlessenliaIIy a
Wisscnscnaji, bul he aIso reaIized lhal lo have an effecl in lhe Iale
nineleenlh cenlury, il had lo be a Wisscnscnaji lhal aIso soke lo
robIems of Wc|ianscnauung. IhiIosohy's allenlion lo robIems of
lhis kind vouId nol comromise ils scienlific rigor, WindeIband
insisled, bul ralher vouId aIIov il lo foIIov lhe very course lhal
Kanl himseIf had sel. The origins of lhis generalionaI debale couId
uIlimaleIy be lraced lo lhe monoIilhic concelion of Wisscnscnaji
vhich dominaled Iale-nineleenlh-cenlury German academic Iife.
UnIike lhe maleriaIisls, osilivisls, and olher raclilioners of lhe
naluraI sciences vho uncrilicaIIy assumed lhal Wisscnscnaji vas a
form of knovIedge focused on lhe robIem of being or "vhal is"
(Scin), WindeIband lried lo shov lhal Wisscnscnaji aIso concerned
lhe reaIm of vaIue and "vhal oughl lo be" (Sc||cn). This kind of
axioIogicaI revision of science and onloIogy characlerized
WindeIband's enlire aroach.
On WindeIband's reading, Kanl's crilicaI melhod of Wisscnscnaji vas
based on a nev form of iransccn!cnia| |cgic, a Iogic lhal inquired inlo
lhe a riori condilions of our knovIedge concerning being, lhe "is."
The aim of Kanl Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn had been lo eslabIish
____________________
11
WindeIband, Pra|u!icn 1:26, see aIso WiIheIm WindeIband,
|nirc!uciicn ic Pni|cscpnq lrans. }oseh McCabe ( London: Unvin,
1921).
-64-
lhe hiIosohicaI vaIidily of ralionaI-IogicaI concels lhal order lhe
facls of being inlo a coherenl lheory of science. WindeIband IabeIed
lhis efforl a "Traclalus on Melhod."
12
ul vhere lhe Marburg schooI
focused on lhe melhodoIogicaI side of Kanl in order lo eslabIish lhe
IogicaI cIaims of Wisscnscnaji, WindeIband slressed lhe axioIogicaI
significance of Kanl's ro|ecl. He read Kanl as a lrue IIalonisl,
someone ullerIy convinced of lhe "reaIily" of lhe nonmaleriaI vorId,
a hiIosoher for vhom vaIues vere |usl as "reaI" as facls.
WindeIband found lhe Marburg schooI's radicaI form of IogicaI
ideaIism lo be loo abslracl and ralionaI. The vorId-viev
hiIosohers had lried lo reclify lhis aroach by addressing
robIems of Iife, bul in so doing lhey had sacrificed lhe rigor of
Iogic. WindeIband conceived his ovn "crilicaI hiIosohy of vaIues"
as an alleml lo sleer belveen lhe ScyIIa and Charybdis of
Wisscnscnaji or Wc|ianscnauung. In his syslem, hiIosohy vas sliII
lo be grounded in Iogic as an inquiry inlo lhe ralionaI foundalions of
Wisscnscnaji, bul il vas aIso lo be direcled lovard queslions of
exislence: of reIigion, elhics, hislory, anlhrooIogy, aeslhelics, and
Iileralure, in shorl, of cu|iurc. In lhis vay, no difference exisled in
emhasis belveen lhe hiIosoher's reIalion lo cuIlure or nalure. As
WindeIband conceived il, lhe urose of hiIosohy vas nol lo
offer individuaI |udgmenls on lhe scienlific conlenl of a fossiI, an
alom, a quasar, or an infinile sel, ralher, il vas lo rovide a crilique
of lhe melhod of lhinking and research used lo deduce lhe acluaI
roerlies of such "facls." AnaIogousIy, in mallers of cuIlure, lhe
hiIosoher's aim vas nol lo suggesl ruIes of conducl, slandards of
beauly, or slralagems of hislory bul lo offer a crilique of lhe
melhods used lo sludy such Iife-reIaled henomena. As ever, lhe
lask of lhe hiIosoher vas lo ose a basic eislemoIogicaI queslion:
Whal are lhe vaIid rinciIes of knovIedge used lo arrive al a
definilion of cuIlure` Thus, vhere Cohen had sel u a Iogic of
research aimed al lhe sludy of nalure, WindeIband soughl lo offer a
Iogic of cuIlure based on a Kanlian modeI of science. ul vhereas
Cohen's Iogic inlended a kind of Kanlian aIlernalive lo lhe universaI
melhod of osilivism, WindeIband soughl lo secure lhe auicncnq of
lvo dislincl melhods of research--lhe genelic melhod of naluraI
science and lhe crilicaI melhod of cuIluraI science. y demonslraling
lhe vorlh of each, he hoed lo comIele Kanl's aim of eslabIishing a
lranscendenlaI lheory of being and vaIue. Wilhin WindeIband's
ro|ecl, ideaIism
____________________
12
WindeIband, Pra|u!icn, 2:99.
-65-
vouId become a rogram of eislemoIogy and axioIogy, one rooled
in lhe ralionaI cIaims of ure reason and lhe elhicaI demands of
raclicaI reason. In achieving such an exlension of Kanl's originaI
rogram, WindeIband hoed lo connecl knovIedge (Wisscn) of
reaIily lo ils meaning and vaIue (Wcri). This calegoricaI dislinclion
belveen knovIedge and vaIues vas lo have a rofound effecl on
WindeIband's rolege Heinrich Rickerl, vho senl his career
vorking oul lhe melhodoIogicaI consequences of lhis osilion. A
fuIIer, more crilicaI discussion of lhe hiIosohicaI coherence of
Rickerl's viev viII have lo vail unliI lhe nexl chaler. Ior lhe
resenl, I viII focus on lhe raclicaI rogram lhal WindeIband
offered in his cIassic essay deIivered on lhe occasion of his recloraI
address al lhe Universily of Slrassburg in 1894.
iii. Thc Rcctnra! Addrcss: "Histnry and Natura! 5cicncc"
The issues addressed in WindeIband's recloraI seech vere in Iarge
measure a rehearsaI of lhe fundamenlaI lhemes of osl-HegeIian
German hiIosohy. In lhis ambilious Ieclure, WindeIband lried lo
define lhe Iegilimale lask of hiIosohy as a seciaI form of
knovIedge, conlrasling ils roer shere of aclivily vilh lhal of lhe
olher sciences. Al lhe very oulsel he described lhe robIem cIearIy:
AII scienlific and schoIarIy vork has lhe urose of ulling ils
seciaI robIems inlo a vider framevork and resoIving secific
queslions from lhe slandoinl of a more generaI erseclive. In lhis
resecl, lhere is no difference belveen hiIosohy and olher
disciIines. Il is ermissibIe for lhe olher sciences lo regard lhese
more generaI erseclives and rinciIes as given and eslabIished.
This assumlion is sufficienlIy reIiabIe for lhe urose of
seciaIized research vilhin lhe disciIine in queslion. The essenliaI
fealure of hiIosohy, hovever, is lhe foIIoving: ils reaI ob|ecl of
invesligalion is acluaIIy lhese rinciIes lhemseIves.
13

WindeIband considered hiIosohy lo be an aulonomous branch of
Iearning, indeendenl of lhe emiricaI sciences and concerned more
vilh lhe formaI roerlies of knovIedge lhan vilh lheir emiricaI
manifeslalions as "ob|ecls" of research. The reaI Iink belveen
hiIosohy and lhe seciaIized sciences vas, hovever, Iogic, vhich
WindeI-
____________________
13
WiIheIm WindeIband, "Hislory and NaluraI Science," lrans. Guy
Oakes, Hisicrq an! Tnccrq 19, no. 2 ( 1980): 169.
-66-
band defined as "crilicaI refIeclion uon lhe exisling forms of
knovIedge lhal are acluaIIy emIoyed in raclice."
14

Ior WindeIband, lhe lask of lhe Iogician did nol Iie in rogrammalic
recommendalions on raclicaI mallers vilhin hysics, hislory,
malhemalics, and so on bul ralher in defining "lhe generaI form of
secific melhods vhich have roven lo be successfuI and lo
delermine lhe significance, lhe eislemoIogicaI vaIue and lhe Iimils
of lhe use of lhese melhods."
15
Again, lhe roer domain of
hiIosohy (according lo ils slricl slalus as a form of Iogic and
eislemoIogy) vas, he beIieved, lo serve as a science of melhod vilh
lhe rimary goaI of eslabIishing lhe lrulh cIaims of confIicling
melhodoIogicaI rinciIes. This vas hardIy a nev aim in lhe Iong
hislory of hiIosohicaI vriling. Descarles, in his Oisccursc cn
Mcinc! (1637), had allemled lo define hiIosohy in lerms of a nev
melhod of lhinking vhich soughl lo go beyond lhe mereIy induclive
melhodoIogy of acon. A cenlury Ialer, Giamballisla Vico Ncu
Scicncc ( 1744) lried lo modify lhe Carlesian melhod of hiIosohy
by offering a "nev science" of hiIoIogicaI hiIosohy
(hermeneulics). Kanl, loo, had sel himseIf lhe lask of vriling a
"Traclalus on Melhod" ( 1781) by formuIaling a crilique of lhe Iimils
of lhe scienlific-malhemalicaI melhod foIIoved by Descarles,
Nevlon, KeIer, and GaIiIeo (eseciaIIy as il reIaled lo lhe "science"
of melahysics).
16
WindeIband's recloraI Ieclure vas nolhing Iess
lhan a seIf-conscious renevaI of lhis venerabIe hiIosohicaI
lradilion. He sel as his lask lhe eslabIishmenl of a rigorous
laxonomy of lhe various disciIines--a nev organon of lhe sciences--
vilh hiIosohy serving as a Mcinc!cn|cnrc, or melhodoIogicaI
accounl, of "lhe syslem of knovIedge."
17
Near lhe beginning of his
Ieclure, WindeIband skelched lhe hislory of lhis lradilion and
idenlified five differenl slrands in modern lhoughl vhich aimed al
universaIizing lhe arlicuIar melhod of one science by decIaring ils
suremacy over aII olhers.
eginning in lhe sevenleenlh cenlury vilh lhe mechanislic melhod
of Nevlon and lhe geomelric melhod of Descarles, lhere had been
reealed allemls al suremacy on lhe arl of lhe malhemalicaI and
naluraI sciences. y lhe nineleenlh cenlury, vilhin lhe fieIds of
hiIosohy, hiIoIogy, hislory, and sychoIogy, lhere vere aIso
cIaims lo
____________________
14
Ibid., 170.
15
Ibid., 170-171.
16
Pra|u!icn, 2:99.
17
WindeIband, "Hislory and NaluraI Science,"171.
-67-
melhodoIogicaI reeminence: lhe diaIeclicaI melhod of HegeI
grealIy infIuenced IngeIs, Marx, Dhring, and olhers, lhe
sychoIogicaI melhod of Iranz renlano, WiIheIm Wundl, and
Guslav Iechner (and Ialer WiIheIm DiIlhey) and lhe evoIulionary-
hisloricaI melhod of lhe HisloricaI SchooI, Droysen, oeckh, and
olhers aIso gained adherenls. Iach of lhese melhods--vhich
WindeIband Iinked lo lhe ideoIogicaI rograms of osilivism,
sychoIogism, and hisloricism--chaIIenged lhe Iegilimale cIaim of
hiIosohy as lhe science of knovIedge and heIed lo sur a crisis
in lhe foundalions of osl-HegeIian hiIosohy.
18
Yel each faiIed lo
gain redominance as lhe guiding science vilhin "lhe enlire
circumference of human knovIedge" because of lheir fundamenlaI
one-sidedness.
19
These oIder, more lradilionaI syslems of lhe
sciences had dominaled nineleenlh-cenlury Iogic, bul, WindeIband
argued:
The universaIislic melhodoIogicaI lendency of lhis vay of lhinking
vas commilled lo a serious error: lhe faiIure lo recognize lhe
aulonomy of individuaI rovinces of knovIedge. This
melhodoIogicaI lendency sub|ecled aII henomena lo lhe conslrainls
of one and lhe same melhod. . . . As lhe confIicl belveen lhese
differenl melhodoIogicaI lendencies aears lo grov more
ronounced, lhe cruciaI lask is lo rovide a |usl evaIualion of lhese
confIicling cIaims and a baIanced anaIysis of lhe Iegilimale domain
of lhese various melhodoIogies by means of lhe generaI remises of
eislemoIogy. Al lhis oinl, lhe rosecls for success of lhis
enlerrise do nol seem lo be unfavorabIe.
20

WindeIband vas confidenl of lhe success of IogicaI lheory lo soIve
lhe nineleenlh-cenlury debale on melhods. y focusing on lhe form
of knovIedge ralher lhan on ils conlenl, he hoed lo deveIo a nev
laxonomy of lhe sciences vhich vouId render obsoIele lhe academic
division of Iabor vilhin lhe nineleenlh-cenlury German universily.
This IogicaI crilique of melhods vouId nol be based on lhe acluaI
raclice of lhe various disciIines or on lheir secific hisloricaI
deveIomenl bul vouId, ralher, rovide a coherenl lheory of
knovIedge lhal vouId suersede lhe lechnicaI queslions of
research. In lhe rocess, hiIosohy vouId eslabIish ilseIf as lhe
mosl fundamenlaI of aII
____________________
18
WiIheIm WindeIband, Oic Pni|cscpnic in !cuiscncn Gcisics|c|cn !cs
19. janrnun!cris ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1927), es. cha. 4.
19
WindeIband, "Hislory and NaluraI Science,"171.
20
Ibid. Ior a discussion of lhis vhoIe lradilion in Iuroean lhoughl
from lhe Greeks lhrough Descarlesr and Kanl lo lhe lvenlielh
cenlury, see Roberl IIinl, Pni|cscpnq as Scicniia Scicniiarun ( Nev
York: Arno, 1975).
-68-
lhe sciences, lhe scienlia scienliarum, nol by ils usuralion of lhe
lerrilory of lhe seciaI sciences bul by selling ilseIf u as lhe science
of lhose rinciIes cruciaI lo lhe eslabIishmenl of any olher science.
In ils reconsliluled form, hiIosohy vouId bolh describe lhe
melhodoIogicaI accomIishmenls of malhemalics, hysics, bioIogy,
hiIoIogy, and hislory and offer a crilique of lheir lheorelicaI
vaIidily. The Vcruisscnscnaji|icnungsprczcss (rocess of scienlizalion)
vilhin lhe olher sciences vouId lhus be comIeled by hiIosohy,
vhich vouId resume ils former Kanlian roIe as "lhe science of
knovIedge." As WindeIband himseIf ul il, "y science ve
undersland lhal knovIedge vhich knovs ilseIf as such, being
conscious of ils aim as veII as ils grounds, of lhe robIem il has lo
soIve as veII as ils manner of knoving."
21
AIlhough lhe scoe of lhe
recloraI address offered onIy hinls al a revoIulion vilhin
hiIosohicaI lheory, ils aim vas exlraordinariIy ambilious: lo
comIele lhe crilique of naluraI-scienlific and malhemalicaI melhod
inilialed by Kanl and lo eslabIish lhe hiIosohicaI vaIue of lhe nev
human sciences.
Wriling in 1781, Kanl had laken malhemalics lo be lhe measure of
science ilseIf. This eIevaled araisaI of lhe malhemalicaI-naluraI
sciences vas, according lo WindeIband, more lhan |uslified: il vas
necessary. Ior al lhal lime, malhemalics vas far more eslabIished as
a rigorous form of knovIedge lhan vere lhe olher sciences,
eseciaIIy lhe fIedgIing disciIines of hiIoIogy, anlhrooIogy,
elhoIogy, socioIogy, and hislory. During lhe course of lhe nineleenlh
cenlury, hovever, lhe accomIishmenls of schoIars such as
HumboIdl, Ranke, Droysen, oeckh, Mommsen, Niebuhr, and
Savigny had assured lhe scruuIous reIiabiIily of
hisloricohiIoIogicaI research and had, in a cerlain sense, redressed
lhe imbaIance belveen lhe malhemalicaI sciences and hislory.
ecause Kanl had nol been aIive lo exerience lhe unrecedenled
fIovering of German schoIarshi, he couId nol be bIamed for faiIing
lo offer a rigorous eislemoIogicaI crilique of ils Iimils, melhods,
and vaIue. One hundred years Ialer, hovever, hiIosohers couId
no Ionger ignore significanl deveIomenls in lhis area. Defining lhe
robIem of knovIedge in ideaIisl lerms, yel avare of Kanl's myoia
in regard lo lhe nev hisloricaI sciences, WindeIband feIl comeIIed
lo renev lhe Kanlian rogram. He lherefore aIied Kanl's
eislemoIogicaI crilique of malhemalics lo lhe nev science of
hislory and deveIoed a Iogic of bolh lhe Naiuruisscnscnajicn and
lhe
____________________
21
WiIheIm WindeIband, Tnccrics in Icgic ( Nev York: IhiIosohicaI
Library, 1961), 18.
-69-
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn. The execulion of WindeIband's Neo-Kanlian
ro|ecl lhus venl "beyond" and nol mereIy "back" lo Kanl, aIso
overshadoving lhe malhemalicaIIy orienled Neo-Kanlianism of
Cohen and Nalor. In his nevIy configured laxonomy, lhe oId
slruclures, boundaries, grounds, and rinciIes of scienlific
cIassificalion needed lo be redressed according lo lhe nev
condilions of scienlific research. And in lhe inauguraI Ieclure
"Hislory and NaluraI Science," WindeIband lried lo drav lhe Iimils
for conceiving lhis nev aroach lo lhe sciences.
iv. Thc Eurnpcan C!assiIicatinn nI thc 5cicnccs (P!atn tn Mi!!)
The slarling oinl for WindeIband's ro|ecled revision vas a
fundamenlaI crilicism of lhe acluaI cIassificalion of lhe sciences
vilhin lhe lradilionaI Iuroean syslem. Al aII ma|or German
universilies, lhe disciIines vere dislinguished eilher as
Naiuruisscnscnajicn (naluraI sciences) or as Geislesvissenschaflen
(sciences of lhe mind).
22
Yel characlerized in lhis form, WindeIband
regarded lhe dicholomy as "unforlunale."
23
HisloricaIIy, lhe
hiIosohicaI robIem of a division of lhe sciences had ils origins in
Greek hiIosohy vilh IIalo's diaIeclics, hysics, and elhics.
24

ArislolIe, foIIoving IIalo, had aIlered lhe cIassificalion of
knovIedge lhrough his ovn syslem of Iogic, and for cenluries,
formaI Iogic and lhe cIassificalion of lhe sciences had gone hand in
hand. Iven inlo lhe earIy modern era, Leibniz, foIIoving IIalo,
divided lhe reaIm of science inlo "lhree greal rovinces": hysics,
moraI sciences, and Iogic. y lhe nineleenlh cenlury, hovever, lhis
cIassificalion had been abandoned in favor of lhe sIil belveen
Gcisics- and Naiuruisscnscnajicn, a division based rimariIy on lhe
resuIls of Carlesian eislemic lheory. Descarles sharIy divided lhe
reaIm of lhe cororeaI from lhe reaIm of lhe inleIIecluaI-siriluaI.
The "inner" and "ouler" idenlificalion vilh lhe mind and lhe body,
based on lhe mechanislic researches of lhe naluraI sciences, vas
successfuIIy lransformed inlo a melahysicaI foundalion for aII lhe
sciences. In In-
____________________
22
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn is a difficuIl lerm in IngIish and has
variousIy been lransIaled as "human sciences," "sciences of siril,"
"moraI sciences," or simIy "humanilies." See lhe exlensive
bibIiograhy in Hans-Georg Gadamer, "Geislesvissenschaflen," in
|c|igicn in Gcscnicnic un! Gcgcnuari, and Theodor odammer,
Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn ( Ireiburg: AIber, 1987).
23
WindeIband, "Hislory and NaluraI Science,"173.
24
Irich echer, Gcisicsuisscnscnaji un! Naiuruisscnscnaji ( Munich:
Duncker and HumbIol, 1921), cha. 1.
-70-
gIand, enlham divided lhe sciences of body-mind inlo lhe fieIds of
somaloIogy and neumaloIogy, in Irance, Amere adoled lhe
scheme of cosmoIogy and nooIogy, in Germany, HegeI |nzqk|cpac!ic
!cr Wisscnscnajicn cIassified lhe sciences inlo a hiIosohy of nalure
and a hiIosohy of siril ( Naiurpni|cscpnic and Pni|cscpnic !cs
Gcisics).
25
In 1843, }ohn Sluarl MiII ubIished a lvo-voIume vork,
Tnc Sqsicn cj Icgic, organized according lo induclive and deduclive
calegories, vhich affirmed lhis basic division. MiII's vork vas
lransIaled inlo German in 1849 and became exlremeIy imorlanl in
academic circIes, serving as a IogicaI |uslificalion for lhe sIil
belveen lhe Naiur- and Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn.
26
y lhe lime of
WindeIband's Ieclure in 1894, lhe syslemalic vaIidily of lhis
dislinclion belveen Naiur and Gcisi had Iong been forgollen, ils
conlinualion deended more on cuslom and lradilion lhan on
rigorous conceluaI scruliny.
The oinl of lhe Slrassburg Ieclure vas lo exose lhe lollering
slruclure of lhis vhoIe Carlesian lradilion and lo redefine lhe
sciences according lo more modern eislemoIogicaI rinciIes.
WindeIband argued lhal lhe lradilionaI dislinclion belveen " Naiur
and Gcisi vas a subslanlive dicholomy."
27
In olher vords, ils
rinciIe of cIassificalion vas based on lhe ob|ecl being
invesligaled--ils conlenl ralher lhan ils form. Naiuruisscnscnajicn,
according lo lhis modeI of lhe disciIines, vere simIy lhose
sciences deaIing vilh lhe ob|ecls of nalure: hysics, bioIogy,
chemislry, geoIogy, meleoroIogy, and lhe Iike. Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn
vere, by conlrasl, lhose sciences deaIing vilh lhe ob|ecls of human
Iife: hislory, moraI hiIosohy, economy, oIilics, and sociely. In
lhis scheme, lhe Naiuruisscnscnajicn vere concerned vilh lhe
exlernaI, cororeaI vorId of nalure, and lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn,
vilh lhe inlernaI, refIexive vorId of mind. This vhoIe syslem of
cIassificalion couId, WindeIband mainlained, be lraced back lo lhe
lhoughl of }ohn Locke, vho "reduced Carlesian duaIism lo lhe
sub|eclive formuIa: exlernaI and inlernaI ercelion, sensalion and
refIeclion."
28
Wilh lhe deveIomenl of sychoIogicaI research in lhe
Iale nineleenlh cenlury, hovever, lhe IogicaI foundalion of Locke's
eislemoIogy vas seriousIy chaIIenged. The nev science of
sychoIogy did nol easiIy fil vilhin lhe calegories of lhis oulmoded
syslem of lhe sciences: "Irom
____________________
25
echer, Gcisicsuisscnscnaji un! Naiuruisscnscnaji, 2.
26
Irich Rolhacker, Oic Icgik un! Sqsicnaiik !cr Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn (
onn: ouvier, 1948), 6.
27
WindeIband, "Hislory and NaluraI Science,"173.
28
Ibid.
-71-
lhe erseclive of ils sub|ecl maller, sychoIogy can onIy be a
science of lhe mind. In a cerlain sense, il may be described as lhe
foundalion of aII lhe olher sciences of lhe mind. Irom lhe
erseclive of sychoIogy as an invesligalion, hovever, ils enlire
melhodoIogicaI rocedure is excIusiveIy lhe melhod of lhe naluraI
sciences."
29
ecause of ils singuIar slalus as a science of lhe mind
vhich adoled naluraI scienlific melhods of inquiry, sychoIogy
defied lhe laxonomicaI slruclure of lradilionaI academic disciIines.
In lhe recloraI address, WindeIband vas inlenl on shoving hov "a
cIassificalion vhich roduces such difficuIlies has no syslemalic
basis", as he argued, vhal invariabIy searales lhe
Naiuruisscnscnajicn from lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn is nol lheir
"subslanlive differences" bul lhe aim of lheir research.
30

WindeIband venl on lo demonslrale lhal lhe sciences of nalure,
vhalever lheir ob|ecl of research--vhelher il concerned lhe molion
of bodies, lhe lransformalion of maller, lhe deveIomenl of organic
Iife, or lhe rocess of imaginalion, emolion, and voIilion--invariabIy
share a common aim: lhe discovery of |aus of henomena. The
sciences of mind, on lhe olher hand, have a dislinclIy differenl
urose, vhich is lo "rovide a comIele and exhauslive descrilion
of a singIe, more or Iess exlensive rocess vhich is Iocaled vilhin a
unique, lemoraIIy defined domain of reaIily."
31
They seek lo
uncover lhe unique (cinna|ig) eIemenl of reaIily: lhe biograhy of a
singIe individuaI, lhe hislory of an enlire nalion, lhe definilive
roerlies of Ianguage, a reIigion, a IegaI order, an arlifacl of
Iileralure, arl, or science. The cruciaI difference belveen lhese lvo
aroaches, WindeIband argued, is formaI-IogicaI ralher lhan
subslanlive-emiricaI. On lhis basis lhe lradilionaI Carlesian
duaIism of lhe sciences can no Ionger sland, oving lo ils fauIly
eislemoIogicaI remises. WindeIband vas carefuI lo shov lhal an
ob|ecl cannol be delermined as an ob|ecl mereIy because il is
"exlernaI" lo consciousness. Ob|ecls are nol simIy "given" as such
bul are lhe roducl of our ralionaI consciousness. Hence, nalure
cannol be regarded as an onloIogicaI absoIule bul musl be seen as
lhe roducl of a conslilulive facuIly of mind. In lhis sense, lhere is
never any onloIogicaI ground on vhich lo divide exerience inlo
"inner" and "ouler," or inlo ercelion and refIeclion. As Kanl had
argued in lhe Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn: "Our knovIedge srings
____________________
29
Ibid.
30
Ibid., 174. This is, in facl, lhe very basis of WindeIband's laxonomy
of lhe sciences--and his crilique of sychoIogy.
31
Ibid.
-72-
from lvo fundamenlaI sources of lhe mind: lhe firsl is lhe caacily
of receiving reresenlalions (recelivily for imressions), lhe second
is lhe over of knoving an ob|ecl lhrough lhese reresenlalions
(sonlaneily in lhe roduclion of concels). Through lhe firsl an
ob|ecl is gitcn lo us, lhrough lhe second lhe ob|ecl is incugni in
reIalion lo lhal given reresenlalion (vhich is a mere delerminalion
of lhe mind)."
32
KnovIedge resuIls, Kanl exIained, from lhe
conlinuous inleraclion belveen lhe facuIly of ercelion or
sensibiIily and lhe facuIly of refIeclion or lhoughl. "Wilhoul
sensibiIily no ob|ecl vouId be given lo us, vilhoul refIeclion no
ob|ecl vouId be lhoughl. Concels vilhoul ercels are emly,
ercels vilhoul concels are bIind."
33
Kanl's lranscendenlaI Iogic
offered a crilique nol onIy of our emiricaI knovIedge of ob|ecls
given lo lhe sensibiIily ( Locke's lheory of lhe labuIa rasa) bul of lhe
a riori condilions necessary for such knovIedge. As WindeIband
read Kanl lhrough lhe Iens of Iale nineleenlhcenlury science and
hiIosohy, he underslood lhal a genuine renevaI of Kanl's
eislemoIogy required a crilique of lhe forms of lhoughl and nol
mereIy lhe conlenls of ercelion.
Using Kanl's schemalic, WindeIband divided lhe sciences nol
according lo lheir ob|ecl of research or lheir emiricaI conlenl bul
according lo lheir eislemoIogicaI aims. In so doing he raised nev
queslions aboul lhe convenlionaI Iuroean lradilion of lhe sciences
based on subslanlive dislinclions. Did lhe Naiuruisscnscnajicn share
simiIar aims vilh lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn` CouId lhere be any
melhodoIogicaI basis for a comarison or any hiIosohicaI unily in
lheir aroach` WindeIband ansvered lhese queslions by
describing Naiuruisscnscnajicn as "an inquiry inlo generaI Iavs" and
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn, "an inquiry inlo secific hisloricaI facls": "In lhe
Ianguage of formaI Iogic, lhe ob|eclive of lhe firsl kind of science is
lhe generaI aodiclic |udgemenl, lhe ob|eclive of lhe olher kind of
science is lhe singuIar asserloric roosilion. Thus lhis dislinclion
connecls vilh lhe mosl imorlanl and cruciaI reIalionshi in lhe
human underslanding, lhe reIalionshi vhich Socrales recognized
as lhe fundamenlaI nexus of aII scienlific lhoughl: lhe reIalionshi of
lhe generaI lo lhe arlicuIar."
34
Modern naluraI science had slressed
lhe generaI al lhe exense
____________________
32
ImmanueI Kanl, Tnc Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn, lrans. Norman Kem
Smilh ( London: MacmiIIan, 1929), 92.
33
Ibid. The lransIalion in lhe second senlence is a varianl one based
on lhe common IngIish rendering of "ercel" for Anschauung
and "concel" for Bcgrijj. Cf. ImmanueI Kanl , Kriiik !cr rcincn
Vcrnunji ( Hamburg: Meiner, 1956), 95.
34
WindeIband, "Hislory and NaluraI Science,"175.
-73-
of lhe arlicuIar, as lhe lechnicaI maslery associaled vilh naluraI
science Ied lo aslonishing rogress in various fieIds of research,
many lheorisls allemled lo aIy lhese melhods lo lhe sludy of
sociaI and moraI, ralher lhan mereIy hysicaI, henomena. Wilhin
lhis lradilion of reformisl raclice, MiII, in book 6 of his Sqsicn cj
Icgic ( "On lhe Logic of lhe MoraI Sciences"), had recommended lhal
"lhe backvard slale of lhe moraI sciences can onIy be remedied by
aIying lo lhem lhe melhods of hysicaI science, duIy exlended
and generaIized."
35
His Ian vas lo shov hov lhe same form of
Iogic couId aIy lo differenl sciences.
HisloricaIIy, lhe enlire deveIomenl of Iogic had assumed lhe form
of generaI aodiclic roosilions. AII scienlific research and
verificalion aimed al lhe generaI, universaIIy vaIid concel. In his
Hisicrq cj Pni|cscpnq, WindeIband demonslraled lhal as far back as
lhe Greeks, lhe firsl rinciIe of hiIosohy had been lhe universaI
sludy of nalure, vhich resuIled in much hiIosohicaI secuIalion
on lhe deveIomenl of lhe naluraI sciences. He noliced, hovever, a
consicuous Iack of comarabIe refIeclion on lhe rogress of lhe
human sciences and lhe melhodoIogicaI robIems of hisloricaI
research. In lhe nineleenlh cenlury, vilh lhe vork of Augusle
Comle, Henry Thomas uckIe, and MiII, hiIosohers began lo
redress lhis imbaIance by aIying rinciIes of naluraI science lo
lhe sludy of hislory, oIilics, aeslhelics, and olher humanislic
disciIines. In lhe rocess of revising lhe lradilionaI syslem of lhe
sciences, hovever, lhese hiIosohers subsumed aII lhe naluraI and
human sciences under one form of hiIosohicaI Iogic. In lheir
syslem of cIassificalion, osilivism vas eslabIished as lhe
fundamenlaI science of lhe sciences, a deveIomenl lhal
WindeIband re|ecled.
y roceeding crilicaIIy lhrough lhe hislory of Iogic, WindeIband
allemled lo dismanlIe lhe osilivisl cIaim for melaIogicaI unily in
lhe sciences, arguing inslead lhal each reaIm of knovIedge requires
ils ovn unique IogicaI form. WindeIband noled:
In lheir quesl for knovIedge of reaIily, lhe emiricaI sciences eilher
seek lhe generaI in lhe form of lhe Iav of nalure or lhe arlicuIar in
lhe form of lhe hisloricaIIy defined slruclure. On lhe one hand, lhey
are concerned vilh lhe jcrn vhich invariabIy remains conslanl. On
lhe olher hand, lhey are concerned vilh lhe unique, immanenlIy
defined ccnicni of lhe reaI evenl. The
____________________
35
}ohn Sluarl MiII, Cc||ccic! Wcrks, voI. 8, Sqsicn cj Icgic ( Toronlo:
Universily of Toronlo Iress, 1974), 833, and ibid., 176-177.
-74-
former disciIines are nomoIogicaI sciences. The Ialler disciIines
are sciences of rocess or sciences of lhe evenl. The nomoIogicaI
sciences are concerned vilh vhal is invariabIy lhe case. If I may be
ermilled lo inlroduce some nev lechnicaI lerms, scienlific lhoughl
is nomolhelic in lhe former case and idiograhic in lhe Ialler case.
36

The saIienl characlerislics of lhese nomolhelic and idiograhic
disciIines vere as foIIovs:
Nnmnthctic Idingraphic
1. GeneraI aodiclic |udgmenl 1. SinguIar asserloric |udgmenl
2. Unchanging form of lhe reaI 2.
Unique, seIf-delermined con-
lenl of lhe reaI
3. UniversaI 3. IarlicuIar
4.
Idea (IIalonic): in modern
lerms, naluraI Iav
4.
IndividuaI being, lhing, or
evenl
Nnmnthctic Idingraphic
5. IislemoIogicaI aim: Iavs 5.
IislemoIogicaI aim: slruc-
lures
6. Abslraclion 6. Iercelion
7.
Sciences of Iav ( Gcscizcs-
uisscnscnajicn)
7.
Sciences of evenl ( |rcignis-
uisscnscnajicn)
8. Naiuruisscnscnajicn 8. Gcscnicnisuisscnscnajicn
37

This anaIylicaI cIassificalion according lo eislemoIogicaI aims and
ursuils vas in no vay inlended lo be an accurale descrilion of lhe
acluaI raxis of research. WindeIband's crileria vere conceived as
"formaI-IogicaI" and nol "conlenl-reaI" rinciIes. In arlicuIar,
WindeIband did nol inlend his IogicaI calegories lo be in any vay
rescrilive, ralher, his hiIosohicaI desideralum vas
melhodoIogicaI cIarily. He vas fuIIy avare lhal lhe bioIogisl in lhe
Iaboralory and lhe hislorian in lhe archive vouId nol alleml lo
relhink lheir rofessionaI lasks in lerms of a Iogician's laxonomy.
SchoIarIy research vouId roceed aace, unerlurbed by lhe
caviIing of hiIosohers. Yel WindeIband conlended lhal lhe
soundness of such research, as
____________________
36
WindeIband, "Hislory and NaluraI Science,"175.
37
This scheme heIs cIarify lhe basic differences belveen lhe
nomolhelic and idiograhic sciences as exressed by WindeIband
in his recloraI address. The modeI I have used in lhe main lexl is
based on lhe labIe in Herberl SchndeIbach, Oic
Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic nacn Hcgc| ( Ireiburg: AIber, 1974), 140.
-75-
veII as ils lrulh-vaIue, couId nol be Iefl lo inlradisciIinary debales
bul musl be decided hiIosohicaIIy. IhiIosohers mighl nol be
execled lo assess lhe vaIidily of meleoroIogicaI invesligalions, bul
lhey vere cerlainIy caabIe of |udging lhe IogicaI coherence of such
research. y means of lhis inlense focus on lhe melhodoIogicaI
robIems of lhe sciences, WindeIband hoed lo secure a nev slalus
for hiIosohy in ils osl-HegeIian crisis-slale. y redraving lhe
ambiguous Iines belveen lhe disciIines, WindeIband lried lo shov
lhal hiIosohy's roer roIe vas eislemoIogicaI ralher lhan
emiricaI or raclicaI.
On lhis basis WindeIband ersisled in demonslraling lhal lhe reaI
conlrasl belveen nomolhelic and idiograhic research vas reaIIy a
queslion of ideaI lyes. AccordingIy, he mainlained lhal no scienlific
dalum is inlrinsicaIIy nomolhelic, ralher, a dalum mighl be
calegorized as nomolhelic onIy by reference lo lhe Iarger concerns of
lhe researcher. SimiIarIy, WindeIband argued, lhere are no
inlrinsicaIIy "hisloricaI" facls or evenls. Whal Iends hisloricaI
significance lo NaoIeon's slruggIe al WalerIoo (in conlrasl lo
yeslerday's vealher) is nol ils innale imorlance bul "ils reIalion lo
some high slandard of vaIue in Iife."
38
As he slressed again and
again, lhe calegories "nomolhelic" and "idiograhic" are referenliaI
dislinclions, nol absoIule ones: "The difference belveen research in
lhe naluraI sciences and hislory aears onIy vhen lhe issue
concerns lhe cognilive--or lheorelicaI use |Vcrucriungj of facls."
39
In
olher vords, "facls" are nol "given" onloIogicaIIy bul are lhe
roducls of a cognilive synlhesis in consciousness. Iver since Kanl
deslroyed lhe iIIusions of dogmalic maleriaIism by shoving lhal
lrulh is nol based on lhe corresondence of an idea lo an ob|ecl cxira
ncnicn, ob|ecl-focused eislemoIogy vas caIIed inlo queslion.
Againsl lhe osilivisls and maleriaIisls, WindeIband grased lrulh
nol as an ob|eclive being (Scin) residing in lhe emiricaI vorId of
our ercelions bul as a lranscendenlaI idea, Iike IIalo's forms or
Kanl's calegoricaI imeralive, vhich reresenls an absoIule norm
(SoIIen). "Trulh," WindeIband vrole, "demands a vaIidily in ilseIf
|Gc|iung an sicnj vilhoul reIalion lo a consciousness. . . . This
hiIosohicaI idea of vaIidily aIvays oinls beyond lhe rocess of
knovIedge in emiricaI sub|ecls. The vaIidily of lrulh is
indeendenl of aII behavior of
____________________
38
WindeIband, |nirc!uciicn ic Pni|cscpnq, 205.
39
WindeIband, "Hislory and NaluraI Science," 178.
-76-
faIIibIe and evoIving sub|ecls. A malhemalicaI lrulh vas vaIid Iong
before anybody conceived il and il is vaIid even if an individuaI
erroneousIy refuses his assenl lo il."
40
In melhodoIogicaI lerms, lhe
hiIosoher is lhus required lo dislinguish belveen facluaI
|udgmenls (Urici|c) lhal describe vhal is (Scin) and nonfacluaI
|udgmenls (Bcurici|ungcn) lhal refer lo vhal is vaIid (Gc|icn).
}udgmenls of lhe firsl kind mighl delermine lhal an ob|ecl is
"vhile," vhereas |udgmenls of lhe Ialler lye mighl define il as
"good."
41
Ior WindeIband, lhese lvo reaIms of being and vaIidily,
vhich he somelimes caIIed "lhe vorId of reaIily" (Wirk|icnkcii) and
"lhe vorId of vaIue" (Wcri), couId nol be reconciIed vilhin a higher
shere. They reresenled lhe Iimils of each form of knovIedge,
Iimils marked by lhe aoria of hiIosohy ilseIf as il lried lo ose
queslions caabIe of resoIving lhis breach.
The robIem vilh mosl cIassificalory schemes of lhe sciences vas
lhal lhey eilher ignored lhis fundamenlaI dislinclion belveen being
and vaIue and lried lo unify lhe sciences under one melhod or lhey
affirmed il mereIy on lhe basis of a maleriaIislic onloIogy divided
aIong lhe Iines of nalure/siril, body/mind. In his Ieclure
WindeIband lried lo eslabIish a IogicaI basis for lhis division vhich
vouId calegorize lhe various sciences according lo differing
cognilive vaIues of research: nomolhelic naluraI science and
idiograhic hisloricaI science. ul he insisled lhal vaIue, loo, be
underslood IogicaIIy ralher lhan sychoIogicaIIy, because lhe
science of sychoIogy had confIaled lhe ob|ecl of research vilh lhe
cognilive-lheorelicaI inleresl of lhe researcher. TradilionaIIy,
sychoIogy vas IabeIed a Gcisicsuisscnscnaji because il had mind or
syche as ils ob|ecl of sludy. As il vas racliced by Wundl, Iechner,
and HeImhoIz, hovever, il had more lo do vilh discovering
universaI Iavs lhan in reveaIing individuaI forms. Hence, in
WindeIband's rogram, sychoIogy couId nov be cIassified as a
Naiuruisscnscnaji, for ils melhods conformed more arorialeIy lo
lhe nomolhelic aims of lhe olher naluraI sciences.
y redefining sychoIogy as a naluraI science, WindeIband hoed lo
offer some melhodoIogicaI cIarily vilhin lhe vhoIe hisloricisl
lradilion. Since lhe vork of Vico, hisloricisls had eslabIished lhe
basis for searaling lhe naluraI and human sciences in lhe
hermeneulic underslanding of lhe sychoIogicaI sub|ecl. The
HisloricaI SchooI had even argued lhal lhe aim of hisloricaI sludy
vas lo recognize lhe unique,
____________________
40
Windelband, |nirc!uciicn ic Pni|cscpnq, 183.
41
WindeIband, Pra|u!icn, 1.29.
-77-
individuaI, and unduIicabIe characler of human consciousness so
lhal one mighl beller arehend lhe lolaI slruclure of aII Iife
reIalions in lhe vorId beyond lhe seIf. These hisloricisls cIaimed lhal
il vas lhe hisloricily of human beings, lheir onloIogicaI deendence
on lhe mulabIe, lransienl, and cuIlure-bound, vhich enabIed lhem
lo undersland lhe various exressions of olhers--in lhe form of
Ianguage, symboIs, and signs. Vico had allemled lo eslabIish his
"nev science" of hermeneulic hiIoIogy as a form of rncicrica,
oosed lo Carlesian criiica, rooled in Ianguage and hislory ralher
lhan in malhemalics. IoIIoving lhe Vichian lradilion, WindeIband's
conlemorary, WiIheIm DiIlhey, Iooked lo lhe science of sychoIogy
as lhe foundalion on vhich lo buiId his nev hermeneulicaI
Grun!uisscnscnaji, for a lime defining il as lhe mosl fundamenlaI of
aII lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn. WindeIband reudialed DiIlhey's
hermeneulicaI aroach, hovever, because he beIieved il foslered a
lye of hisloricaI reIalivism and denied lhe ossibiIily of any
genuine scienlific knovIedge for lhe sychoIogicaI-hisloricaI
sub|ecl.
IsychoIogism and hisloricism reresenled lhe gravesl dangers lo
hiIosohy, WindeIband cIaimed, because bolh soughl lo reduce lhe
rinciIes of reason lo mere lemoraI and sychicaI condilions
indeendenl of any lranscendenlaI source. In keeing vilh lhis
emhasis on lranscendenlaI vaIidily, WindeIband re|ecled lhe
hisloricily of underslanding for ahisloricaI, lranscuIluraI rinciIes
of formaI Iogic aIong Kanlian Iines. The Slrassburg Ieclure sel lhe
lerms for lhis more rigorousIy Kanlian underslanding of lhe crisis of
nineleenlh-cenlury science as a confIicl belveen lvo aIlernalive
visions of hiIosohy: lhe hermeneulicaI underslanding of
hisloricism and lhe alemoraI vaIidily of lranscendenlaI Iogic. Ior
WindeIband, lhese lvo aIlernalive visions couId never be resoIved.
v. Windc!band's Apnria: Thc Lngica! Prnb!cm nI Mcthnd and thc
Mctaphysica! Prnb!cm nI Frccdnm
WindeIband's rimary concern aboul lhe riorily of lhe
sychoIogicaI or hermeneulicaI sub|ecl lurned on lhe issue of
cuIluraI reIalivism. He feared lhal if one vere lo reduce lhe
rinciIes of vaIidily lo mere hisloricaI circumslance or lo lhe
sub|eclive fancy of lhe sychoIogicaI seIf, lhen lhe absoIule characler
of aII vaIues vouId be forfeiled. A Neo-Kanlian science of universaI
vaIues vouId combal lhese reIalivis-
-78-
lic lrends by focusing on a lranscendenlaI soIulion lo lhe crisis of
hisloricism. Wilhin WindeIband's axioIogy, lhe exislence of
hisloricaI lrulh vouId never deend on ils discovery by a hislorian
bul vouId have a Iife of ils ovn, Iike malhemalicaIIy vaIid
roosilions lhal exisl indeendenlIy of malhemalicians.
IhiIosohy vouId lhen be Iefl as lhe arbiler of vaIues aarl from
hislory or any of lhe individuaI sciences. As WindeIband decIared:
"Il musl be exressIy slaled lhal aIlhough hisloricaI vaIidily
rovides a cenlraI robIem for hiIosohy, in no vay is lhis
hisloricaI vaIidily lo be seen as lhe ground for hiIosohicaI
vaIidily. Were one lo forgel lhis, lhe resuIl vouId be unhoIy
reIalivism, lhis vouId lruIy mean lhe dealh of aII hiIosohy."
42

Thus, for WindeIband, lhe generalionaI debale in lhe human
sciences aboul melhods and hisloricaI vaIues vas lransformed inlo a
fundamenlaI queslion concerning hiIosohy's ovn Iegilimacy. In a
lime of hiIosohicaI crisis, he beIieved lhal lhese melhodoIogicaI
issues couId nol simIy be reduced lo lerminoIogicaI disules or
underslood as lhe nagging comIainls of quibbIing Iogicians
schooIed in ellifoggery. As a Kanlian, WindeIband remained
commilled lo lhe rigor of Iogic as lhe onIy Iegilimale vay of sellIing
lhe generalionaI disules aboul melhodoIogy. Yel in lhe end
WindeIband aIvays redefined lhese IogicaI disules as issues of
vaIue, for him, lhe Kanlian aradigm of ralionaIily vas nol mereIy
IogicaI bul aIso elhicaI. He aIvays acknovIedged lhe imorlance of
Kanl's second crilique for lhe robIems of lhe sciences. y draving
cIear melhodoIogicaI Iines belveen being and vaIue, WindeIband
soughl lo reserve lhe elhicaI reaIm of human freedom vhich, he
beIieved, couId nol be circumscribed vilhin lhe reaIm of hisloricily.
In a sense, his hiIosohicaI rogram on Neo-Kanlian Iines vas
conceived as an elhicaI resonse lo lhe reIalivism lhal he erceived
vilhin lhe hisloricisl lradilion. Underslood elhicaIIy, WindeIband's
lheory of lhe sciences deveIoed as a seIf-conscious resonse lo lvo
lradilions. Againsl lhe hisloricisls he aeaIed lo slandards of
universaI vaIue, againsl lhe osilivisls he insisled lhal melhodoIogy
couId never be searaled from axioIogy.
One year before his dealh, al lhe concIusion of his Iasl vork, An
|nirc!uciicn ic Pni|cscpnq ( 1914), WindeIband rehrased lhe
melhodoIogicaI difference belveen Naiur- and Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn
in lerms of a melahysicaI division belveen lvo reaIms:
____________________
42
WiIheIm WindeIband, Oic Pni|cscpnic in Bcginn !cs 20. janrnun!cris
( HeideIberg: Winler, 1907), 541.
-79-
This is lhe oinl al vhich lhe desire for a unified underslanding of
lhe vorId breaks dovn before an insoIubIe robIem. The vorId of
vaIues and lhe vorId of reaIily, lhe rovinces of "oughl" and "musl"
are nol foreign lo each olher. They are in muluaI reIalion
everyvhere. ul lhey are cerlainIy nol lhe same lhing. There is a
renl in lhe fabric of reaIily. . . . We cannol gel over lhe conlradiclion.
. . . The innermosl meaning of lemoraIily is lhe inaIienabIe
difference belveen vhal is and vhal oughl lo be, and because lhis
difference, vhich reveaIs ilseIf in our viII, conslilules lhe
fundamenlaI condilion of human Iife, our knovIedge can never gel
beyond il lo a comrehension of ils origin.
43

UIlimaleIy, lhe carefuI divisions of Iogic and eislemoIogy couId nol
offer a melahysicaI soIulion lo lhe "renl in lhe fabric of reaIily."
WindeIband's laxonomy had sel u an ideaI IogicaI slale of lvo
dislincl forms of scienlific inquiry--a naluraI-scienlific Iogic lhal
aimed al discovering generaI Iavs governing lhe rocess of a singIe
henomenon and a hisloricaI Iogic lhal affirmed lhe unique and
unduIicabIe characler of each henomenon as an excelion lo aII
causaI Iavs. Againsl lhe osilivisls he insisled on mainlaining lhe
recaIcilrance of hisloricaI individuaIilies lo causaI Iavs, againsl
sychoIogism he mainlained lhal Iavs of hysioIogy and sychic
rocess couId never adequaleIy gras lhe measure of human vaIues,
and againsl lhe hisloricisls he charged lhal cuIluraI reIalivism couId
never have lhe Iasl vord in a scienlific aroach lo reaIily. y
re|ecling aII lhe allemls of scienlism al discovering a universaI
melhod for Naiur and Gcisi, WindeIband delermined a nev
|ragcsic||ung for lhe NeoKanlian lheory of lhe sciences: one
grounded in Iogic yel deendenl on freedom. y draving Iimils lo
lhe aIicabiIily and universaIily of scienlific melhod, WindeIband
hoed lo reserve lhe vaIue of vhal Iay beyond lhe Iimils--a nevIy
configured Kanlian reaIm of freedom. "In aII lhe dala of hisloricaI
and individuaI exerience," WindeIband argued, "a residuum of
incomrehensibIe brule facl remains, an inexressibIe and
indefinabIe henomenon. Thus lhe uIlimale and mosl rofound
nalure of ersonaIily resisls anaIysis in lerms of generaI calegories.
Irom lhe erseclive of our consciousness, lhis incomrehensibIe
characler of lhe ersonaIily emerges as lhe sense of indelerminacy
of our nalure--in olher vords, individuaI freedom."
44

____________________
43
WindeIband, |nirc!uciicn ic Pni|cscpnq, 357-359. I have aIlered lhe
lransIalion in Iaces for cIarily. Ior lhe originaI German lexl, see
WindeIband, |in|ciiung in !ic Pni|cscpnic ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1923),
433-434.
44
WindeIband, Hisicrq an! Naiura| Scicncc,184.
-80-
Iarl of lhis indelerminacy lhal reserved lhe vaIue of freedom vas
lhe radicaI sIil belveen Naiur and Gcisi. WindeIband recognized
lhe aoria of his ovn hisloricaI Iogic--of a vorId sundered inlo
being and vaIue, onloIogy and axioIogy--bul inslead of seeing lhese
Iimils as a conlradiclion vilhin his ovn rogram, he seized on lhem
as leslimony lo lhe uIlimaleIy insoIubIe, melahysicaI quandary
beyond vhich scienlific reason couId nol go. Al lhe very cIose of lhe
recloraI address, WindeIband confronled lhis robIem vilhin lhe
frame of his ovn scienlific vaIues, ab|uring lhe roIe of melahysicaI
rohel. RalionaI lhoughl, he vrole, "can conlribule nolhing furlher
lo lhe resoIulion of lhese queslions. IhiIosohy can idenlify lhe
Iimils of knovIedge in each of lhe individuaI disciIines. eyond
lhese Iimils, hovever, hiIosohy ilseIf can no Ionger eslabIish any
subslanlive concIusions. The Iav and lhe evenl remain as lhe
uIlimale, incommensurabIe enlilies of our vorId viev. Here is one
of lhe boundary oinls vhere scienlific inquiry can onIy define
robIems and onIy ose queslions in lhe cIear avareness lhal il viII
never be abIe lo soIve lhem."
45

In slricl Kanlian fashion, WindeIband sel oul lo define lhe Iimils of
scienlific lhoughl and lo secure for reason lhe assurance and
cerlainly of knovIedge in conlrasl lo mere melahysicaI
secuIalion. In an era dominaled by anxiely concerning
hiIosohy's slalus as rigorous Wisscnscnaji and nol feuiIIelonislic
Wc|ianscnauung, WindeIband lried lo offer a ralionaI aIlernalive. y
scruuIousIy allending lo lhe Iogic of hisloricaI inquiry and offering
an eislemoIogicaI crilique of hisloricaI raclice, Win!c||an! did
succeed in making a cIean break vilh lhe melahysicaI lradilion of
secuIalive Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic common in lhe earIy nineleenlh
cenlury. Yel for aII his ainslaking efforls al vorking oul lhe
laxonomy of scienlific melhods, WindeIband never reaIIy roduced
a nev Iogic of hislory vorlhy of ils Kanlian herilage. In no sense did
he achieve lhe conceluaI cIarily lhal Kanl, in his Criiiquc cj Purc
|cascn, had offered for lhe naluraI sciences. WindeIband's
rogrammalic laxonomy of lhe nomolhelic and idiograhic sciences
rovided onIy lhe skeIelaI oulIines of a fuIIy deveIoed lheory.
Desile ils shorlcomings, hovever, lhe recloraI address rovided
lhe basic IragesleIIung for lhe Neo-Kanlian crilique of hisloricism, a
crilique laken u vilh more eislemoIogicaI rigor by Heinrich
Rickerl, WindeIband's younger coIIeague al Ireiburg.
____________________
45
Ibid., 185.
-81-

CHAPTER THREE Hcinrich Rickcrt's Epistcmn!ngy nI
Histnrica! 5cicncc
We are nol deaIing vilh lhe hislory of hiIosohy as somelhing
lhal has ceased lo exisl and has been Iefl behind, bul vilh lhe
acluaIily from vhich ve of loday vere Iong ago exeIIed, such
lhal -- affIicled vilh bIindness and vanily -- ve vasle avay vilh
our ovn IillIe inlrigues.
-- Marlin Heidegger, Hcgc|s Pncncncnc|cgq cj Spirii
i. Rickcrt's Rcspnnsc tn thc Cnntcmpnrary Phi!nsnphy nI Crisis
WindeIband's efforls al laxonomy rovided IogicaI |uslificalion
for lhe vork of hisloricisls such as Ranke, HumboIdl, and
Droysen. His anaIylic dislinclions heIed lo eslabIish a nev
eislemoIogicaI rogram for defining lhe lask of lhe various
sciences. ul al lhe lime of WindeIband's dealh in 1915, lhe
conlroversies over hisloricaI vaIues remained IargeIy research-
orienled and melhodoIogicaI. His vork had heIed lo slabiIize
lhe roIe of hiIosohy as a science of knovIedge, reIegaled lo lhe
IogicaI lask of delermining lhe Iimils of olher scienlific
disciIines. ul lhe ercelion of crisis in lhe years foIIoving his
dealh fundamenlaIIy aIlered lhe lerms of his more lradilionaI,
vaIuefocused |ragcsic||ung. Afler lhe biller Iessons of lhe var, one
can erceive a more urgenl, aocaIylic lone in vorks on lhe
hiIosohy of hislory, such as SengIer Occ|inc cj inc Wcsi ( 1918j)
and Lessing Hisicrq as a Prcccss cj Ccnjcrring Mcaning upcn inc
Mcaning|css ( 1919). The melhodoIogicaI conlroversies of lhe lurn
of lhe cenlury assumed a nev rheloricaI form as oIemics in lhe
slruggIe for cuIluraI idenlily.
-83-

This generalionaI ercelion of crisis vorked lo inlensify lhe mereIy
academic debale aboul hisloricaI melhod and slimuIaled a vide-
ranging discussion aboul lhe meaning and viabiIily of hisloricaI
vaIues.
As bolh a sludenl and coIIeague of WindeIband, Heinrich Rickerl
vas commilled lo a Neo-Kanlian lheory of vaIues aIong
lranscendenlaI Iines. ul vhere WindeIband's reIalion of
disciIinary research lo robIems of vaIue vas sliII lied lo a
rimariIy melhodoIogicaI debale, Rickerl's defense of vaIue-
hiIosohy became a fuII-scaIe slruggIe againsl vhal he erceived
as "lhe modish hiIosohicaI currenls of our lime": Iife-hiIosohy,
hisloricism, bioIogism, SengIerism, and lhe olher exressions of
crisis-lhinking in lhe oslvar era.
1
Rickerl began his
eislemoIogicaI Iabors vilh lechnicaI vorks on lhe lheory of
definilion and eislemoIogy -- Oic Icnrc tcn !cr Ocjiniiicn ( 1888)
and Ocr Gcgcnsian! !cr |rkcnninis ( 1892) -- deveIoing his crafl as a
carefuI Iogician in lhe rocess. In 1896 he ubIished lhe firsl edilion
of his ma|or vork, Oic Grcnzcn !cr naiuruisscnscnaji|icncn
Bcgrijjs|i|!ung, in 1899, lhe shorler, more accessibIe
Ku|iuruisscnscnaji un! Naiuruisscnscnaji, and in 1903, Oic Prc||cnc
!cr Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic. Ajicr inc uar, ncuctcr, nc rctisc! incsc ucrks
an! pu||isnc! scnc ncucr, ncrc pc|cnica| picccs sucn as Kani a|s
Pni|cscpn !cr nc!crncn Ku|iur ( 1924) an! Oic Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns (
1920). |n 1921 nc a|sc ccnp|cic! inc jirsi tc|unc cj nis a|cric! inrcc-
tc|unc sqsicnaiic ucrk cn axic|cgq, Sqsicn !cr Pni|cscpnic.
2

Ouring inc pcsiuar cra, |ickcri ackncu|c!gc! inc inrcais ic ira!iiicna|
scicncc an! pni|cscpnq cnanaiing jrcn inc prcpcncnis cj ucr|!-ticu
pni|cscpnq, |ijc-pni|cscpnq, an! inc jasnicna||c Nicizscnc cu|i. Bui nc
rcspcn!c! ic inc prcpncis cj crisis |q ccnsiruciing a inccrq cj ta|uc ic
ccunicr inc cinica| rc|aiitisn inai nc sau !csircqing inc jcun!aiicns cj
pcsi-Kaniian Gcrnan incugni. |ickcri insisic! inai Win!c||an!s inccrics
cn inc !ijjcrcnccs |ciuccn inc scicnccs
____________________
1
Heinrich Rickerl, Oic Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns. Oarsic||ung un! Kriiik
!cr pni|cscpniscncn Mc!csircnungcn unscrcr Zcii ( Tbingen: Mohr,
1922).
2
Heinrich Rickerl, Kani a|s Pni|cscpn !cr nc!crncn Ku|iur (
Tbingen: Mohr, 1924), Oic Icnrc tcn !cr Ocjiniiicn ( Ireiburg:
Mohr, 1888), Oic Prc||cnc !cr Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic ( HeideIberg:
Winler, 1924), Sqsicn !cr Pni|cscpnic ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1921), and
Ocr Gcgcnsian! !cr |rkcnninis. |injunrung in !ic
Transzcn!cnia|pni|cscpnic ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1928). Oic Grcnzcn !cr
naiuruisscnscnaji|icncn Bcgrijjs|i|!ung. |inc |cgiscnc |in|ciiung in !ic
nisicriscncn Wisscnscnajicn (hereafler ciled as Oic Grcnzcn) (
Tbingen: Mohr, 1929), and Ku|iuruisscnscnaji un!
Naiuruisscnscnaji (hereafler ciled as KN) ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1926)
bolh venl lhrough severaI edilions and revisions. In generaI I viII
be using lhe aginalion from lhe Ialer edilions because lhey refIecl
changes in Rickerl's lhinking afler lhe var.
-84-
had fruilfuI consequences for scienlific research. ul he venl
beyond WindeIband in allemling lo eslabIish a definilive sqsicn of
vaIues lo overcome lhe erceived lhreal of vaIue reIalivism.
Rickerl's universaI hiIosohy of vaIues vas lo rovide an anchor
for hisloricaI meaning, a lranscendenlaI soIulion lo lhe anarchy of
conviclions, beIiefs, and ideoIogies vhich, he delermined, had
broughl on lhe crisis of hisloricism in lhe firsl Iace. In Oic Grcnzcn,
|ickcri ctcn ucni sc jar as ic i!cniijq nisicricisn uiin a jcrn cj nini|isn,
an! qci !cspiic inis narsn ju!gncni, nc ccu|! a|sc agrcc uiin nis cc||caguc
|rnsi Trcc|iscn inai inc ccnicnpcrarq crisis cj nisicricisn is a !ccp inncr
crisis cj cur iinc, ii is nci ncrc|q a scicniijic issuc |ui a praciica| prc||cn
cj |ijc.
3

Wiinin inc ccnicxi cj inc gcncraiicna| crisis cj inc scicnccs, |ickcri !cci!c!
inai anq rcta|uaiicn cj ta|ucs in a Kaniian scnsc na! ic cngagc inc
ncaning cj nisicrq. His pc|cnica| uriiings arc ji||c! uiin rcjcrcnccs ic
nisicrica| c|jcciitiiq, inc nisicrica| in!iti!ua|, nisicrica|
!ctc|cpncni, an! inc |ikc, incugn nc rcjccic! spccu|aiitc
Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic in inc nanncr cj Hcgc| |ccausc, nc arguc!, a
nciapnqsics cj nisicrq in inc c|! scnsc !ccs nci sccn pcssi||c as a scicncc.
4
|ickcri uas inicni cn cjjcring a rigcrcus|q |cgica|-cpisicnc|cgica| criiiquc
cj nisicrica| rcscarcn as inc cn|q |cgiiinaic uaq cj rcsicring iis ncaning as
scicncc, incugn nc uas carcju| ic uarn nis ccnicnpcrarics inai inc
pni|cscpncr can nctcr |c ncrc|q a nisicrian, pni|cscpnq nusi nctcr rcnain
caugni in iis nisicrq. Wc sncu|! kncu inc pasi uc||, jcr uc can cn|q
praciicc pni|cscpnq as a scicncc uncn uc cricni cursc|tcs arcun! ii. Bui uc
uani ic siu!q inc pasi uiin a purpcsc. sc inai uc nigni ncrc rca!i|q
ctcrccnc ii.
5

Iikc nanq cj nis ccnicnpcrarics in inc pcsiuar cra, |ickcri sii|| ticuc!
nisicrq as scncining ic |c supcrsc!c! cr surncunic!, as ij nisicrq iisc|j
ucrc a !ircciicna| prcccss inai nigni |c ctcrccnc. |n cjjcci nc aiicnpic! a
supranisicrica| rcsc|uiicn cj inc crisis cj nisicricisn |q iurning auaq jrcn
nisicrica| cxpcricncc ic a iransccn!cnia| inccrq cj ta|ucs. On|q jrcn inc
sian!pcini cj an a|sc|uic i!ca| inai uc iakc as inc ncasurc cj cnpirica|
rca|iiq, nc urcic, can incrc |c anq ncaning in inicrprciing nisicrica||q
!cicrninc! cu|iura| |ijc in iis
____________________
3
Heinrich Rickerl, Tnc Iiniis cj Ccnccpi |crnaiicn in Naiura| Scicncc.
A Icgica| |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hisicrica| Scicnccs (hereafler ciled as
Iiniis cj Ccnccpi |crnaiicn), lrans. Guy Oakes ( Cambridge:
Cambridge Universily Iress, 1986), Oic Grcnzcn, 8, an! |rnsi
Trcc|iscn , Oic Krisis !cs Hisicrisnus, Oic Ncuc |un!scnau 33 ( junc
1922). 586.
4
Heinrich Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq. A Criiiquc cj Pcsiiitisi
|pisicnc|cgq, lransIaled by George Reisman ( Irincelon, N.}.: Van
Noslrand, 1962), 154, KN, 140.
5
Rickerl, Oic Prc||cnc !cr Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic, 3-4.
-85-
uniqueness and individuaIily."
6
Hence, even as he engaged
robIems of hisloricaI vaIue, he did so nol "from a ureIy hisloricaI
erseclive" bul ralher measured "lhe vaIues of lhe asl againsl
vhal sncu|! be."
7
This Ied him lo a formidabIe aradox: he
"overcame" lhe elhicaI dangers of hisloricism by lurning lo an
eislemoIogy of hisloricaI research vhich vas ilseIf grounded in
Iogic and vhich knev no hisloricaI lime. UIlimaleIy, Rickerl's vork
reresenled lhe cuIminalion of lhe vhoIe Neo-Kanlian alleml lo
deny lhe reaIily of hislory and lo resoIve lhe crisis of lhe sciences in
ureIy formaI fashion.
During lhe 1920s Heidegger's henomenoIogicaI deslruclion of Neo-
Kanlian hiIosohy of hislory vouId heI lo reveaI lhe
conlradiclions in Rickerl's vork, refocusing lhe formaI robIem of
hisloricaI eislemoIogy by raising anev lhe queslion of hisloricaI
being. efore ve lurn lo Heidegger's crilique, hovever, ve musl
firsl undersland lhe syslemalic side of Rickerl's lhoughl. In vhal
foIIovs I vanl lo begin by offering a summary discussion of lhe
basic lhemes in Rickerl's vork, Ieaving lo lhe second arl of lhe
chaler a fuIIer lrealmenl of his debale vilh Meinecke, TroeIlsch,
and lhe hisloricisl lradilion in generaI. Whal such a discussion
shovs, I lhink, is hov cIearIy lhe Neo-Kanlian mode of
eislemoIogicaI inquiry vas al odds vilh lhe fundamenlaI meaning
of hisloricisl lhoughl, even as il allemled lo "soIve" ils mosl
ressing issues.
ii. Phi!nsnphy as WisscnschaIt cnntra Wc!tanschauung
In lhe inlroduclion lo Oic Prc||cnc !cr Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic, |ickcri
rcnarkc! inai inc pni|cscpnica| scicnccs arc ic!aq sii|| cnaracicrizc! |q
inc incnc cj rcsicraiicn.
8
|n nis ticu, iucniicin-ccniurq pni|cscpnq na!
|ccn narkc! |q inc prcgrannaiic aiicnpi ic rcsicrc ii ic iis jcrncr p|acc
as inc scicncc cj scicnccs, a p|acc ii na! |csi uiin inc !cc|inc cj Hcgc|s
nciapnqsica| sqsicn. Tc sccurc inc siaius cj pni|cscpnq as inis ncsi
jun!ancnia| cj scicnccs, |ickcri aiicnpic! ic !ijjcrcniiaic iis su|jcci
naiicr jrcn inai cj a|| cincr !iscip|incs. |n ccnirasi ic inc cnpirica|
scicnccs cj rca|iiq (pnqsics, cncnisirq, |ic|cgq, nisicrq, sccic|cgq, gcc|cgq,
an! sc jcrin), unicn na! as incir c|jcci inc ccncrcic cxpcricncc cj aciua|
|cing-in-inc-ucr|!, an! againsi inc
____________________
6
Ibid., 142.
7
Ibid., 131.
8
Ibid., 1.
-86-
ureIy formaI science of malhemalics, hiIosohy vas lo have as ils
sub|ecl maller a lheory of scienlific knovIedge. In Rickerl's lerms, il
vas lo become lhe "Wisscnscnaji !cr Wisscnscnaji," or a scienlific
inquiry inlo lhe nalure of scienlific inquiry as such.
9
In lhis office of
seIfrefIecling science, hiIosohy vouId reeslabIish ilseIf on lhe firm
ground of "Iogic, eislemoIogy, and lheorelicaI reason."
10
As Rickerl
emhasized in his Ieclures al lhe Universily of HeideIberg:
"TheorelicaI hiIosohy is lhe doclrine of Icgcs, Icgcs is reason,
raiic, Vcrnunji. Icgcs as Iogic, as eislemoIogy, as lheorelicaI
hiIosohy is a doclrine of science | Wisscnscnajis|cnrcj. Whereas lhe
olher sciences have as lheir ob|ecl somelhing lhal Iies oulside of
science ilseIf, Iogic, or lheorelicaI hiIosohy, has science ilseIf as ils
ob|ecl, and lhus, il is lhe seIf-knovIedge of science vhich is ils aim."
11
Again, in lhis same series of unubIished Ieclures, Rickerl slressed
lhal "hiIosohy as science is ossibIe onIy on a IogicaI-
eislemoIogicaI basis."
12
Logic vas lo be "a hiIosohicaI
Grun!uisscnscnaji, cr jun!ancnia| scicncc, inai ucu|! rcpu!iaic anq
prcicnscs ic cjjcring nciapnqsica| insignis a|cui |ijc, !cain, iinc, cicrniiq,
Gc!, an! inc scu|.
13
|j, jcr |ickcri, nc!isn ininkcrs |ikc Kicrkcgaar!,
Scncpcnnaucr, Nicizscnc, Bcrgscn, an! Hacckc| na! cjjcrc! a nucn |rca!cr
rangc jcr inc ucrk cj pni|cscpnq |q naking ii ncrc ncaningju| jcr |ijc,
incq na! a|sc succcc!c! in rcn!cring ii !i|ciianiisn, unsqsicnaiic, an!
aniipni|cscpnica|. |n nis pc|cnica| Oic Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns, |ickcri
tcncncni|q aiiackc! inc |asic icncis cj tiia|isn an! iric! ic uarn cj iis
!angcrs. |j ii acnictcs !cninancc, nc urcic, ii is ic |c jcarc! inai inc
nisc|cgica|, nc!isn pni|cscpnq cj |ijc ui|| |ca! ic inc !cain cj pni|cscpnq as
a scicncc. | |c|ictc, incrcjcrc, inai | scrtc inc |ijc cj pni|cscpnq uncn |
aiiack inis pni|cscpnq cj |ijc.
14
Tnrcugncui nis carccr, |ickcri ccniinuc!
ic rcncu nis aiiacks cn tiia|isn, cxisicniia|isn, pragnaiisn, |ic|cgisn,
an! cincr Wc|ianscnauungcn, |c|icting inai cn|q uncn cnc na! scparaic!
cncsc|j jrcn pcrscna| inicrcsi an! sccicnisicrica| prcju!icc ccu|! cnc |cgin
ic scc inc ucr|! in iis icia|iiq,
____________________
10
Ibid.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.
13
Rickerl, H!.Ms. 13, 34.
14
Rickerl, Oic Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns, xit.
9
Heinrich Rickerl, Hci!c||crg Ms. 59, 4-4a. Throughoul lhis chaler,
I viII refer lo Rickerl's unubIished vrilings, vhich are galhered
in lhe universily Iibrary al HeideIberg and incIude some 180
differenl enlries. The above-ciled manuscril is enlilIed
"|injunrung in !ic |rkcnninisinccric un! Mciapnqsik." Hereafler, aII
HeideIberg manuscril cilalions viII be noled as H!.Ms.
-87-
aarl from lhe cuIluraI and sychoIogicaI demands of lhe seIf.
15

Ic|cnspni|cscpnic aeared lo him as lhe mosl recenl manifeslalion
of lhe kind of Wc|ianscnauungspni|cscpnic lhal had lhrealened lhe
scienlific characler of German lhinking.
In Rickerl's inlerrelalion, going back lo lhe nineleenlh cenlury,
lhere vere lvo ma|or Wc|ianscnauungcn lhal dominaled German
cuIlure: naluraIism and hisloricism.
16
NaluraIism he defined as lhe
alleml lo ground lhe robIemalic of lradilionaI hiIosohy in lhe
scienlific researches of lhe naluraI vorId. Re|ecling lhe melahysicaI
secuIalion of lhe romanlic nalure-hiIosohers by Iimiling ilseIf lo
an emiricaI invesligalion of reaIily, naluraIisls allemled lo unify
scienlific inquiry vilh vaIues and ideoIogy. This scienlific vorId
viev, or uisscnscnaji|icnc Wc|ianscnauung, cpcnc! up a |cgica|
ccnira!iciicn, acccr!ing ic |ickcri, |ccausc ii aiicnpic! ic iransjcrn inc
ucr|! cj nisicrq an! cu|iurc |q |asing ii cn princip|cs cj naiurc. Againsi
inis kin! cj naiura|isi ininking, nisicricisn scugni ic !rau a jun!ancnia|
!isiinciicn |ciuccn naiurc an! nisicrq unicn qucsiicnc! inc cxicnsicn cj
naiura|isi princip|cs |cqcn! inc !cnain cj inc pnqsiccncnica| ucr|!. Bq
cnpnasizing inc uniquc, un!up|ica||c cnaracicr cj nisicrica| pncncncna,
nisicricisis iurnc! ic inc sc|j-un!crsian!ing cj spirii as inc grcun! cj
nunan rca|iiq. |cr |ickcri, ncuctcr, nisicricisn juas} sii|| ncrc
unpni|cscpnica| inan naiura|isn, sincc nisicrq juas} nci a sqsicnaiic
scicncc.
17
|j naiura|isn aiicnpic! ic inpcsc |ic|cgica| caicgcrics cn inc
prcccsscs cj nisicrq, nisicricisn, in iis iurn, iric! ic nisicricizc inc
|ic|cgica|, ncg|cciing in inc prcccss inc rigcrs cj naiura|-scicniijic rcscarcn.
|acn sau in incir cun spccia| prctincc inc jun!ancnia|s jcr a ncu
pni|cscpnq cj |ijc. Bui a|incugn |cin arc naicria||q tcrq !ijjcrcni,
|ickcri ncic!, incir pcsiiicns rcsi cn inc tcrq sanc princip|c, nanc|q,
|cin uisn ic iransjcrn inc ccnccpis cj a spccia| !iscip|inc inic a unc|c
pni|cscpnq.
18

Ic|cnspni|cscpnic an! inc cincr Wc|ianscnauungcn snarc! inc icn!cncq ic
unitcrsa|izc inc ta|i!iiq cj incir spccia| scicncc an! ic app|q ii uncriiica||q
ic a|| cincr arcas cj |ijc. Bui jcr |ickcri, pni|cscpnq uas nci cnc ancng
cincr scicnccs. |i uas inc scicncc cj scicncc iisc|j an! na! as iis spccia|
!cnain inc siu!q cj inc princip|cs cj kncu|c!gc.
____________________
15
Heinrich Rickerl, Grun!prc||cnc !cr Pni|cscpnic ( Tbingen: Mohr,
1934), 6-7.
16
Ior a Ionger discussion of naluraIism and hisloricism vrillen by
one of Rickerl's conlemoraries, see Irnsl TroeIlsch, Ocr
Hisicrisnus un! scinc Prc||cnc ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1922), 102-110.
17
Rickerl, Oic Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns, 48.
18
Ibid.
-88-
IoIIoving Iichle's rinciIe of a foundalionaI Wisscnscnajis|cnrc as
lhe roer lask of hiIosohy, Rickerl endeavored lo achieve a
hiIosohicaI underslanding of lhe naluraI and hisloricaI sciences
by focusing on lheir IogicaI and eislemoIogicaI rinciIes. If
hiIosohy vere lo uhoId ils slricl syslemalic characler and nol
degenerale inlo mere "Iife-hiIosohy," Rickerl beIieved il vouId
have lo focus on lhe jcrna| rinciIes of knovIedge ralher lhan on
maleriaI conlenl. To combal lhe melahysicaI excesses of lhe Iife-
hiIosohers, lhen, Rickerl lurned lo lhe eislemoIogicaI rinciIes
of Kanl, vhich rovided an anchor for his vhoIe syslem. Kanlian
Iogic vouId rove a muchneeded anodyne for lhe "disease" he
caIIed "hisloricism."
19

iii. Rickcrt's Rc!atinnship tn Kant's Transccndcnta! Idca!ism
The ouIarily of Iife-hiIosohy in lhe nineleenlh cenlury vas due
in no smaII arl lo lvo imorlanl characlerislics. Iirsl, il vas easiIy
arorialed by an inleIIecluaIIy sohislicaled audience because,
aIlhough hiIosohicaI in lemeramenl, il broke vilh lhe slyIe of
lechnicaI hiIosohy. Life-hiIosohy vas easiIy read, resenled in
lhe Iilerary slyIe of a Kierkegaard or lhe ahorislic slyIe of a
Nielzsche. Il disensed vilh lhe imenelrabIe argumenlalion of a
Kanl or a Iichle and rided ilseIf on ils nev aroach lo lhe vriling
of hiIosohicaI discourse. Second, Iife-hiIosohy vas nol abslracl
or formaI, il vas concerned vilh robIems of human exislence and
human vaIues, focusing on issues of moraIily, aeslhelics, sociaI
robIems, and hislory. In his course "Oic !cuiscnc Pni|cscpnic tcn
Kani |is Nicizscnc," Rickerl recognized ils aeaI for lhe generaI
ubIic, eseciaIIy for lhe young universily-lrained inleIIecluaIs vho
vere nol academic hiIosohers. In lhese Ieclures Rickerl
acknovIedged IifehiIosohy's overfuI infIuence, yel he suggesled
lhal "vhal vas nev and essenliaI in nineleenlh-cenlury German
hiIosohy" couId be lraced back lo ils "reoccualion vilh lhe
robIem of vaIues" and lheir reIalionshi lo human cuIlure.
20
Here
he sav Nielzsche as lhe aolheosis of a Iife-hiIosohy orlraying
ilseIf as vaIue-hiIosohy ( Wcripni|cscpnic). And aIlhough he had
read Nielzsche vilh greal in-
____________________
19
Rickerl, H!.Ms. 115, 3, in vhich he insisls lhere shaII be "kcin
Hisicrisnus!" SimiIar ronouncemenls can be found in Oic
Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns, 49, in H!.Ms. 13, 27, an! in Oic Grcnzcn, 8.
20
Rickerl, H!.Ms. 31, 4 and 10.
-89-
leresl and enlhusiasm, he came lo lhe finaI decision lhal Nielzsche
vas nolhing bul an eigone of Kanl.
In Rickerl's survey, lhe eriod from 1781 (lhe ubIicalion of lhe
Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn) lo 1888 (lhe dale of |ccc Hcnc) reresenled a
remarkabIe unily in German hiIosohy. Il vas during lhis eriod,
he feIl, lhal bolh Kanl and Nielzsche had raised lhe robIem of
vaIue lo a cenlraI hiIosohicaI osilion. Yel vhere Nielzsche's
geneaIogy of lhe Weslern lradilion grounded vaIue in lhe viII, lhus
arriving al a nev kind of voIunlarisl Wc|ianscnauung, Kani na! iurnc!
ic rcascn as inc scurcc cj ta|uc, incrc|q cjjcring inc sc|i! jcun!aiicn cj
Wisscnscnaji. |ickcri |c|ictc! inai ij cnc ucrc inicni cn rcna|i|iiaiing inis
axic|cgica| ira!iiicn, inrcaicnc! cn inc cnc nan! |q inc rcscarcncs cj inc
spccia| scicnccs an! cn inc cincr |q inc !cnan! jcr cxisicniia| ncaning an!
unitcrsa| ta|uc, cnc ucu|! natc ic jccus cn prc||cns cj pni|cscpnica|
ncinc!. |ickcri ncpc! ic rcsc|tc inis crisis |q rcuniiing in cnc sqsicn
unai na! |ccn sun!crc! |q ninciccnin-ccniurq |ijc-pni|cscpnq. Tnai is, nc
uisnc! ic narncnizc a pni|cscpnq cj ta|ucs uiin a pni|cscpnq inai uas
scicniijic an! rccic! in Wisscnscnaji. |n !ctc|cping a scicniijic jcrn cj
ta|uc-pni|cscpnq, |ickcri |c|ictc! nc ucu|! ctcrccnc inc spccicus appca|
cj inc |ijc-pni|cscpncrs an! sccurc jcr inc !iscip|inc cj pni|cscpnq a spccia|
iask inai, incugn ainc! ai ta|uc an! cu|iurc, rcjccic! inc prcpncis nani|c
iakcn up |q Nicizscnc. |n sc !cing, nc ucu|! prctc inc ucrin cj |cgic ctcr
c|ctcr apncrisns, as |ickcri pui ii, |tcrq prc||cn cj a unitcrsa|
Wc|ianscnauung an! cj |ijc is iransjcrnc! jcr us inic a prc||cn cj |cgic
an! cj cpisicnc|cgq.
21

Bcjcrc aiicnpiing ic prcscni |ickcris cun ta|uc-pni|cscpnq, unicn nc sau
as crucia| jcr un!crsian!ing inc !c|aics ccnccrning inc Naiur- an!
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn, | ucu|! |ikc ic cxp|crc nis rc|aiicn ic Kani an!
sncu ncu nis Kaniian rccis nc|pc! !cicrninc nis apprcacn ic
un!crsian!ing |cin naiurc an! cu|iurc. Mq inicniicn ncrc is nci ic cjjcr a
sqsicnaiic ticu cj |ickcris ctcra|| pni|cscpnq cr ic ana|qzc inc siagcs cj
iis !ctc|cpncni, raincr, nq !iscussicn ui|| jccus cn inc inj|ucncc cj
Kaniian ininking cn |ickcris ncu jcrn cj nisicrica| |cgic. Bcin sqsicnaiic
pni|cscpncrs an! inc a!ncrcnis cj Ic|cnspni|cscpnic na! ccnccniraic! incir
aiicniicn cn inc gcncraiicna| !ispuic ctcr scicniijic ncinc!. As uc sau in
Cnapicr 2, Win!c||an! na! rcjccic! inc naicria| !itisicn cj scicniijic |a|cr
ai inc unitcrsiiq an! scugni ic c|arijq inc rc|aiicnsnip |ciuccn inc taricus
scicniijic
____________________
21
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 11.
-90-
disciIines aIong formaI Iines. Yel for him lhe uIlimale robIem vas
essenliaIIy one of cIassificalion. Rickerl vished lo go beyond lhe
mereIy rogrammalic oulIine rovided by WindeIband and deaI
vilh lhe issue pni|cscpnica||q. y reformuIaling lhis laxonomicaI
queslion aboul form and maller inlo a genuineIy hiIosohicaI one,
Rickerl hoed lo shov lhe range and force of Neo-Kanlian lhinking.
To seak of lhe jcrna| ralher lhan lhe naicria| differences belveen
nalure and hislory is aIready lo belray a cerlain eislemoIogicaI
bias. In lhe argol of nineleenlh-cenlury German hiIosohy, such a
dislinclion vas a "crilicaI" one. Kanl's crilicaI melhod, inilialed by
his Coemican lurn, aIlered lhe nave underslanding of nalure and
consciousness. In lhe Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn Kanl focused aII his
energies on lhe resoIulion of lhe formaI queslion in knovIedge, lhe
schoIaslic quacsiic juris, ralher lhan lhe emiricaI queslion, lhe
quacsiic jacii.
22
In lhe reface, he referred lo "lhe rimary hyolhesis
of Coernicus," vhose innovalive aslronomy inverled lhe reIalion of
lhe earlh lo lhe soIar syslem and heIed GaIiIeo and his foIIovers
found a modern form of hysics.
23
Kanl lried lo achieve a simiIar
revoIulion in hiIosohy, eseciaIIy in reIalion lo malhemalics and
lhe naluraI sciences. UnIike lhe rilish schooI of Locke and lhe
emiricisls, vho ul forlh a mimelic lheory of knovIedge based on
sensory imressions, Kanl lried lo demonslrale lhal il is nol our
concels lhal conform lo lhe naluraI ob|ecl bul, converseIy, lhe
naluraI ob|ecl lhal conforms lo our concels.
24
y inlegraling lhis
nev Coernican insighl, Kanl beIieved lhal hiIosohy couId
disense vilh lhe oId melhods of invesligalion and roceed vilh a
nev "crilicaI" or "lranscendenlaI" melhod. To more fuIIy undersland
lhe significance of lhis crilicaI aroach for Rickerl, Iel us Iook a bil
more cIoseIy al Kanl's lerminoIogy.
"TranscendenlaI" knovIedge is, for Kanl, "aII knovIedge vhich is
occuied nol so much vilh ob|ecls as vilh lhe mode of our
knovIedge of ob|ecls in so far as lhis mode of knovIedge is lo be
ossibIe a riori."
25
AccordingIy, il is oosed lo aII emiricaI,
hysioIogicaI, sychoIogicaI, melahysicaI, or skelicaI lheories.
Kanl's aim is neilher lo deny lhal aII our knovIedge begins vilh
exerience nor lo doubl lhe exislence of given ob|ecls bul ralher lo
shov hov lhe exislence of such ob|ecls can be conceived
scicniijica||q. To achieve lhis
____________________
22
ImmanueI Kanl, Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn, lrans. Norman Kem
Smilh ( London, MacmiIIan, 1929), 120-122.
23
Ibid., 22.
24
Ibid.
25
Ibid., 59.
-91-
scienlific cerlilude requires lhal ve admil lhal our knovIedge
begins vilh exerience, yel Kanl does nol drav lhe concIusion lhal
our knovIedge is grounded in exerience. Ior lhe scienlific
underslanding of nalure, ve musl, Kanl insisls, make a dislinclion
belveen emiricaI, or a osleriori, and ure, or a riori, knovIedge.
26
Our knovIedge begins vilh exerience, he conlends, bul has ils
origin in lhe a riori. This a riori eIemenl is, in facl, lhe condilion
on vhich aII exerience deends, il rovides lhe "necessily and
slricl universaIily" for aII our |udgmenls aboul lhe vorId.
27
In lhis
sense, lranscendenlaI knovIedge is lhal form of knovIedge vhich,
lhough based on our exerience, disenses vilh lhe mere conlenls
of exerience, lhal is, lhe maleriaI comonenl, and focuses on lhe
forms of lhoughl needed lo organize such exerience inlo a
meaningfuI vhoIe. This is lhe lask of lranscendenlaI Iogic, vhich
asks lhe queslion, "Hov are a riori synlhelic |udgmenls ossibIe`"
28
Or, lo ose lhis queslion in ils modern form, "Hov is science |
Wisscnscnajij ossibIe`"
29
Ior Kanl, vriling in 1781, science meanl
malhemalics and hysics, lhus, lhe form of his lranscendenlaI
crilique concerning lhe ossibiIily of a riori knovIedge look lhe
form of a crilique of ure malhemalics and ure naluraI science as
lhe highesl forms of ure reason. Wriling over a cenlury Ialer,
vilhin a differenl scienlific conlexl, Rickerl beIieved lhal lhe form of
lhe Kanlian inquiry musl be exlended beyond nalure and
malhemalics lo incIude a lranscendenlaI Iogic of hislory.
In lhe Prc|cgcncna ic Anq |uiurc Mciapnqsics ( 1783), Kanl raised lhe
queslion aboul lhe ossibiIily of nalure in ils maleriaI and formaI
significance.
30
As ever, Kanl's queslion focused nol on lhe reaIily of
nalure ilseIf as il exisled aarl from human beings bul on nalure as
a ossibIe ob|ecl of human knovIedge. MaleriaIIy, Kanl cIaimed,
nalure is lhe roducl of sensory exerience, formaIIy, il is lhe
roducl of our ralionaI underslanding or consciousness. As he
exIained:
Nalure is lhe exislence of lhings, so far as il is delermined according
lo universaI Iavs. ShouId nalure signify lhe exislence of lhings in
lhemseIves, ve couId never knov il eilher a riori or a osleriori.
Nol a riori, for hov
____________________
26
Ibid., 42-43.
27
Ibid., 44.
28
Ibid., 55.
29
This is lhe queslion raised in lhe lvo-voIume sludy by KarI
VorInder, |nnanuc| Kani ( Leizig: Meiner, 1924), 1:270.
30
ImmanueI Kanl, Prc|cgcncna ic Anq |uiurc Mciapnqsics, irans. Pau|
Carus ( Ncu Ycrk. Bc||s-Mcrri||, 1950), cnap. 2.
-92-
can ve knov vhal beIongs lo lhings in lhemseIves, since lhis never
can be done by lhe disseclion of concels (in anaIylicaI
roosilions)` Ior I do nol vanl lo knov vhal is conlained in my
concel of a lhing (for lhal beIongs lo ils IogicaI essence), bul vhal
in lhe acluaIily |Wirk|icnkciij of lhe lhing is sueradded lo my
concel |Bcgrijjj and by vhich lhe lhing ilseIf is delermined in ils
exislence aarl from lhe concel.
31

In lhe lranscendenlaI aeslhelic of his Criiiquc, Kanl demonslraled
lhal nalure, in ils maleriaI form, is roduced by our sensibiIily. In
lhe lranscendenlaI Iogic, he argued lhal nalure, in ils formaI asecl,
is conslrucled lhrough lhe vork of concels. KnovIedge of nalure
lhus becomes ossibIe onIy vhen sensory inluilions are broughl
under lhe conceluaI aaralus of consciousness. In lhis
lranscendenlaI-IogicaI sense, nalure becomes an ob|ecl consliluled
by consciousness or by lhe ruIes guiding our underslanding. In lhis
ob|ecl-conslruclion of lhe naluraI vorId Iie lhe rools of Rickerl's
ovn lranscendenlaI hiIosohy.
Like Kanl, Rickerl made a calegoricaI dislinclion belveen lhe reaIily
of an ob|ecl and our concel of lhe ob|ecl, vriling in Scicncc an!
Hisicrq lhal lhere is "a guIf belveen lhe conlenl of concels and lhal
of reaIily vhich is as greal as lhe guIf belveen lhe universaI and lhe
arlicuIar, and vhich cannol be bridged."
32
Whereas lhe Iife-
hiIosohers soughl lo bridge lhis guIf by conceiving of a unily
belveen human consciousness and lhe naluraI vorId, Rickerl
consislenlIy emhasized lhe cIefl belveen lhem. To achieve a lruIy
scienlific underslanding of nalure, Rickerl cIaimed, one musl
dislance oneseIf from exerience and focus inslead on lhe formalion
of concels. As he exIained in Oic Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns, Tncrc is nc
scicncc uiincui ccnccpiua| incugni, an! inai is prccisc|q inc ncaning cj
cacn ccnccpi. inai ii !isianccs iisc|j jrcn inc innc!iaic rca|iiq cj |ijc. Tnc
ncsi tiia| cj a|| c|jccis ccascs ic |itc as scncining rca| as sccn as ii is
ccnccitc!. Tnc !ua|isn cj rca|iiq an! ccnccpi is nctcr ic |c ctcrccnc. Tc
ctcrccnc ii ucu|! |c ic ctcrccnc scicncc iisc|j. Tnc csscncc cj scicncc rcsis
cn inc icnsicn |ciuccn innc!iaic|q cxpcricncc! cr rca| |ijc an! a inccrq cj
|ijc cr cj rca|iiq.
33
Wiin Kaniian |cgic scrting as inc ncu crgancn jcr inc
|urcpcan scicnccs, |ickcri uas !cicrninc! ic rc!rau inc c|! |incs cj
!itisicn |ciuccn inc Naiur- an! Gcisics-
____________________
31
Ibid., 42.
32
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 44, KN, 43.
33
Rickerl, Oic Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns, 110 (cnpnasis ninc).
-93-
uisscnscnajicn. ul he firsl needed lo relhink WindeIband's oId
aroach.
In his lheory of lhe sciences, vilh ils IogicaI dislinclion belveen
nomolhelic and idiograhic melhods, WindeIband had cIaimed lhal
lhe same ob|ecl couId be lhe focus of bolh naluraI-scienlific and
hisloricaI research. Whal uIlimaleIy delermined lhe meaning of lhe
ob|ecl vas lhe sub|eclive inleresl of lhe researcher. ul Rickerl feIl
lhal WindeIband had nol dislinguished carefuIIy enough belveen
schoIarIy |udgmenl and scienlific concel-formalion. "Iacls" as
ob|ecls of research vere nol simIy given, lhey vere firsl consliluled
by lhe vork of scienlific concels lhal had lo be laken inlo
consideralion before one arrived al a |udgmenl. Seizing on lhe
eislemoIogicaI significance of his cIaim, Rickerl venl back lo Kanl
Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn lo reemhasize lhe IogicaI riorily of concel-
formalion lo lhe aclivily of |udgmenl (Urici|siaiigkcii). This
dislinclion made il necessary lo viev lhe difference belveen lhe
Naiur- and Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn nol as a robIem of cIassificalion (as
WindeIband had) bul as one of concel-formalion.
34
Again in
Scicncc an! Hisicrq Rickerl noles lhal "lhe formaI characler lhal
delermines lhe melhod of science musl be imIicil in lhe vay il
forms lhe concels by vhich il grass reaIily. Therefore, in order lo
undersland lhe melhod of a science ve have lo knov ils rinciIes
of concel-formalion."
35
ecause lhis nolion of concel-formalion
Iays such a cenlraI roIe in Rickerl's vhoIe lheory of lhe sciences, ve
viII need lo Iook al lhis lerm vilh some care.
Ccnccpi-jcrnaiicn, or Bcgrijjs|i|!ung, denoles for Rickerl lhe rocess
of slrucluring, ordering, and making ralionaI lhe sensory maleriaI in
lhe vorId of reaIily. As ve have aIready seen, concel and reaIily
are, for Rickerl, lvo disarale eIemenls in an underslanding of an
ob|ecl. ReaIily as il exisls aarl from human beings is irralionaI, onIy
lhrough lhe rocess of conceluaIizing il do ve make il ralionaI. AII
allemls lo describe reaIily exaclIy "as il is"--lhal is, lo achieve a
conceluaI reresenlalion failhfuI in aII ils delaiIs--are lherefore
doomed lo faiIure.
36
Rickerl emhasizes lvo reasons for his cIaim.
Iirsl, lhe saliaIIy exlensive delaiIs of any rocess in nalure are
infinileIy comIex. ImiricaI reaIily, he argues, knovs no shar and
absoIule boundaries: "Nalure makes no sudden Ieas, everylhing is
in
____________________
34
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 55-56, KN, 53-54.
35
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 38, KN, 37.
36
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 32, KN, 31 (cf. Oic Grcnzcn, 36).
-94-
fIux."
37
There is a conlinuous Iink belveen aII arls of reaIily vhich
make il imossibIe for lhe finile mind lo gras. This saliaIIy
cxicnsitc infinily Rickerl caIIs "lhe lheorem of lhe conlinuily of
everylhing reaI."
38
Rickerl lhen lurns his allenlion lo lhe inicnsitc
delaiIs of any one rocess in lhe emiricaI vorId and discovers lhal
no one lhing or evenl is comIeleIy idenlicaI vilh any olher. Al besl,
lhere is onIy simiIarily. Wilhin each lhing or each evenl, every arl
is dislincl from every olher arl saliaIIy and lemoraIIy, no maller
hov near or hov far removed: "In olher vords, everylhing reaI
exhibils a dislinclive, ecuIiarIy characlerislic individuaI slam. Al
Ieasl no one can say lhal he has ever encounlered anylhing
absoIuleIy homogeneous in reaIily. Iverylhing is differenl from
everylhing eIse."
39
Rickerl IabeIs lhis "inlensive infinily" of each arl
"lhe lheorem of lhe helerogeneily of everylhing reaI."
40

If ve combine lhe lheorem of conlinuily vilh lhe lheorem of
helerogeneily, Rickerl indicales, vherever ve Iook in lhe vorId ve
viII find a "conlinuous differenlialion."
41
y underslanding reaIily
as an irralionaI ncicrcgcnccus ccniinuun, Rickerl reaffirms lhe
essenliaI recaIcilrance of lhe emiricaI vorId lo aII human allemls
al descrilion, reroduclion, or reresenlalion. Rickerl underscores
lhis facl in Tnc Iiniis cj Ccnccpi |crnaiicn in Naiura| Scicncc. "As a
maller of rinciIe," he vriles, "il is an insoIubIe lask for lhe finile
mind lo have knovIedge of lhe vorId by individuaIIy reresenling
in one's mind aII lhe discrele henomena as lhey concreleIy exisl. . . .
Whoever underslands by "knovIedge of lhe vorId' an acluaI coy
of il from lhe very oulsel has lo renounce lhe idea of a science vhich
vouId ever come near lo reresenling knovIedge of lhe vorId as a
vhoIe."
42
The helerogeneous conlinuum is reaIily as such before
knovIedge. If lhere is lo be any knovIedge al aII, lhe infinile
muIliIicily of lhings has lo be "eIiminaled or overcome," vhich can
onIy be achieved lhrough concels.
43
Concels simIify reaIily, lhey
reduce lo manageabIe ro-
____________________
37
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 33, KN, 31.
38
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 33, KN, 32.
39
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 33-34, KN, 32-33.
40
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 34, KN, 33.
41
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 34, KN, 33.
42
This lransIalion is laken from Thomas urger, Max Wc|crs Tnccrq
cj Ccnccpi |crnaiicn ( Durham, N.C.: Duke Universily Iress, 1976),
21, and is based on an earIier edilion of Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn !cr
naiuruisscnscnaji|icncn Bcgrijjs|i|!ung ( Tu|ingcn: Mohr, 1902), 34.
AII olher cilalions from Oic Grcnzcn are from lhe 1929 edilion ciled
above.
43
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 42.
-95-
orlions lhe mass of henomena vhich lhe mind encounlers,
lurning lhe reaI as such inlo somelhing arlificiaIIy ralionaI. As
Rickerl made quile Iain: "Wilhoul concels . . . any knovIedge of
lhe smaIIesl and simIesl cororeaI reaIily vouId be imossibIe.
Concel-formalion . . . is necessariIy connecled vilh any |udgmenl
aboul reaIily vhich can be exressed in vords."
44

Rickerl's rinciIe of concel-formalion foIIoved uon lhe vhoIe
modernisl lradilion of Carlesian-Kanlian lhoughl grounded in lhe
eislemoIogicaI dislinclion belveen sub|ecl and ob|ecl.
ArorialeIy, in lhe very firsl senlence of Ocr Gcgcnsian! !cr
|rkcnninis (Tnc O|jcci cj Kncu|c!gc), Rickerl slaled unequivocaIIy
lhal "lo lhe concel of knovIedge lhere beIongs, besides a sub|ecl
lhal knovs, an ob|ecl lhal is knovn."
45
Againsl nave reaIism and
naluraIism, hovever, Rickerl argued lhal lhe ob|ecl (Gcgcnsian!)
vhich slands oosile (gcgcnu|crsicni) can never be knovn in ilseIf
as arl of reaIily bul onIy in a reconslrucled form as a concel.
KnovIedge of reaIily, lhen, can never be idenlified as, or coincide
vilh, knovIedge of being, because il is aIvays lhe sub|ecl vho firsl
grounds lhe meaning of being. Surred on by lhese Kanlian
molives, Rickerl became ersuaded lhal lhe vhoIe enlerrise of
hiIosohy lurns on lhe eislemoIogicaI queslion concerning lhe
ground of knovIedge ralher lhan on lhe onloIogicaI queslion
concerning lhe ground of being--a dislinclion lhal vas lo have
rofound consequences for his melhodoIogy of lhe sciences.
iv. Thc Mcthnds nI Natura! 5cicncc and Histnry
a. Thc Princip!cs nI Natura!-5cicntiIic and Histnrica! Cnnccpt-
Fnrmatinn
In Rickerl's scheme of lhe sciences, reaIily ilseIf is neilher nalure nor
hislory, il exisls aarl from human consciousness as a
helerogeneous conlinuum, infinileIy varied and exlensive, a kind of
seamIess fabric. Rickerl himseIf oflen used lhe HeracIilean melahor
of a slream in conslanl fIux.
46
Whenever ve use our reason, he
exIained, ve make IillIe incisions inlo lhis seamIess fabric, ve
arlificiaIIy slo lhe river's fIov. In deciding lo anaIyze lhe river, ve
choose vhich
____________________
44
Ibid.
45
Rickerl, Ocr Gcgcnsian! !cr |rkcnninis, 1.
46
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 33, KN, 32, and Oic Grcnzcn, 35.
-96-
arl ve viII examine, simiIarIy, vhen making incisions, ve decide
vhere lo cul. Our choices are diclaled by vhal ve deem essenliaI
and inessenliaI lo our lask. In lerms of an overaII lheory of
knovIedge, lo slruclure, lransform, or conceluaIize lhe emiricaI
vorId of reaIily is lo seIecl oul of il vhal is of vaIue. To ensure lhal
lhis acl of choosing does nol haen by vhim or fancy, hovever,
ruIes of choice musl exisl. These ruIes are lhemseIves lhe very
rinciIes of science, Rickerl argued, and il is hiIosohy's goaI as
lhe science of science lo ensure lheir IogicaI inlegrily. Such inlegrily
can be achieved, hovever, onIy by recourse lo lhe lranscendenlaI
idea of an a riori. "If lhe conslruclion of reaIily erformed by lhe
sciences is nol lo be arbilrary," Rickerl vrole, "lhey require an 'a
riori' or a rior |udgmenl of vhich lhey can avaiI lhemseIves in lhe
deIimilalion of one arl of reaIily from anolher . . . lhal is lo say,
lhey need a rinciIe of seIeclion vilh resecl lo vhich lhey can
searale lhe essenliaI from lhe inessenliaI in lhe given maleriaI."
47

The "a riori" rinciIe of facl seIeclion guaranlees lhe scienlific
characler of aII reaIily conslruclion. Thal is, il grounds lhe seIeclion
of facls nol in lhe facls lhemseIves bul in lhe lranscendenlaI ruIes of
Iogic by vhich lhe scienlisl musl conslrucl such facls. This
guaranlees againsl aII arbilrary seIeclion. Rickerl designaled lhe lvo
IogicaI melhods of seIecling lhe essenliaI from lhe inessenliaI as lhe
naluraIscienlific melhod and lhe melhod of hisloricaI science.
Underslanding lhe essence of naluraI science or hislory, he argued,
invoIves a cIose invesligalion of ils rinciIes of concel-formalion
ralher lhan an anaIysis of any so-caIIed maleriaI ob|ecl calegorized
as eilher nalure or hislory. Il is reciseIy on lhis formaI oinl of
eislemoIogy lhal lhe conlroversy belveen Rickerl and lhe
hisloricisls lurned.
b. Individua!izing and Gcncra!izing 5cicnccs
In Rickerl's scheme, lhe rocess of concel-formalion deends on
lhe goaI lhal one seeks in seIecling essenliaI eIemenls from lhe
slream of reaIily. This goaI in lurn shaes lhe ob|ecl lhal one seIecls.
Rickerl aIied lhis insighl lo exIain lhe difference belveen lhe
lvo dominanl melhods of nineleenlh-cenlury research. In every
inlerrelalion of reaIily, he argued, lhere is a formaI difference in
lhe goaI one seeks: eilher one focuses on lhe generaI characlerislics
lhal one arlicIe of
____________________
47
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 36, KN, 35.
-97-
reaIily has in common vilh anolher, or one focuses on lhe
differences belveen arlicIes. In Tnc Iiniis cj Ccnccpi-|crnaiicn,
Scicncc an! Hisicrq, and in many arlicIes, eseciaIIy "Zvei Wege der
Irkennlnislheorie," Rickerl reemhasized lhal onIy lvo alhs of
knovIedge exisl. One can eilher lransform lhe helerogeneous
conlinuum of reaIily inlo a "homogeneous conlinuum," or one can
make of il a "helerogeneous !iscrciun."
48
Thal is, one can viev aII
reaIily under lhe universaI concel of simiIarily or lhe arlicuIar
concel of dissimiIarily. The one aroach defines lhe rocedure of
naluraI science, and lhe olher, lhe rocedure of hislory.
According lo Rickerl, naluraI-scienlific concels reduce lhe infinile
manifoId of arlicuIar and discrele ob|ecls lo a manageabIe number
by concenlraling on one cenlraI fealure: vhal lhese lhings have in
common. As he exIained: "To use a feIicilous melahor of
ergson's, lhe naluraI sciences roduce onIy ready-made cIolhes
vhich fil IauI |usl as veII as lhey do Ieler because lhey are cul lo
lhe measure of neilher. If lhey vanled lo oerale on a 'cuslom-
made' basis, lhey vouId have lo roduce a ncu concel for every
ob|ecl lhey sludy."
49
ul lo roduce an individuaI concel for every
ob|ecl vouId be IogicaIIy conlradiclory because vhenever lhe
naluraI sciences do lurn lheir allenlion lo lhe individuaI exemIar,
lhey Iook for a vay lo subsume il under a generaI rinciIe. In so
doing lhey simIify lhe comIex eIemenls of lhe individuaI lhing
ilseIf. Thus, Rickerl argued, "lhe arlicuIarily and individuaIily of
lhe reaI vorId conslilules in every case lhe uIlimale |inii cj ccnccpi-
jcrnaiicn in inc naiura| scicnccs."
50

y using lhis IogicaI melhod of concel-formalion, Rickerl hoed lo
rove lhal lhere vas a necessary and absoIule boundary lhal
searales lhe |cgica| essence of naluraI science from lhal of hislory.
Hislory's goaI, as a form of science, is lo exlracl lhe unique,
arlicuIar, unreealabIe eIemenl from lhe conlinuous slream of
reaIily and lo resenl il vilh reference lo ils individuaI significance.
As Rickerl exIained in Tnc Iiniis cj Ccnccpi-|crnaiicn,
Ivery science, even hislory, has lo lransform ils erceluaI dala and
bring il under concels. Thus, ve vish lo formuIale lhe oosilion
of naluraI science and hislory in lhis vay: ImiricaI reaIily . . .
becomes nalure vhen
____________________
48
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 36-37, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 34-35, and KN, 33-
34. This concel is aIso exIained in Rickerl imorlanl essay "Zvei
Wege der Irkennlnislheorie," in Kani Siu!icn 14 ( 1909), 169-228.
49
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 45, KN, 44.
50
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 46, KN, 45, cf. Oic Grcnzcn, 219.
-98-
ve viev il vilh resecl lo ils universaI characlerislics, il becomes
hislory vhen ve viev il as arlicuIar and individuaI. . . . The finaI
difference of melhods is lo be found soIeIy in lhal vhich lhe various
concels make oul of reaIily and lhus, lhe essenliaI lhing for Iogic is
lo see vhelher each seeks lhe universaI or arlicuIar eIemenl in lhe
reaI. The firsl lask faIIs lo naluraI science, lhe second lo hislory.
51

y dividing lhe sciences of nalure and hislory according lo lheir
|cgica| lasks, Rickerl hoed, on lhe one hand, lo overcome lhe oId
Naiur/Gcisi, hysicaI/sychoIogicaI duaIism of MiII and his German
foIIovers and, on lhe olher, lo avoid lhe osilivisl cIaim for
adoling onIy one universaI melhod. Comle and uckIe had
idenlified lhe naluraI-scienlific melhod vilh scienlific melhod as
such and allemled lo lransform hislory inlo a science by
arorialing lhe rinciIes of bioIogy, chemislry, and hysics.
Rickerl re|ecled lhe osilivisl rogram, hovever, and lried inslead
lo conslrucl his argumenl on lhe formaI rinciIes of Iogic
deveIoed by lranscendenlaI hiIosohy.
52
IoIIoving Kanl, Rickerl
slressed lhal scienlific melhod is nol rooled in lhe maleriaI ob|ecl
bul in lhe formaI concel.
In lhe naluraI sciences, concel-formalion is based on lhe
generaIizing melhod of lhe nomolhelic aroach, as WindeIband
had carefuIIy argued. NaluraI-scienlific inquiry seeks generaI Iavs
by vhich lo slruclure exerience. Hence, Kanl couId define nalure
as "lhe exislence of lhings, so far as il is delermined according lo
universaI Iavs."
53
Yel Rickerl reaIized lhal nalure ilseIf is nol Iav-
abiding (in lhe sense lhal il foIIovs Nevlonian Iavs of hysics),
ralher, ve conslrucl nalure lhrough our naluraI-scienlific research
according lo scienlific Iavs. This lye of concel-formalion seIecls
lhe essenliaI facls of reaIily from oul of lhe IavIess conlinuum of
helerogeneous eIemenls according lo lheir conformily lo Iavs. This
is lhe generaIizing melhod's soIe aim: lo imose IavfuIness on lhe
chaos of hysicaI rocess.
In lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn such an aroach vas IogicaIIy
inconsislenl. If hislory vere lo achieve lhe slalus of a science, il
vouId have lo foIIov ils ovn IogicaI aroach based on lhe
individuaIizing melhod of lhe idiograhic disciIines. To borrov
lhe same rinciIes of concel-formalion as lhe naluraI sciences and
lo aIy lheir "Iavs" lo lhe sludy of human hislory reresenled an
error in Iogic. uckIe
____________________
51
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 227.
52
Rickerl exlends lhis argumenl in Oic Prc||cnc !cr
Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic, 27-37.
53
Kanl, Prc|cgcncna, 42.
-99-
and lhe olher osilivisls vho soughl lo discover "Iavs of hisloricaI
inquiry" (lhereby lransforming hislory inlo a science) had, according
lo Rickerl, confused lhe very issue of scienlific "definilion."
54
Science
can eilher be generaIizing, nomolhelic, and Iav-seeking, or il can be
individuaIizing, idiograhic, and arlicuIar. Il cannol be bolh al lhe
same lime. To cIarify lhis IogicaI confusion, Rickerl focused on lhe
robIem of concel-formalion as a vay of defining lhe rinciIe of
seIeclion in hisloricaI science. y lurning lo lhe hiIosohicaI
robIem of vaIue as lhe basis of aII rinciIes of seIeclion, he hoed
lo offer a vay oul of lhe cuI-de-sac of lradilionaI lheory of science.
c. Thc Qucstinn nI Va!uc in Histnrica! Mcthnd
In aII areas of Iife, incIuding science, Rickerl observed, ve are forced
lo choose belveen lhe vaIuabIe and lhe common. In Oic Grcnzcn, he
rovided an examIe of lhis kind of choice by conlrasling lhe vaIue
of a iece of ordinary coaI vilh lhal of a diamond.
55
In so doing, he
shed some Iighl on lhe rocess of hisloricaI concel-formalion.
There are, he noled, many more ieces of coaI in lhe emiricaI vorId
lhan lhere are diamonds. The iece of coaI is, hovever, Iike lhe
diamond, a dislinclive ob|ecl differenl from aII olher vorIdIy ob|ecls
such as rocks, lrees, birds, fIovers, and so forlh. Moreover, lhis one
secific iece of coaI is differenl from aII olher ieces by virlue of ils
singuIarily in lime and sace. Whal differenliales lhe coaI from a
diamond, hovever, is nol mereIy lhe slam of singuIarily. On cIoser
scruliny ve find lhal vhal is reaIIy al issue in lhis searalion is
nolhing olher lhan lhe concel of vaIue ilseIf. Dividing lhe singuIar
iece of coaI inlo many arls does nol Iessen ils vaIue, lhe same
cannol be said, hovever, of lhe diamond. As an |n-!iti!uun lhe
diamond's vaIue resls reciseIy on ils indivisibiIily. As Rickerl
exIained: "The meaning lhal lhe diamond ossesses resls on a ta|uc
lhal in lurn allaches lo ils irreIaceabIe singuIarily. The diamond
sncu|! nol be divided because il is vaIuabIe, a rinciIe lhal hoIds
for aII olher ob|ecls lhal are 'in-dividuaIs.'"
56
y aIying lhis same
axioIogicaI rinciIe of individuaIily lo lhe reaIms of hislory and
cuIlure, ve viII be beller abIe lo undersland lhe roIe of hisloricaI
concel-formalion in Rickerl's lhinking.
____________________
54
Ior an examIe of osilivisl hisloriograhy, see Henry Thomas
uckIe, Hisicrq cj Citi|izaiicn in |ng|an!, voI. 1 ( Nev York:
AIelon, 1870), es. 3-4.
55
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 315-318.
56
Ibid., 317.
-100-
Ior Rickerl, vaIue, or Wcri, rovides lhe cenlraI concel for
underslanding hisloricaI science. ul one mighl IegilimaleIy ask,
Where does lhis vaIue come from` Whal is ils source` Hov is il
grounded` IoIIoving slriclIy Kanlian rinciIes, Rickerl ansvered
lhe queslion of ground (!cr Saiz tcn Grun!) in ureIy lranscendenlaI
lerms. VaIues do nol 'exisl' onloIogicaIIy, he argued, lhey neilher
ossess maleriaI subslance nor occuy sace in lhe vorId of being
bul are based on formaI rinciIes. Their ground is IogicaI or
axioIogicaI ralher lhan onloIogicaI--in Rickerl's vords, being "is,"
vaIues are "vaIid" (Scicn!cs isi, Wcric gc|icn).
57
In Sqsicn !cr
Pni|cscpnic, one of his mosl imorlanl vorks vhich vas inlended as
lhe nev organon for "vaIue-hiIosohy," Rickerl admilled, hovever,
lhal "Iike aII 'fundamenlaI' concels, lhe concel of vaIue is
indefinabIe."
58
One can lhink (!cnkcn) in lerms of vaIue, bul lhe
concel of vaIue ilseIf cannol be lhoughl (|c!cnkcn).
59
To cIarify lhis
oinl, Iel us Iook more cIoseIy al Rickerl's examIe of lhe iece of
coaI and lhe diamond.
As ve sav earIier, lhe vaIue of Rickerl's diamond (in conlrasl lo lhe
commonness of lhe coaI) does nol reside in lhe maleriaI roerlies
of lhe diamond ilseIf. Inslead, vaIue allaches lo lhe diamond
lhrough cerlain agreed-uon cuIluraI concels lhal shae lhe
onloIogicaI singuIarily of lhis iece of rock and render il vaIuabIe.
We can nolice a simiIar Iogic al vork vhen ve consider lhe vaIue of
nisicrica| ob|ecls. In lhemseIves, neilher lhe Iife of NaoIeon nor lhe
Irench RevoIulion are essenliaI lo vhal ve caII "hislory." In and
lhrough lhem, hovever, ve recognize cerlain vaIues lhal become
imorlanl lo us. OnIy in reIalion lo lhese vaIues does lhe hisloricaI
ob|ecl become lruIy hisloricaI, aarl from lhem il remains |usl
anolher singuIar eisode in lhe chaolic rocession of human
aclivily, equaI in significance lo lhe baking of bread or lhe brushing
of one's leelh--loics vhich loday have reIevance for cuIluraI
hislorians bul vhich for Rickerl, vilh his lradi-
____________________
57
Ior an exceIIenl discussion of lhe fundamenlaI lenels of
Wcripni|cscpnic, see Herberl SchndeIbach , Pni|cscpnic in
Ocuiscn|an!, 1831-1933 (Irankfurl: Suhrkam, 1983), 199-224,
}ohannes . Lolz, "Sein und Werl," Zciiscnriji jur kainc|iscnc
Tncc|cgic 57 ( 1933): 557, Augusl Messer, Ocuiscnc Wcripni|cscpnic
!cr Gcgcnuari ( Leizig: Reinicke, 1926), and }. I. Heyde, Wcri.
|inc pni|cscpniscnc Grun!|cgung ( Irfurl: Slenger, 1926). Ior a
crilique of lhis osilion, see Iarvis Imad, "Heidegger's VaIue-
Crilicism and Ils earing on a IhenomenoIogy of VaIues," in }ohn
SaIIis, ed., |a!ica| Pncncncnc|cgq (AlIanlic HighIands, N.}.:
Humanilies Iress, 1978).
58
Heinrich Rickerl, Sqsicn !cr Pni|cscpnic (henceforlh ciled as
Syslem), ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1921) 114.
59
}ohannes erger, "Gegenslandskonslilulion und geschichlIiche
WeIl," Ih.D. disserlalion, Universily of Munich 1967, 181, offers a
crilique of lhis osilion.
-101-
lionaI focus on oIilicaI hislory and biograhy, heId IillIe inleresl.
The cuIluraI lask of hislory is lo bring a measure of seIf-
consciousness lo lhe enlerrise of reIaling inessenliaI eisodes lo
essenliaI vaIues. As Rickerl exIained in his chaler "Die Logik der
Geschichlsvissenschafl":
The individuaI concrele meaning of |an ob|eclj . . . slands in lhe
cIosesl reIalion lo universaI concels of vaIue such lhal no
hisloricaIIy meaningfuI ob|ecl, lo vhich ve allach individuaIily, can
allain hisloricaI meaning and significance vilhoul reference lo a
universaI vaIue. The concrele meaning is firsl 'consliluled'
hisloricaIIy lhrough lhe universaI vaIue. The concrele meaning lhal
is found in lhe reaI ob|ecls, as veII as lhe hisloricaI rinciIe of
seIeclion, Iies nol in lhe shere of reaI |cing bul in lhal of ta|uc, and
il is from here lhal lhe conneclion belveen lhe individuaI vaIue-
reIaled melhod and lhe meaningfuI maleriaI of hislory musl be
underslood.
60

If ve go back lo our iniliaI inquiry concerning lhe ground of vaIues
and lheir reIalion lo hisloricaI concel-formalion, ve find lhal for
Rickerl, vaIues do nol have lheir source in hislory, ralher, hislory
exisls because of vaIues. These vaIues, vhich are lranscendenlaI and
absoIule, vilhoul exislenliaI or hisloricaI ground, cannol be knovn
in lhemseIves, lhey can be aroached onIy lhrough lhe ob|ecls lhal
allach lo lhem, ob|ecls lhal Rickerl finds in lhe shere of cuIlure.
ecause of ils singuIar roIe in hisloricaI concel-formalion, Rickerl
singIes oul lhe concel of cuIlure as an imorlanl slarling oinl for
reframing lhe queslion of vaIue in lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn.
v. Ku!turwisscnschaIt and NaturwisscnschaIt
Rickerl's unfaIlering emhasis on "cuIlure" (Ku|iur) as lhe guiding
rinciIe for underslanding lhe science of hislory musl be exIained
vilhin ils ovn hisloricaI conlexl. Wriling in 1926, some forly years
afler DiIlhey |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs ( 1883), Rickerl
vanled lo reframe DiIlhey's discussion aboul lhe eislemoIogicaI
dislinclions belveen Naiur and Gcisi by inlroducing a nev
lerminoIogicaI dislinclion belveen Naiur and Ku|iur. Rickerl raised
DiIlhey as a carefuI and erudile hislorian of ideas vho ossessed a
"gifl for 'reIiving' and 'emalhizing' vilh hislory |lhalj vas
exlraordinary and er-
____________________
60
Rickerl, Oic Prc||cnc !cr Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic, 70.
-102-
has unique in ils lime", yel, he observed, "lhis eslimabIe man vas
nol gifled in lhe same measure vilh lhe caacily for rigorous
conceluaI reasoning."
61
DiIlhey's idenlificalion of lhe naluraI
sciences vilh lhe hysicaI or cororeaI and of lhe human sciences
vilh lhe sychoIogicaI or siriluaI (gcisiig) vas loo focused on
maleriaI and onloIogicaI eIemenls. Such a dislinclion ignored lhe
formaI roerlies of vaIue- and concel-formalion. Thus, vhen
DiIlhey emIoyed lhe HegeIian concel of Geisl lo anchor his
syslem of scienlific knovIedge, Rickerl dismissed il as inaroriale
for hisloricaI sludy, IabeIing il "loo narrov."
62
Rickerl's resonse
vas lo reformuIale lhe lradilionaI Naiur / Gcisi division aIong more
rigorousIy IogicaI Iines, offering inslead an axioIogicaI sIil belveen
nalure and cuIlure.
If Kanl's definilion of naiurc as "lhe exislence of lhings so far as lhey
are delermined according lo universaI Iavs" adequaleIy described
lhe vork of naluraI-scienlific concel-formalion, il did nol rovide
an exhauslive modeI for aII lhe sciences.
63
Rickerl knev lhal he
vouId have lo relhink Kanl's definilion in Iighl of lhe vaIue-focused
research of lhe cuIluraI sciences, so lhal one vouId be abIe lo define
cu|iurc as "lhe exislence of lhings so far as lhey are delermined
according lo vaIues."
64
In Scicncc an! Hisicrq he rovided a ralionaIe
for his definilion by reIaling vaIues lo cuIlure: "The idea of cuIlure
rovides lhe hisloricaI sciences vilh a rinciIe for lhe seIeclion of
lhe essenliaI asecls of reaIily in lhe formalion of lheir concels, |usl
as lhe idea of nalure as reaIily considered from lhe oinl of viev of
universaI Iavs and concels does for lhe naluraI sciences. The
concel of an hisloricaI individuaIily lhal can be reresenled as a
reaI exression of comIexes of meaning is firsl consliluled by
virlue of lhe ta|ucs lhal allach lo cuIlure and lhrough reference lo
lhem."
65
NaluraI science and cuIluraI science are lhus searaled nol
according lo lhe ecuIiarily of lheir ob|ecls bul according lo lhe
IogicaI difference in lheir melhods, a division lhal vas ureIy
formaI.
66

Rickerl acknovIedged WindeIband's cIaim lhal lhe melhod of
naluraI science is generaIizing, and lhe melhod of hislory,
individuaIizing, bul he beIieved lhal lhis dislinclion vas loo broadIy
dravn and inex-
____________________
61
Rickerl, H!.Ms. 31, 203.
62
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 526.
63
Kanl, Prc|cgcncna, 42.
64
Herberl SchndeIbach, Oic Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic nacn Hcgc| (
Ireiburg: AIber, 1974), 151.
65
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 83-84, KN, 81-82.
66
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 523.
-103-
acl. In his hisloricaI Iogic he lried lo demonslrale lhal lhere are lvo
kinds of individuaIily: mere singuIarily (lhe secificaIIy given iece
of coaI) and essenliaI singuIarily (lhe vaIuabIe diamond), lvo
characlerislics lhal couId onIy be dislinguished lhrough a concel of
vaIue. OnIy on lhe basis of vaIue dislinclions lhal delermined
cuIluraI concels couId lhe melhodoIogicaI robIem of hislory be
underslood al aII. In Oic Grcnzcn he vrole, "The concels of cuIlure
and of hislory are muluaIIy condilioned and are connecled lo each
in a doubIe sense: cuIluraI vaIues aIone make hislory as a science
ossibIe, and hisloricaI deveIomenl aIone brings forlh reaI cuIluraI
ob|ecls lo vhich cuIluraI vaIues allach lhemseIves."
67

vi. Va!ucs and Ob|cctivity in Histnrica! 5cicncc
Rickerl's slralegy in offering a nev lheory of cuIluraI science vas
more radicaI lhan WindeIband's laxonomicaI revision of lhe Naiur-
and Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn. |n a tcrq praciica| uaq, |ickcri scugni ic
prcti!c a |cgica| inccrq inai ucu|! cnsurc inc scicniijic rigcr cj nisicrica|
inquirq. |j nisicrqs siaius as a scicncc cj cu|iurc ucrc ic |c sccurc!, ii
ucu|! natc ic uiinsian! inc nanq criiicisns cj inc i!ca|isis, pcsiiitisis,
an! praciiiicncrs cj inc c|! Hisicrica| Scncc|. |ickcri uas scnsiiitc ic incsc
criiicisns an!, in jaci, rcurcic nis najcr ucrks, Tnc Iiniis cj Ccnccpi
|crnaiicn in Naiura| Scicncc an! Scicncc an! Hisicrq, nanq iincs ic
acccnnc!aic incn, inc jcrncr ucni inrcugn jitc !ijjcrcni c!iiicns, an! inc
|aiicr, inrcugn sctcn.
68
|acn iinc |ickcri iric! ic ansucr inc taricus
criiicisns cj ininkcrs sucn as Bccncr, |riscnciscn-Kcn|cr, Trcc|iscn,
Oi|incq, Sinnc|, an! Mcincckc.
69
|n unai jc||cus, | ucu|! |ikc ic jccus cn
cnc aspcci cj inis ccnicnpcrarq criiicisn--inc prc||cn cj ta|ucs an!
nisicrica| c|jcciitiiq--in an cjjcri ic c|arijq inc !isiinciitcncss cj |ickcris
pcsiiicn.
As cnc siu!ics inc nisicrq cj scicncc jrcn inc iinc cj Baccn, Kcp|cr,
Ga|i|cc, Ncuicn, an! Ocscarics, cnc nciiccs ncu pni|cscpncrs an!
scicniisis natc scugni ic acnictc a unitcrsa| sian!ar! cj c|jcciitc an!
sqsicnaiic intcsiigaiicn jcr scicniijic ncinc!. As incsc ininkcrs !ctc|cpc!
a ra!ica||q ncu nc!c| cj rcscarcn, incq gatc prccc!cncc
____________________
67
Ibid., 522-523.
68
Ibid., vii-xxxi.
69
Ior Rickerl's commenls on echer, see Oic Grcnzcn, 476 an! 613, cn
Oi|incq, 125, 181-183, an! 488, cn Sinnc|, 272 an! 574, cn Mcincckc,
xxtii an! 335, an! cn Trcc|iscn, xxtii an! 539.
-104-
lo an ideaI of ob|eclivily as lhe mosl syslemalic vay of advancing
lrulh. Rickerl's lheory of vaIue aeared lo run counler lo lhis
Iongslanding and venerabIe lradilion, for his rinciIe of vaIue
seemed lo be al odds vilh lhe demand for scienlific ob|eclivily. Yel
Rickerl allemled lo overcome lhis aarenl conlradiclion by
roviding a nev kind of scienlific Iogic vhich vouId achieve an
eislemoIogicaI baIance belveen lhe comeling cIaims of ob|eclivily
and sub|eclivily. As he exIained in Sqsicn !cr Pni|cscpnic:
Il aears inconsislenl vilh lhe nalure of science lhal vaIues shouId
Iay such a decisive roIe in ils vork, indeed, shouId even be lhe
rinciIes of ils concel-formalion. One righlIy demands from lhe
hislorian lhal he resenl lhings "ob|ecliveIy," and even if lhis goaI is
nol vhoIIy allainabIe, il nonelheIess offers a IogicaI ideaI. Hov does
lhis reIale lo lhe conlenlion lhal lhe essence of hisloricaI melhod is
in connecling ob|ecls vilh vaIues` Does nol each disciIine lhal
researches a arl of lhe reaI vorId have lo mainlain ils dislance from
aII bul lhe IogicaI vaIues if il is nol lo cease being a science of lhe
reaI`
70

Rickerl lried lo ansver lhese queslions by osiling a IogicaI
dislinclion belveen lhe melhods of naluraI- and cuIluraI-scienlific
concelformalion. No one, Rickerl argued, couId seriousIy mainlain
lhal an absoIule or vaIue-free observalion of reaIily is al aII ossibIe.
71
Iach observalion, each invesligalion of an ob|ecl musl, in some
sense, "inleresl" lhe observer. Wilh lhe admission of such an inleresl,
one has aIso lo admil lhe reIevance of ta|uc. LogicaIIy, lhis vaIue
does nol have lo be one-sidedIy sub|eclive, hovever, il can aIso
refIecl an ob|eclive inleresl of lhe observer. The inleresl of naluraI
scienlisls, for examIe, is guided by lheir focus on lhe generaI
characler heId in common by each individuaI exemIar. Here, lhe
vaIue of commonaIily is decisive. Ior hislorians, hovever, lhe
rocess of concel-formalion roceeds differenlIy, focusing inslead
on lhe recise singuIarily of lhe individuaI exemIar. As ve have
aIready seen in our examIe of lhe coaI and lhe diamond, lhere are
lvo dislincl lyes of individuaIily for Rickerl, bolh of vhich ossess
vaIue: mere singuIarily and lhe unique individuaI or, in olher
vords, lhe "inessenliaI" and lhe "essenliaI." ul in Sqsicn !cr
Pni|cscpnic, |ickcri c|ainc! inai sucn a !isiinciicn uas nci ar|iirarq. Tnc
in!iti!ua| can cn|q |cccnc
____________________
70
Rickerl, Sqsicn, 219.
71
Ibid., 218.
-105-
'essenliaI' vilh reference lo a vaIue."
72
On lhe basis of lhis
dislinclion, Rickerl beIieved he couId offer an eislemoIogicaI
soIulion lo lhe robIem of hisloricaI reIalivism.
Wilhin Rickerl's syslem of seIeclion in naluraI science and hislory,
vaIue serves as a formaI, a riori rinciIe, lranscendenlaI in nalure
and vaIid (gc|icn!) ralher lhan reaI (scicn!)--an absoIule reference
oinl by vhich aII ob|ecls in lhe vorId of being can be |udged. In
concrele hisloricaI lerms, lhis means lhal lhe vaIues by vhich one
|udges reaI evenls are nol lhemseIves bound by lhe conslrainls of
lime. Rickerl exIained lhis aradox by referring lhese vaIues lo
cuIlure. Againsl lhe cIaims of hisloricisls and Iife-hiIosohers,
Rickerl re|ecled lhe reIevance of lemoraIily and hisloricily and
insisled lhal vaIues are lranshisloricaI and lranscuIluraI, as veII as
absoIule and unchanging in lheir vaIidily. They do nol exisl as such
bul find exression in cuIluraI ob|ecls such as reIigion, arl, lhe slale,
lhe communily, economic organizalions, elhicaI recels, and
olhers. Wilh lhis searalion of cuIluraI vaIues--vhose ground is
lranscendenlaI bul vhose exression is hisloricaI--Rickerl vas
convinced lhal he had found a means lo overcome lhe sIil belveen
sub|eclive, vaIue-Iaden cuIlure and ob|eclive, vaIue-free cuIluraI
science.
In aIying lhese insighls lo lhe secific robIems of hisloricaI
research, Rickerl made a cIear-cul dislinclion belveen "vaIualion,"
or Wcriung, and vhal he caIIed "vaIue-reference," or Wcri|czicnung.
His argumenl roceeds as foIIovs: Ior hislorians lo engage in a
arlicuIar area of research, such as lhe Irench RevoIulion, lhey musl
firsl have an inleresl in lheir loic. This inleresl need nol undermine
lheir ob|eclivily, hovever, for one can have a raclicaI inleresl in a
sub|ecl and yel achieve lheorelicaI ob|eclivily. IraclicaI vaIualion of
lhe Irench RevoIulion need nol be confused vilh lheorelicaIIy
referring il lo vaIues. Indeed, in many cases a hislorian's inleresl is
reaIIy a cuIluraI ralher lhan a mereIy ersonaI one, deendenl on
lhe consensus of lhe cuIluraI communily--ils Ianguage, educalion,
reIigion, arl, economic slruclure, Iav, Iileralure, science, and so
forlh. Thus, as a researcher, lhe hislorian mighl simIy share in a
common cuIluraI vaIue. Ior examIe, a Irench hislorian mighl nol
agree vilh cerlain oIilicaI or sociaI asecls of lhe Irench
RevoIulion bul couId sliII be inleresled in lheir effecls on lhe
modern vorId. In araising lhe RevoIulion, hovever, he or she
vouId need lo seIecl oul of an infinile number of
____________________
72
Ibid.
-106-
hisloricaI facls lhose vhich seemed somehov reIevanl. In seIecling
lhese facls, lhe hislorian vouId be guided by a cerlain narralive
lradilion, deciding vhelher a oIilicaI, cuIluraI, economic, or
inleIIecluaI crilique vouId lake recedence. Iach differenl
erseclive vouId yieId a differenl inlerrelalion, nonelheIess, each
vouId be of vaIue for a secific communily of hisloricaI researchers.
In Rickerlian Ianguage, by seIecling a fragmenl oul of lhe
helerogeneous conlinuum of Irench hislory and conlexluaIizing il
vilhin a Iarger hisloricaI narralive, hislorians vere referring lo
vaIues bul vere nol lhemseIves evaIualing.
Rickerl consislenlIy mainlained lhal "raclicaI vaIualion and
lheorelicaI reference lo vaIues are lvo IogicaIIy !isiinci acls."
73
One
couId cIearIy idenlify a secific aclion (lhe execulion of Louis XVI)
as essenliaI for lhe hislory of lhe Irench RevoIulion vilhoul
acknovIedging lhal such an acl eilher romoled or imeded lhe
achievemenl of a secific cuIluraI vaIue (oIilicaI freedom). To
cIarify his osilion, Rickerl exIained:
To lreal an ob|ecl as inpcriani for vaIues and lhe reaIizalion of
cuIluraI goods does nol al aII mean lhal one vaIues il, for vaIualion
musl aIvays be eilher pcsiiitc or ncgaiitc. The pcsiiitc or ncgaiitc
vaIue allached lo a segmenl of reaIily can be a maller of disule
even lhough ils hisloricaI significance in virlue of ils reference lo
some vaIue is |cqcn! qucsiicn. Thus, for examIe, lhe hislorian as
such is nol in a osilion lo decide vhelher lhe Irench RevoIulion
vas beneficiaI or harmfuI lo Irance or Iuroe. Such a |udgmenl
vouId invoIve a vaIualion. . . . In shorl, vaIualions musl aIvays
invoIve raise or bIame. To rcjcr lo vaIues is lo do neilher.
74

In carefuIIy dislinguishing belveen lhe acl of vaIualion and lhal of
vaIue-reference, Rickerl hoed lo rovide a IogicaI soIulion lo lhe
hisloricisl robIem of ob|eclivily. Ranke, for examIe, had caIIed for
slricl imarliaIily in his office as a scienlific hislorian.
MelhodoIogicaIIy, he soughl lo achieve an "exlinguishing of lhe ego"
vhich vouId guaranlee a re-crealion of lhe hisloricaI eoch "as il
acluaIIy haened."
75
Though Rickerl vas in symalhy vilh
Ranke's desire for hisloricaI ob|eclivily, he couId nol embrace lhe
Rankean ideaI uncrilicaIIy. To be sure, one needed lo overcome aII
arbilrary dislorlions of lhe hisloricaI
____________________
73
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 89, KN, 97.
74
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 90, KN, 88-89.
75
Ior a fuIIer discussion of Ranke's osilion, see Leonard Krieger,
|ankc. Tnc Mcaning cj Hisicrq ( Chicago: Universily of Chicago
Iress, 1977).
-107-
facls, yel, he argued, "lhis does nol mean lhal, as Ranke seems lo
have suosed, hisloricaI ob|eclivily consisls in a mere reroduclion
of lhe facls vilhoul any ordering rinciIe of sc|cciicn."
76
Rickerl
cIaimed lhal lhe hislorian, as a cuIluraI scienlisl, aIvays has lo reIale
facls lo vaIues. If one had no crilerion of seIeclion, no seciaI inleresl
lo guide one's research, lhen everylhing vouId be vilhoul meaning
and vouId be reduced lo mere vaIue-free "nalure."
Rickerl did nol dismiss lhis inleresl as being irreIevanl or
inaroriale, he admilled, ralher, lhal in lhe raclicaI vorId of
hisloricaI schoIarshi, inleresls did delermine vaIue |udgmenls. He
vas reaIislic enough lo see lhal no hisloricaI vork couId ever be
"enlireIy free from osilive or negalive vaIualions."
77
Yel he aIso
mainlained lhal hislorians vere slriclIy accounlabIe lo render
imarliaI |udgmenls and reserve slandards of schoIarIy ob|eclivily.
Hislorians mighl offer lheir ovn ideoIogicaI inlerrelalions of lhe
Irench RevoIulion, bul in so doing lhey vere oversleing lhe
roer bounds of scienlific hislory. As cuIluraI scienlisls, lheir lask
vas lo refer lo vaIues, nol lo evaIuale. ul Rickerl's argumenls vere
nol as convincing for acluaI hislorians, many of vhom beIieved lhal
in focusing on lhe Iogic of research, he had missed lhe essenliaI
exerience of hisloricaI reaIily.
vii. Causa!ity and Va!ucs: Rickcrt's Transccndcnta! Phi!nsnphy
and Fricdrich Mcincckc's Histnricism
Rickerl's IogicaI lour de force in Tnc Iiniis cj Ccnccpi |crnaiicn in
Naiura| Scicncc consisled of a suslained discussion invoIving lhe fine
oinls of scienlific Iabor. He inlended his book lo reformuIale
robIems of hisloricaI vaIues inlo eislemoIogicaI queslions
concerned vilh lhe slalus of hiIosohy as lhe science of science
ilseIf. In lhis sense, Rickerl's vork marked a nev hase in lhe
deveIomenl of hisloricism or, more reciseIy, in lhe hiIosohicaI
resonse lo lhe robIems generaled from oul of lhe hisloricisl
lradilion. Ior if lhe eriod from 1880 lo 1930 reresenls lhe coming
lo seIf-consciousness of lhe hiIosohicaI robIems of hisloricism,
lhen lhe debales belveen lhe Neo-Kanlians and DiIlhey served lo
inlensify lhis seIf-consciousness. Whal is remarkabIe here is hov lhe
confIicl belveen NeoKanlian Iogic and DiIlhey's hermeneulics aboul
queslions of hisloricaI
____________________
76
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 85, KN, 83.
77
Rickerl, Scicncc an! Hisicrq, 91, KN, 89.
-108-
ob|eclivily, vaIualion, and re|udice heIed lo reinforce lhe basic
hiIosohicaI resuosilions of lhe modernisl era, bringing inlo
focus lhe conlradiclions vilhin sub|ecl/ob|ecl melahysics and ils
demand for scienlific cerlilude. In Heidegger Ocsirukiicn cj Ncc-
Kaniian Iogic, lhe bankrulcy of lhese melahysicaI cIaims as a kind
of hyoslalizalion of hisloricaI exerience vas broughl lo Iighl in a
nev vay. And yel, for aII ils robIems, Neo-Kanlian lhinking served
a osilive funclion. Ior il vas onIy in lhis hyoslalized form,
Heidegger cIaimed, lhal lhe aorias of sub|ecl/ob|ecl melahysics
couId genuineIy reveaI lhemseIves. Thus, for Heidegger, even
lhough lhe NeoKanlian "soIulion" lo lhe crisis of hisloricism faiIed,
in ils faiIure il caIIed allenlion lo lhe inadequacy of lhe vhoIe
hisloricisl IragesleIIung. Heidegger underslood DiIlhey's vork, on
lhe olher hand, as oening u lhe vhoIe queslion of hisloricism in a
nev sense. In his viev, DiIlhey's inquiry inlo lhe queslion of
hisloricaI being did nol, as did Rickerl's, reduce lhe robIem of
hisloricaI lrulh lo a mere ob|ecl of hisloricaI concel-formalion bul
inslead oened u lhe henomenaIily and hisloricily of hisloricaI
exerience. In lhe nexl lvo chalers, I viII discuss lhe imIicalions
of lhis shifl more fuIIy, bul I viII firsl exIore vhal is al issue
hiIosohicaIIy in Rickerl's confronlalion vilh hisloricism. I begin
my discussion of Rickerl's hisloricaI Iogic by Iooking al hov his
vork vas received by his conlemorary Iriedrich Meinecke.
Wriling in 1928 in lhe Hisicriscnc Zciiscnriji, Mcincckc iric! ic cjjcr an
a|icrnaiitc ic |ickcris !iscussicn cj nisicrica| c|jcciitiiq. |n nis cssaq
Causa|iiq an! Va|ucs in Hisicrq, nc i!cniijic! inc jun!ancnia| pc|ariiq
cj causc an! ta|uc uiin inc Kaniian aniincnq cj ncccssiiq an! jrcc!cn,
arguing inai incsc caicgcrics ucrc u|iinaic|q rc|aic! ic inc pni|cscpnica|
|cgic inai scparaic! gcncra|izing an! in!iti!ua|izing ncinc!s uiinin inc
scicnccs.
78
Ai inc cuisci Mcincckc i!cniijic! inrcc grcai ira!iiicns in
Gcrnan incugni unicn aiicnpic! ic rcsc|tc inc causa|iiq-ta|uc prc||cn.
inc pcsiiitisi-naiura|isi scncc| cj cnpiricisn, inc tiia|isi
(Ic|cnspni|cscpnic) inccrq cj Vcrsicncn (un!crsian!ing), an! inc Ncc-
Kaniian ira!iiicn cj nisicrica| |cgic.
79
Tnc pcsiiitisi ira!iiicn, Mcincckc
arguc!, aiicnpic! ic cra!icaic su|jcciitc ta|uc
____________________
78
Iriedrich Meinecke, "KausaIillen und Werle," in Zur Tnccric un!
Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcscnicnic ( Slullgarl: KoehIer, 1959), 61-89.
79
Ior an exlensive lrealmenl of Meinecke's crilique of lhese lhree
lradilions, see WaIler Hofer , Gcscnicnisscnrci|ung un!
Wc|ianscnauung, pi. 1 ( Municn. O|!cn|curg, 1950), 39-318.
-109-
lhrough ob|eclive science, vhereas lhe vilaIisl slressed vaIue al lhe
cosl of rigor, lhe Neo-Kanlian, hovever, allemled lo resoIve lhe
robIem by aIying lhe Kanlian calegory of causaIily lo lhe science
of vaIues. Meinecke had greal symalhy for Rickerl's
eislemoIogicaI Iabors and even suorled his scienlific aims,
uIlimaleIy, lhough, he crilicized Rickerl for Iaying loo much
emhasis on queslions of causaIily al lhe exense of lhe hislorian's
Iife-inleresls and individuaI idenlily.
Againsl bolh lhe osilivisls and vilaIisls, Rickerl lried lo combine
causaIily and vaIues in a scienlific manner, demonslraling lhal
vilhoul lhe nolion of cause, hislory as a form of science musl
eremloriIy cease. He chaIIenged lhe osilivisl assumlion lhal
hisloricaI causaIily couId be exIained in lerms of lhe Iav-seeking,
naluraI-scienlific calegory of cause and effecl. HisloricaI causaIily,
Rickerl argued, vas individuaI, nol generaI, lhe resuIl of a unique
rocess of evenls causaIIy ordered vilhoul being universaIIy
necessary.
80
The causes invoIved in Iriedrich WiIheIm IV's re|eclion
of lhe German crovn, for examIe, vere unique and unreealabIe.
On lhe basis of lhis singuIar incidenl, one couId nol conslrucl a
universaI lheory of imeriaI succession. ul hisloricaI research couId
sliII offer a scienlific inlerrelalion of evenls by reIaling lhe unique
cause lo a universaI vaIue, such as oIilicaI over, lhereby
guaranleeing lhal vhal hoIds an inleresl for lhe hisloricaI scienlisl is
never mereIy ersonaI bul is delermined by lhe causaI rocess of
hislory ilseIf. In lhis sense, hislory serves as lhe ob|eclified
exression of limeIess universaI vaIues. In seIecling erlinenl
maleriaI, lhe hislorian is nol exressing a sub|eclive oinion bul is
mereIy referring lo vaIues. Meinecke resonded lo Rickerl's
argumenl by cIaiming lhal lhis Iine of reasoning did nol adequaleIy
refIecl lhe reaIilies of hisloricaI schoIarshi.
Meinecke agreed vilh Rickerl lhal lhe hislorian seIecled oul of an
infinily of lemoraI evenls according lo a cerlain rinciIe of
universaIIy shared cuIluraI vaIues: "ehind lhe search for causaIilies
lhere aIvays Iies, direclIy or indireclIy, lhe search for vaIues, lhe
search for vhal is caIIed cuIlure."
81
Yel he did nol accel Rickerl's
conlenlion lhal hislorians, in lheir office as cuIluraI scienlisls, had
mereIy lo refer lo vaIues ralher lhan acluaIIy evaIuale asl evenls.
82

In ansver lo lhe
____________________
80
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 376-377.
81
Irilz Slern, ed., Variciics cj Hisicrq ( Nev York: WorId, 1958), 273,
and Meinecke, Zur Tnccric un! Pni|cscpnic, 68.
82
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 335.
-110-
queslion of vhelher lhe hislorian couId fuIfiII lhe condilion of
eIiminaling aII sub|eclive lendencies, Meinecke simIy reIied, "Il
cannol be."
83
He mainlained lhal: "Iven lhe mere seIeclion of vaIue-
reIaled facls is imossibIe vilhoul an evaIualion. Il vouId onIy be
ossibIe if lhe vaIues lo vhich lhe facls reIaled subsisled, as Rickerl
lhinks, soIeIy in generaI calegories Iike reIigion, slale, Iav, elc. ul
lhe hislorian seIecls his maleriaI nol onIy according lo generaI
calegories Iike lhese bul aIso according lo his |iting inicrcsi in lhe
concrele conlenl of lhe maleriaI. He Iays hoId of il as somelhing
more or Iess of vaIue, and in lhis he is evaIualing il."
84

Ior Meinecke, evaIualion vas "nol mereIy a suerfIuous by-roducl
of lhe hislorian's aclivily." He agreed vilh Rickerl lhal "lhe hislorian
can abslain from vaIue-|udgmenl of his ob|ecl" bul, he noled,
"hislory vrillen vilhoul such a vaIualion is eilher mere amassing of
maleriaI and rearalion for genuine hisloricaI vriling or, in
cIaiming lo be genuine hislory, is insiid."
85
The hislorian musl,
Meinecke feIl, lake a slance on lhe vaIualion of hisloricaI maleriaI,
and such a vaIualion had, necessariIy, lo be sub|eclive. The
sub|eclivily of one's osilion vas arl of one's melhod and defined
one's aclivily as a scienlisl of cuIluraI ob|ecls. In lhe fiflh edilion of
Oic Grcnzcn (revised eseciaIIy lo ansver Meinecke's ob|eclions),
Rickerl resonded by arguing lhal any concession lo sub|eclivily
undermined lhe IogicaI ideaI of Wisscnscnaji.
86
To evaIuale hislory
sub|ecliveIy vas lo move avay from lhe ob|eclive demands of a
science. Al lhe hearl of Rickerl's disule vilh Meinecke over
queslions of Iogic and ob|eclivily, hovever, vas a fundamenlaI
disagreemenl over vhal consliluled lhe roer shere of
hiIosohicaI "sub|eclivily." Whereas Rickerl heId lo a Kanlian
nolion of lhe lranscendenlaI sub|ecl, Meinecke (in foIIoving lhe
hisloricisl nolion of Vcrsicncn) defined sub|eclivily in vilaIisl lerms
as an abiIily "lo enler inlo lhe very souIs of lhose vho acled
|allemlingj lhrough arlislic inluilion lo give nev Iife lo Iife gone
by--vhich cannol be done vilhoul a lransfusion of one's ovn Iife
bIood."
87
On Meinecke's reading, sub|eclivily consliluled in ilseIf a
singuIar vaIue lhal secured for individuaIs lheir ovn raison d'lre
aarl from any universaI rinciIe or Iav. IoIIoving Herder's
neocIassicaI ideaI of
____________________
83
Slern, Variciics cj Hisicrq, 273, Meinecke, Zur Tnccric un!
Pni|cscpnic, 68-69.
84
Slern, Variciics cj Hisicrq, 273, Meinecke, Zur Tnccric un!
Pni|cscpnic, 68-69.
85
Slern, Variciics cj Hisicrq, 497, Meinecke, Zur Tnccric un!
Pni|cscpnic, 68.
86
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 335.
87
Slern, Variciics cj Hisicrq, 283, Meinecke, Zur Tnccric un!
Pni|cscpnic, 82.
-111-
Hunaniiai, Mcincckc |c|ictc! inai cacn in!iti!ua| cniiiq is jcrnc! an!
snapc! acccr!ing ic iis cun ta|uc, unicn in iurn is a|uaqs rc|aiitc ic iis
nisicrica| !ctc|cpncni. Tnc cpiinisiic icnc cj nis |i|cra|nunanisi
nisicricisn nciuiinsian!ing, Mcincckc un!crsicc! inai inis !ccirinc cj
ta|uc rc|aiitiiq nigni sii|| ja|| ticiin ic inc !angcrs cj rc|aiitisn,
anarcnq, acci!cni, an! ar|iirarincss.
88
Hc rcnainc! a!anani in nis
ccnticiicn inai inc cn|q uaq ic prctcni inc nini|isiic ccnscqucnccs cj
rc|aiitisn jrcn ctcriaking Gcrnan |ijc ucu|! |c a prcjcun! ccnniincni
ic ncra| ccnscicncc an! jaiin.
89
Hisicrica| iruin nigni |c rc|aiitc, |ui
Mcincckc rcnainc! ccntincc! inai incrc is an unkncun a|sc|uic inai
scrtcs as inc crcaiitc grcun! cj a|| ta|ucs. |tcn ij nisicricisn an!
rc|aiitisn |c|cng icgcincr, Mcincckc ccncc!c!, rc|aiitisn ncc! nci |c
injuricus.
90
Tnc !cnan!s p|acc! cn inc in!iti!ua| su|jcci ccu|! aci as
ciincr |ijc-cnnancing cr |ijc-ncgaiing.
91
|n anq casc, inc ccnscqucnccs
ucu|! |c cinica| an! cngagc issucs cj |ijc ( Ic|cn), nci ncrc scicncc (
Wisscnscnaji). U|iinaic|q, jcr Mcincckc, qucsiicns cj ta|uc an! cu|iurc
ucrc rc|igicus an! nciapnqsica| an! ccu|! nctcr |c rcsc|tc! |q |cgic cr
cpisicnc|cgq. Tnc uaq cui cj inc !angcrs cj rc|aiitisn, su|jcciitisn, an!
nisicricisn |aq in inc acccpiancc cj inc prina| irraiicna| grcun! cj inc
scu|.
92

tlll. Rlckerts Response to the ProbIems of Hlstorlclsm
Mcincckcs cssaq uas aninaic! |q pcrscna| ccnccrns a|cui inc tiia|
cnaracicr cj nisicrica| scnc|arsnip, ccnccrns inai rcj|ccic! nis rca!ing cj
Nicizscnc cssaq On inc Uscs an! Oisa!taniagcs cj Hisicrq jcr Iijc.
93

Iikc Nicizscnc, Mcincckc spckc cj inc usc cj nisicrq jcr inc crcaiitc |ijc
an! inc usc cj nisicrica| incugni jcr inc prcscni,
____________________
88
Slern, Variciics cj Hisicrq, 283, Meinecke, Zur Tnccric un!
Pni|cscpnic, 82.
89
Slern, Variciics cj Hisicrq, 283, Meinecke, Zur Tnccric un!
Pni|cscpnic, 82.
90
Iriedrich Meinecke, Oic |nisicnung !cs Hisicrisnus ( Munich:
OIdenbourg, 1965), 94 and 577, and Zur Tnccric un! Pni|cscpnic,
203.
91
Meinecke, Zur Tnccric un! Pni|cscpnic, 204.
92
Meinecke, Oic |nisicnung !cs Hisicrisnus, 95. Scc cspccia||q inc
cxcc||cni ariic|c |q jcrn |uscn, |ric!ricn Mcincckcs |nisicnung !cs
Hisicrisnus, in Micnac| |r|c, c!., |ric!ricn Mcincckc Hcuic ( Bcr|in.
Cc||cquiun, 1981), 76-99.
93
See lhe inlroduclion lo Iriedrich Meinecke, Hisicrisn, lrans. }. I.
Anderson ( London: RoulIedge, 1972), I-Ii. See aIso Iriedrich
Meinecke, Vcn gcscnicni|icncn Sinn un! tcn Sinn !cr Gcscnicnic (
Leizig: KoehIer and AmeIang, 1939), 13, and Iriedrich Nielzsche
, Uniinc|q Mc!iiaiicns, lrans. R. }. HoIIingdaIe ( Cambridge:
Cambridge Universily Iress, 1983), 57-123.
-112-
invoking Goelhe as his symboI for lhe crealive hisloricaI sensibiIily.
94
Where Nielzsche sav lhe surfeil of hisloricaI cuIlure as an
exression of decadence, hovever, deeming il unheaIlhy and
nihiIislic, Meinecke embraced il as an affirmalion of Iife's vilaI
lendencies. He admilled lhal hisloricism mighl Iead lo reIalivism
and nihiIism, bul he counlered lhese arehensions by oinling lo
lhe osilive oorlunilies lhey oened u. He vas convinced lhal
facing lhe dangers of hisloricaI reIalivism vouId force one lo
confronl an elhicaI choice in lhe resenl. In Meinecke vords, "Thal
vhich makes us siriluaIIy richer, vhich brings us inlo immediale
'Iife-conlacl' vilh lhe eoIe and lreasures of lhe asl, vhich leaches
us lo undersland lhe rhylhm of elernaI becoming and
lransformalion in lhe fales of men and nalions -- aII lhal can nol
onIy carry a deslruclive eIemenl bul musl aIso ossess a crealive
over vilhin ilseIf."
95
ConsequenlIy, in his refIeclions on lhe crisis
of hisloricaI reIalivism, Meinecke lermed hisloricism a "Iife-robIem
in lhe highesl sense."
96
To erceive hisloricism as a lhreal lo cuIlure
vas lo misundersland graveIy ils elhicaI vaIue. In Oic |nisicnung !cs
Hisicrisnus, Mcincckc urcic. Wc can !isccrn in ii jnisicricisn} inc
nigncsi siagc sc jar rcacnc! in inc un!crsian!ing cj nunan ajjairs an! arc
ccnji!cni inai ii ui|| |c a||c ic !ctc|cp sujjicicni|q ic iack|c inc prc||cns cj
nunan nisicrq inai sii|| ccnjrcni us. Wc |c|ictc inai ii nas inc pcucr ic
nca| inc ucun!s ii nas causc! |q inc rc|aiitizing cj a|| ta|ucs, prcti!c! inai
ii can jin! inc ncn ic ccntcri inis -isn inic inc icrns cj auincniic |ijc.
97

|cr |ickcri, inc jcun!aiicns cj Mcincckc |ragcsic||ung, inc tcrq icrns in
unicn nc pcsc! inc qucsiicn cj nisicricisn, ucrc pni|cscpnica||q
ina!nissi||c.
Mcincckcs cnpnasis cn |ijc as inc siariing pcini cj nisicrica| inquirq
sccnc! janciju| an! !csiruciitc ic |ickcri. |n nis pc|cnica| Oic Pni|cscpnic
!cs Ic|cns ( 1922), |ickcri rcjccic! Mcincckcs tiia|isi prcsuppcsiiicns,
insisiing inai in pni|cscpnizing a|cui |ijc, a pni|cscpnq cj ncrc |ijc is nci
cncugn.
98
Pni|cscpnq rcquirc! inc rigcr cj |cgic an! Wisscnscnaji. Iijc
cxpcricncc, nqpcsiaiizc! as an cpisicnc|cgica| princip|c, un!crninc! |cin.
|n i!cniijqing inc scurcc cj ta|uc as |ijc an! inc cinica| !cnan!s na!c cn
|ijc |q ccnscicncc an! jaiin, Mcincckc na! succun|c! ic inc rc|aiitizing cj
a|| ta|uc. His
____________________
94
Meinecke, Vcn gcscnicni|icncn Sinn, 13 and 97.
95
Ibid. In "VaIues and CausaIily in Hislory" Meinecke vriles,
"Wilhoul a slrong desire for vaIues, causaI inquiry becomes a
IifeIess lask." Slern, Variciics cj Hisicrq, 276.
96
Meinecke, Zur Tnccric un! Pni|cscpnic, 341.
97
Meinecke, Hisicrisn, Ivii.
98
Rickerl, Oic Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns, tii.
-113-
emhasis on vilaIisl, romanlic, and Nielzschean readings of vaIue
had onIy succeeded in reroducing lhe cIiches of hisloricism,
making il a surrogale form of Wc|ianscnauung.
Rickerl counlered Meinecke's vilaIisl hisloricism vilh a
lranscendenlaI crilique of hisloricaI melhod. Re|ecling lhe
hermeneulic lheory of Vcrsicncn, Rickerl argued lhal lo have
knovIedge of an ob|ecl vas nol lo exerience il inluiliveIy or
lhrough symalhelic idenlificalion bul lo conslrucl il formaIIy
according lo rinciIes of concel-formalion. Underslanding, for
Rickerl, vas a IogicaI ralher lhan sychoIogicaI rocess lhal
overcomes lhe sub|eclivily of hisloricaI exerience by aeaIing lo a
nonhisloricaI sub|ecl: Kanl's lranscendenlaI ego. In lhe Sqsicn !cr
Pni|cscpnic, Rickerl lried lo eslabIish lhe IogicaI ground of vaIue by
reference lo a "lhird reaIm" -- lhe "ro-hysicaI" -- a reaIm of formaI
vaIidily indeendenl of lhe lvo reaIms of mind and body, Gcisi and
Naiur, on vhich lhe oId cIassificalion of lhe sciences resled. In lhis
formaI reaIm of vaIues -- a Iogician's IIysian fieIds -- Rickerl
beIieved he couId offer a remedy for lhe oisons of Meinecke's
hisloricism.
Ior Rickerl, lhe ro-hysicaI vorId differs from lhe vorId of
lradilionaI melahysics nol by being "above" or "beyond" (ncia) lhe
exerienliaI hysicaI vorId bul by being "rior lo" or "before" (prc)
il. Iriorily, in Rickerl's lerms, is nol lo be underslood in a lemoraI
sense, hovever, as coming before lhe hysicaI vorId
chronoIogicaIIy. Ralher, ro-hysicaI means lhal lhis reaIm recedes
lhe hysicaI vorId conceluaIIy. Thal is, unIike lhe vorId of
exerience vhich is bound lo ob|ecls and lo lhe necessary condilions
lhal govern lheir exislence, lhe ro-hysicaI vorId is re-ob|eclive
and vilhoul necessary condilion. Ior examIe, Rickerl mainlained
lhal aII our ercelions of ob|eclive reaIily (lrees, rocks, fIovers), as
veII as our underslanding of nonob|eclive comIexes of meaning (
Sinngc|i|!c, e.g., lhe semanlics of a senlence, lhe meaning of a
eelhoven adagio, malhemalicaI funclions), desile lheir many
differences, aII share one common funclion: each slands aarl from
us as lhings ( Gcgcnsian!c) ralher lhan as sub|ecls. These Gcgcnsian!c
are bound by Iavs of causaI necessily vilhin a secific sace-lime
conlinuum. As emiricaI sub|ecls vilh bolh hysicaI and
sychoIogicaI roerlies, ve, loo, Rickerl argued, sland under lhe
same causaI Iavs. ul vhal enabIes us lo bridge lhe chasm belveen
lhe emiricaI sub|ecl and lhe emiricaI ob|ecl is a nonemiricaI,
lranscendenlaI reaIm vhich is ccnccpiua||q rior lo exerience and
vhich grounds aII our knovIedge in a riori vaIidily. Wilhin
Rickerl's hiIosohy, vaIue is grounded in a ro-hysi-
-114-
caI, lranscendenlaI reaIm lhal has onIy axioIogicaI vaIidily and nol
onloIogicaI exislence. AII our exerience in lhe lemoraI vorId is al
firsl made ossibIe by lhis lranscendenlaI ground, vhich, in conlrasl
lo lhe causaI Iavs guiding nalure, aIIovs for a dimension of
freedom. As Rickerl exIained in his Sqsicn, "The freedom of lhe acl
Iies rior lo or before lhe reaIily of causaIIy condilioned ob|ecls. Il
makes lhis reaIily al aII 'ossibIe.'. . . CausaIily reigns over lhe reaI
vorId of ob|ecls and lhe vorId of lhe sychoIogicaI sub|ecl,
hovever, lhis vorId vouId be vilhoul any basis if lhere vere nol a
reaIm of freedom, lhrough vhich ve had lo ass in order lo allain
il."
99
AII causaIily, aII ob|eclivily, Rickerl goes on lo say, vouId be
imossibIe vilhoul freedom. Il is onIy lhe free acl of lhe sub|ecl
vhich firsl grounds lhe vorId of lhe ob|ecl and vhich aIIovs us lo
conceive of such a vorId, lhus making knovIedge al aII ossibIe. In
his aeaIs lo lhis lhird ro-hysicaI reaIm of freedom, Rickerl
beIieved he couId overcome lhe vilaIisl and hermeneulic lendencies
in Meinecke's underslanding of hislory and reare lhe vay for a
lhoroughgoing crilique of hisloricisl rinciIes. Hisloricisl Vcrsicncn
had mereIy eIevaled sub|eclive inferences lo lhe slalus of a
melhodoIogicaI recel, raising raclicaI evaIualion over lheorelicaI
vaIue-reference. Such an aroach, Rickerl charged, vas
"monslrous."
100

In Oic Prc||cnc !cr Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic, |ickcri spckc cui c|car|q
againsi nisicricisn, sccing ii as pari cj inc unc|c crisis nc!c cj Wcinar
cu|iurc.
|n!cc!, inis nisicricisn, unicn appcars as scncining sc pcsiiitc, prctcs
iisc|j (as sccn as ii is carric! ic iis |cgica| ccnc|usicn) as a jcrn cj
rc|aiitisn unicn can cn|q |ca! ic nini|isn. . . . Tnis kin! cj nisicricisn, ij ii
ucrc iru|q |cgica|, ucu|! natc ic a!nii ctcrq icnpcra| c|jcci as ucrinq cj
|cing nisicrica| an!, incrcjcrc, ccu|! aiiacn iisc|j ic nc ining prccisc|q
|ccausc ii ucu|! natc ic aiiacn iisc|j ic a|| inings. Hisicricisn inus nakcs
a princip|c cui cj ininking uiincui princip|cs an! raiscs inai ic a
Wc|ianscnauung. As sucn, ii is ic |c !ccisitc|q ccn|aic! |q |cin inc
pni|cscpnq cj nisicrq an! pni|cscpnq in gcncra|.
101

|n nis unpu||isnc! |cciurcs nc ccniinuc! nis assau|is, ca||ing nisicricisn
unsqsicnaiic, rc|aiitisiic, an! aniipni|cscpnica|.
102
|n TncIiniis cj
Ccnccpi |crnaiicn in Naiura| Scicncc
____________________
100
Rickerl, Oic Prc||cnc !cr Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic, 129.
101
Ibid., 129-130.
102
Rickerl, H!.Ms. 115, drafl no.1, 3, H!.Ms. 115, drafl no.2, 4, H!.Ms.
13, 27, and H!.Ms. 31, 760. These hrases recur frequenlIy
lhroughoul lhe various manuscrils.
99
Rickerl, Sqsicn, 305.
-115-
Limils of Concel Iormalion in NaluraI Science, he made il cIear
lhal he "decisiveIy re|ecled aII forms of hisloricism" as "dangerous
and onesided", hisloricism "vas eilher reIalivislic and nihiIislic or il
covered ils negalivily and emliness by choosing lhis or lhal form
of hisloricaI Iife in order lo find lhe conlenls of ils Wc|ianscnauung."
103
In lhe Sqsicn !cr Pni|cscpnic, he echoed simiIar senlimenls.
104
The
robIem vilh Meinecke, TroeIlsch, and lhe olher hisloricisls vas
lhal lhey refused lo go beyond lhe "mereIy hisloricaI."
105
As Rickerl
aIvays mainlained, "Hislory vas in no osilion lo soIve
hiIosohicaI robIems for ilseIf."
106
The ansvers musl come from
hiIosohy. Any soIulion lo lhe crisis concerning hisloricaI
knovIedge musl ilseIf be free of hisloricaI reIalivism. Hence, as
Rickerl sav il, if hiIosohy vere lruIy lo "overcome" lhe crisis of
hisloricism, il vouId firsl have lo redefine lhe basic |ragcsic||ung of
hisloricaI inquiry. In an efforl lo do so, Rickerl lurned lo lhe Kanlian
rinciIe of elhics.
If lhe vaIues of Meinecke and olher hisloricisls reresenled a
ersonaI decision of conscience and conviclion, Rickerl's limeIess,
absoIule vaIues consliluled an elhicaI imeralive ( Sc||cn) of
universaI humanily. These vaIues vere in lhemseIves ahisloricaI
and vilhoul conlenl, |usl as lhe hisloricaI vorId vas in ilseIf
vaIueIess and elhicaIIy neulraI. Rickerl's lask vas lo shov hov lhese
ahisloricaI vaIues couId serve as lhe ground for a lranscendenlaI
sub|ecl vho slood oosed lo lhe emiricaI-sychoIogicaI sub|ecl of
lhe hisloricaI vorId. In acluaI raclice, Rickerl admilled, lhe
hisloricaI sub|ecl allemls lo concrelize elhicaI demands by bringing
lo fruilion cerlain ro|ecls, goaIs, aims, and so forlh, vhich ve caII
cuIlure. In cuIlure one seeks lo reconciIe lhe ga belveen lhe "is"
and lhe "oughl" ( Scin and Sc||cn), belveen meaningIess being and
meaning-Iaden hislory. Such a reconciIialion can never be
comIeled, hovever, because lhere is aIvays some imerfecl
dislance belveen lhe reaIily of hislory and lhe ideaIily of vaIue. And
yel lhe meaning of hisloricaI Iife is grounded in lhe alleml lo
overcome lhis dislance and achieve a universaI vaIue -a lask lhal is
"insoIubIe," according lo Rickerl. ConsequenlIy, lhe hiIosohy of
hislory is never abIe lo offer a finaI lrulh. The vaIues lhal il allemls
lo syslemalize serve as a kind of "Kanlian |!cc vhose reaIizalion
becomes lhe goaI for aII cuIlures lhal musl, nonelheIess, Iabor
____________________
103
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 8 and 736.
104
Rickerl, Sqsicn, 19 and 321.
105
Rickerl, Oic Grcnzcn, 697.
106
Ibid.
-116-
under lhe knovIedge lhal lheirs is a never-ending lask."
107
These
lranscendenlaI vaIues serve a duaI funclion in lhal lhey guide lhe
scienlisl's search for ob|eclivily as veII as roviding cuIluraI
meaning for lhe hisloricaI rocess ilseIf. In lhis sense, lhey offer a
raclicaI soIulion lo robIems of hisloricaI knovIedge and meaning
by demonslraling lhal lhe sub|ecl, loo, slands under lhe imeralive
lo allain an elhicaI goaI. As Rickerl vrole in Grun!prc||cnc !cr
Pni|cscpnic: "Wilhoul lhe lension belveen lvo forms of being -- i.e.,
vilhoul lhe duaIily of vhal is | Scinj reaI and vhal is nol yel reaI
bul vhich shouId become reaI | Sc||cnj -- lhere is absoIuleIy no
meaning lo Iife. Wilhoul lhis lension lhe slriving lo reaIize unique
vaIues in cuIluraI ob|ecls vouId nol come lo ass."
108
Il is reciseIy
lhis elhicaI imeralive lhal guides lhe vork of bolh lhe naluraI
scienlisl and lhe hislorian, Rickerl insisled, for scienlific aclivily is
nolhing bul lhe alleml lo bridge lhe chasm belveen vhal is and
vhal oughl lo be. Trulh ilseIf, as lhe highesl vaIue of science,
demands lhal science be grounded in freedom and nol necessily.
OnIy lhis freedom lo move from Scin lo Sc||cn can bring aboul lhe
reaIizalion of lrulh as lhe exression of vaIue. Thus, Rickerl
concIuded: "We musl see aII lhe lheories lhal beIieve lhey can re|ecl
lhe idea of freedom as being lheorelicaIIy invaIid. The cruciaI reason
for lhis is lhal science ilseIf needs freedom even vhen invesligaling
causaI conneclions. OnIy a lheorelicaI (lranscendenlaI) sub|ecl vho
is nol deendenl on causaIily can lake a osilion on lhe vaIue of
lrulh. OnIy vhen ve granl lhe ossibiIily of such a sub|ecl can ve
recognize somelhing as being lrue and meaningfuI."
109

In recognizing lhe rimacy of freedom as an elhicaI imeralive
vilhin science ilseIf, Rickerl beIieved he had lransformed
WindeIband's melhodoIogicaI inquiries inlo genuine queslions of
vaIue. IislemoIogicaI consideralions aside, Rickerl couId agree
vilh his adversary Nielzsche lhal "lhe queslion of vaIue is more
fundamenlaI lhan lhe queslion of cerlainly: lhe Ialler becomes
serious onIy by resuosing lhal lhe vaIue queslion has aIready
been ansvered."
110
Wilhin lhe reaIm of freedom, Rickerl beIieved he
had overcome charges of formaIism, because freedom imIied
aulonomy, and aulonomy, aclivily. UIlimaleIy, lhe fundamenlaI
goaI of his hiIosohy of
____________________
107
Rickerl, Oic Prc||cnc !cr Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic, 119.
108
Rickerl, Grun!prc||cnc !cr Pni|cscpnic, 228-229.
109
Ibid., 231-232.
110
Iriedrich Nielzsche, Tnc Wi|| ic Pcucr, lrans. WaIler Kaufmann
and R. }. HoIIingdaIe ( Nev York: Random House, 1968), 322.
-117-
hislory vas nol lheorelicaI or formaI melhod bul raclicaI, vilaI
lrulh. Rickerl's finaI ansver lo lhe crisis of hisloricism vas lo affirm
lhe rimacy of Iichle's lranscendenlaI sub|ecl, a sub|ecl lhal
grounded ilseIf lhrough ils ovn freedom and lhrough ils raclicaI
demand for seIf-reaIizalion ( Bi|!ung), lhereby roviding elhicaI
meaning ( Sinn/ Sc||cn) in lhe meaningIess vorId of hisloricaI being (
Scin).
ix. Rickcrt's Phi!nsnphy nI Histnry
Desile Rickerl's allemls lo overcome charges of formaIism in his
vork, many feIl his aroach lo robIems of hisloricaI Iife remained
insuIar and overIy lheorelicaI. Irnsl TroeIlsch, for examIe,
crilicized Rickerl for being loo formaI in bolh his syslem of vaIues
and his underslanding of concrele hisloricaI exerience. He argued
lhal Rickerl's lranscendenlaI Iogic exIained aII sychoIogicaI facls
as arl of lhe saliaI-hysicaI "helerogeneous conlinuum" vilhoul
acknovIedging lhe roIe of lhe irralionaI.
111
The effecl of such an
aroach vas lo undermine lhe very bond lhal aIIoved lhe
hislorian lo undersland lhe asl, as TroeIlsch ul il, "As soon as one
slarls from ideas and slandards, one faIIs inlo an unhisloricaI
ralionaIism and Ioses conlacl vilh emiricaI hislory and ils
raclice."
112
Iriedrich Meinecke, in an essay vrillen a fev years
afler TroeIlsch's dealh, exressed simiIar senlimenls. AIlhough
raising Rickerl for his nolevorlhy melhodoIogicaI conlribulions,
Meinecke nonelheIess lried lo shov lhal hiIosohy couId onIy go
so far in exIaining hisloricaI reaIily: "Delerminalion of lhe essence
of vaIues is lhe chief concern of modern hiIosohy. The hislorian
may seek lo Iearn from lhis discussion, bul he need nol and cannol
refrain from forming an idea of lhe essence of vaIues based on his
ovn cxpcricncc. Irom lhe slandoinl of lhe hiIosoher, lhis idea
viII aear lo be loo skelchy, ambiguous, and lherefore insufficienl.
ul because il is dravn from lhe raclice of hisloricaI inquiry, il viII
ossess more inslinclive cerlainly, erhas, lhan lhe one vhich
arises from more IogicaI-abslracl rocedures."
113
Meinecke's crilique
vas echoed by many of his conlemoraries.
____________________
111
On his crilique of Rickerl, see eseciaIIy Irnsl TroeIlsch, "Die
Geislesvissenschaflen und der Slreil um Rickerl," Scnncc||crs
janr|ucn 46 ( 1922): 35-64.
112
TroeIlsch, Ocr Hisicrisnus un! scinc Prc||cnc, 162. |cr ancincr
apprcacn ic |ickcris iransccn!cnia| inccrq cj ta|uc, scc A|jrc! Sicrn,
Pni|cscpnq cj Hisicrq an! inc Prc||cn cj Va|ucs ( Bcrkc|cq. Unitcrsiiq
cj Ca|ijcrnia Prcss, 1962), 134.
113
Iriedrich Meinecke, "VaIues and CausaIily in Hislory," in Slern,
Variciics cj Hisicrq, 277-278, and Meinecke, Zur Tnccric un!
Pni|cscpnic, 74.
-118-
In vriling his ovn Iogic of hisloricaI inquiry, Tnc Prc||cns cj inc
Pni|cscpnq cj Hisicrq, Georg SimmeI varned of lhe dangers of being
loo abslracl vhen deaIing vilh lhe acluaI exerience invoIved in
hisloricaI research. To do so crealed a slale of "arlificiaI isoIalion in
vhich eislemoIogy lransoses or disIaces melhods lhal are
inexlricabIy Iinked in lhe acluaI raxis of research . . . in
consequence, lhe eislemoIogicaI anaIysis of lhese sciences does nol
seem lo be germane lo lheir reaI slruclure al aII. y refIecling on lhe
rocess of research, il seems lo creale ils ovn slruclure of lhe
sciences, a slruclure vhich il ro|ecls inlo lheir reaI form."
114

SimmeI, Meinecke, and TroeIlsch vere onIy a fev of lhose vho
crilicized Rickerl for vhal lhey feIl lo be his negIecl of lhe acluaI
circumslances of hisloricaI raxis. These Iife-hiIosohers and
hisloricisls vished lo inquire inlo lhe vilaI and hisloricaI ground of
knovIedge, an area lhal Rickerl, vilh his lranscendenlaI syslem of
vaIue, had soreIy negIecled. The mosl rescienl crilique, hovever,
came from DiIlhey, vho agreed vilh Rickerl lhal vaIue vas lhe key
lo hisloricaI science. In his Nacn|ass DiIlhey vrole lhal "vilhoul lhe
delerminalion of vaIues in lhe hisloricaI maleriaI and lhe hisloricaI
rocess, neilher hisloricaI reaIily nor hisloricaI sludy are
conceivabIe." OnIy vhen "such vaIues are nol lranscendenlaI vaIues,
bul Iife-vaIues," DiIlhey exIained, couId lhey have any meaning for
hislory.
115
Rickerl had erred vhen he vished lo inlerrel hisloricaI
Iife-vaIues as lhe exression of "a riori ob|ecliveleIeoIogicaI vaIues"
akin lo Kanl's calegories.
116
HisloricaI vaIues, DiIlhey insisled,
derived lheir vaIidily nol from lheir ideaI slalus as lhe
lranscendenlaI ground of aclivily bul in lheir reaI effecl on hisloricaI
beings.
117

In his "Crilique of HisloricaI Reason," DiIlhey allemled lo
overcome Rickerl's "lranscendenlaI formaIism" by rooling lhe
melhod of lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn in lhe hisloricaI deveIomenl of
Gcisi ilseIf. Like Rickerl, he vas inleresled in deveIoing a nev
lheory of hisloricaI knovIedge vhich vouId secure lhe slalus of
genuine science for hisloricaI inquiry vhiIe simuIlaneousIy granling
ils indeendence from aII naluraI-scienlific melhod. ul vhere
Rickerl had underlaken a lranscendenlaI aroach modeIed on
Kanl's crilique of naluraI
____________________
114
Georg SimmeI, Prc||cns cj inc Pni|cscpnq cj Hisicrq ( Nev York:
Iree Iress, 1977), 147.
115
This quolalion from DiIlhey is arl of lhe unubIished Nacn|ass
bul has been ciled by MichaeI Irmarlh, Wi||ian Oi|incq. Tnc
Criiiquc cj Hisicrica| |cascn ( Chicago: Universily of Chicago Iress,
1976), 194.
116
Ibid.
117
Ibid, 193-197.
-119-
science and malhemalics, DiIlhey ressed for a radicaIIy
humancenlered, hermeneulic form of Iogic. In DiIlhey's reading,
differences belveen nalure and hislory couId nol be lraced back
mereIy lo conlrasling forms of concel-formalion. Ralher, he
argued, lhere vas somelhing in our exerience ilseIf vhich made us
caabIe of underslanding hislory lhal couId nol be circumscribed by
naluraI-scienlific melhod. He concurred vilh Rickerl lhal lhe roer
aroach lo hislory musl be scienlific, bul his aim vas lo eslabIish a
science vhose ground vas hislory ilseIf. Human beings "beIonged
lo hislory," DiIlhey conlended, and lheir knovIedge of lhe hisloricaI
vorId vas grounded in lhis "beIonging." Hence, for DiIlhey, hislory
vas never mereIy an ob|ecl, never a Gcgcn-sian! lhal slood over and
aarl from a sub|ecl. A lheory of lhe sciences vhich insisled on lhe
Gcgcnsian!|icnkcii (ob|eclivily) of hislory couId never hoe lo
calure lhis uniqueIy human bond lo lhe asl.
118

Neo-Kanlian eislemoIogy vas rooled in lhe Kanlian queslion,
Hov is ob|eclive (gcgcnsian!|icnc) exerience ossibIe` y foIIoving
lhe basic lenels of Kanl's lheory of naluraI-scienlific knovIedge,
Rickerl beIieved he couId offer an eislemoIogicaIIy secured lheory
of hisloricaI lrulh. ul in carrying over lhe Kanlian crilique of nalure
lo a lranscendenlaI crilique of hislory, DiIlhey cIaimed, Rickerl Iefl
oul lhe essenliaI characler of lhe hisloricaI exerience ilseIf, nameIy,
ils hisloricily. Ior Rickerl, lhe hisloricaI ob|ecl, much Iike lhe ob|ecl
lhal ve lerm "naluraI," vas simIy "lhere" for lhe hisloricaI
observer, ils reaIily having aIready been delermined by a
lranscendenlaI concel-formalion generaled oul of lhe calegories of
mind. IoIIoving lhis Kanlian oulIine, Rickerl argued lhal a science
of hislory musl inlerrogale lhe hisloricaI ob|ecl in lerms of ils IogicaI
slruclure, an aroach lhal defined lhe very melhod of Neo-Kanlian
lhinking. Hisloricisl lhinkers such as Meinecke and TroeIlsch,
hovever, had serious misgivings aboul lhis Neo-Kanlian slralegy.
Though lhey acknovIedged lhal by slressing ideas of vaIue and
individuaIily Rickerl had calured lhe essence of hisloricaI lhinking,
lhey nonelheIess beIieved lhal in so doing he had aIso denied lhe
ossibiIily of genuine hisloricaI deveIomenl.
119
In lheir viev,
Rickerl's lendency lo overemhasize lhe
____________________
118
To define hislory as a "Gcgcnsian!" vas lo see il as onIy an inerl
"facl," nol as a vilaI, Iiving, and organic bond lo lhe resenl --
nameIy, as somelhing exerienced. This, in facl, is lhe key
difference belveen DiIlhey's underslanding of hislory in
hermeneulic lerms and Rickerl's viev of a Iogic of hisloricaI
knovIedge.
119
TroeIlsch, Ocr Hisicrisnus un! scinc Prc||cnc, 236.
-120-
Kanlian calegory of causaIily succeeded onIy in eIiminaling lhe
dynamic and vilaI rocess of hisloricaI becoming. Thal hislory vas
essenliaIIy pasi hislory and nol somelhing lhal vas simIy "lhere" in
lhe resenl for lhe hislorian vailing lo be "knovn" vas comIeleIy
overIooked by Rickerl. In effecl, lhe facl of lemoraI dislance did nol
conslilule a IogicaI robIem in Rickerl's lheory of hisloricaI
concelformalion.
120
He vas far more inleresled in lhe forms of
scienlific resenlalion and in lhe IogicaI synlhesis of hisloricaI
maleriaI. He hardIy noliced lhal lhe hisloricaI individuaI vas nol a
given "facl of knovIedge" (Iike Hermann Cohen's malhemalicaI-
IogicaI |akiun !cr |rkcnninis) bul vas ilseIf sub|ecl lo lhe myriad
changes and inlerrelive ossibiIilies of lemoraI being.
121
As
TroeIlsch noled, "He knovs or recognizes onIy lhe Kanlian
malhemalicaI concel of lime and nol lhe concel of hisloricaI lime
or concrele duralion."
122
UIlimaleIy, Rickerl's Kanlian causaIily,
vhen aIied lo hislory, resuIled in a vorId of slalic hisloricaI
ob|ecls vilhoul any deveIomenl. In lhis vorId of discrele ob|ecls
vilhoul lemoraI change, lhere vas onIy facluaIily, no hisloricily.
Rickerl's crilics vere aIso concerned aboul his bIind disregard for
lhe hisloricily of lhe human being. They mainlained lhal his nolion
of lhe lranscendenlaI sub|ecl missed lhe essenliaI allribules of
hisloricaI consciousness, because a sub|ecl grounded in Iogic ralher
lhan hisloricaI reaIily couId hardIy be execled lo undersland lhe
concrele dynamic of cuIluraI change. Againsl Rickerl's limeIess,
lranscendenlaI sub|ecl, TroeIlsch and Meinecke argued for a
lemoraI sub|ecl vho underslands lhal hislory offers a "horizon" for
lhe human underslanding of lhe asl. In affirming lhe osilive sense
of lhis boundary Iine beyond vhich human lhoughl couId nol go,
TroeIlsch and Meinecke vere foIIoving Nielzsche, vho, in lhe
second of his "UnlimeIy Medilalions," soke of "lhe hisloricaI
horizon" of human consciousness as a Iife-enhancing ossibiIily.
123

AII knovIedge lakes lhe
____________________
120
This basic crilicism is a Heideggerian one and has been ul forlh
in an exceIIenl disserlalion by erger, "Gcgcnsian!skcnsiiiuiicn,"
vho lreals Rickerl's eislemoIogy from a hermeneulic
erseclive.
121
Ior a fuIIer discussion of Hermann Cohen, see KIaus Chrislian
Khnke, |nisicnung un! Aujsiicg !cs Ncukaniianisnus. Oic !cuiscnc
Unitcrsiiaispni|cscpnic zuiscncn |!ca|isnus un! Pcsiiitisnus (
Irankfurl: Suhrkam, 1986).
122
TroeIlsch, Ocr Hisicrisnus un! scinc Prc||cnc, 236.
123
Nielzsche menlions lhis idea in his second "unlimeIy medilalion"
of hislory, bul lhe concel is rich in meaning vilhin lhe German
lradilion al Iarge. Ior a more modern viev, see Hans-Georg
Gadamer, K|cinc Scnrijicn, voI. 1 (Tbingen: Mohr, 1970), 7.
Ludvig Landgrebe , Majcr Prc||cns in Ccnicnpcrarq |urcpcan
Pni|cscpnq, lrans. Kurl Rein hardl
-121-
form of inlerrelalion, Nielzsche argued. We can onIy aroach
lrulh from a Iimiled erseclive lhal is bound lemoraIIy by a
hisloricaI horizon and bound saliaIIy by cuIluraI lradilion. We are
embedded in a hisloricaI momenl, Nielzsche vrole, so lhal lhe more
acliveIy ve seek lo sle oul of lhis congeries of re|udice and
circumslance lo deny lhe Iimilalions of lhe momenl, lhe furlher ve
move avay from any knovIedge lhal has cIaim lo human vaIue. ul
Rickerl vas nol moved by Nielzsche's crilique or lhe hisloricisl
vrilings of TroeIlsch and Meinecke. In an efforl lo "overcome" lhe
Iimilalions of lhe "horizon," Rickerl soughl lo ground hislory in a
limeIess syslem of absoIule vaIidily. In lurning avay from lhe
erseclivism of lhe momenl, he offered a lranscendenlaI lheory of
hislory vhich did nol reaIIy resoIve lhe underIying crisis in
hisloricisl lhinking.
The mosl overfuI crilique of Rickerl's vork came from one of his
sludenls al lhe Universily of Ireiburg, Marlin Heidegger, vho
oinled lovard lhe unlenabiIily of his lranscendenlaI |ragcsic||ung.
124
Heidegger, foIIoving DiIlhey, slressed lhal lhe ground of
hisloricaI science vas nol Iogic bul lhe lemoraI calegories of
human exislence. Heidegger venl on lo affirm lhal an ob|ecl
"becomes" hisloricaI nol as a resuIl of IogicaI concel-formalion bul
from ils rooledness in lemoraI being. The hisloricaI ob|ecl musl nol
be seen as a mere "facl" lhal is "lhere" for hisloricaI science bul
shouId be underslood as a form of being lhal has laken on lhe
characler of lemoraI dislance. To reduce hislory lo a mere ob|ecl is
lo Iose lhe fundamenlaI conneclion lo lhe asl. As Heidegger
exIained in Bcing an! Tinc:
Iven if lhe robIem of 'hislory' is lrealed in accordance vilh a
lheory of science, nol onIy aiming al lhe 'eislemoIogicaI'
cIarificalion of lhe hisloricaI vay of grasing lhings ( SimmeI)--or--
al lhe Iogic of concel-formalion in an hisloricaI resenlalion (
Rickerl), bul doing so vilh an orienlalion lovards 'lhe side of lhe
ob|ecl,' lhen, as Iong as lhe queslion is formuIaled lhis vay, hislory
becomes accessibIe onIy as lhe c|jcci of a science. Thus lhe basic
henomenon of hislory (vhich is rior lo any ossibIe lhemalizing
by hisloricaI science) has been irrelrievabIy ul aside. Hov hislory
can become a ossibIe c|jcci for hisloricaI science is somelhing lhal
may be galhered
____________________
hardl ( Nev York: Unger, 1966), 17, defines "horizon" as "lhe
silualionaI Iocus in vhich man finds himseIf embedded al any
given lime."
124
Heidegger vrole his habiIilalion under Rickerl in 1916, vilhin
monlhs, Rickerl moved lo HeideIberg lo reIace WindeIband, and
Heidegger began lo vork more cIoseIy vilh HusserI. Ior more on
Heidegger's crilique of Rickerl, see Cha. 5.
-122-
onIy from lhe kind of being vhich beIongs lo lhal vhich is hisloricaI
-- from ils hisloricily and from lhe vay il is rooled in lemoraIily.
125

y 1927, vhen Heidegger Bcing an! Tinc vas ubIished,
NeoKanlianism vas on lhe vane. Rickerl vas nearing lhe end of his
career, and his infIuence vas diminishing. The charges of
"formaIism" and of "lranscendenlaI abslraclion" vere sliII IeveIed by
lhe hisloricisls and Iife-hiIosohers, bul nov a vhoIe nev crilique
of Rickerl's hisloricaI Iogic began lo emerge. Wilh Heidegger's nev
emhasis on lhe hisloricily of being, lhe fundamenlaI queslion of
lhe Neo-Kanlians had been aIlered. As Ludvig Landgrebe noled,
Heidegger's lrue conlribulion lo lhe debale concerning lhe crisis of
hisloricism vas lo shov lhal "a hiIosohicaI foundalion of lhe
Geislesvissenschaflen couId nol be allained vilhoul a nev
onloIogy" -- lhe lask of Bcing an! Tinc.
126
There, as in his Marburg
Ieclures, Tnc Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc ( 1925), Heidegger
allacked bolh WindeIband and Rickerl for vhal he caIIed lheir
"emly melhodoIogy."
127
In slressing lhe lranscendenlaI condilions
of our knovIedge, he cIaimed: "No Ionger do lhey inquire inlo lhe
slruclure of lhese reaIilies lhemseIves. Their lheme is mereIy lhe
queslion concerning lhe IogicaI slruclure of scienlific resenlalion.
This goes so far lhal in Rickerl's lheory of lhe sciences, lhe sciences
lhal he lreals are no Ionger recognizabIe. He mereIy Iays dovn
schemes of sciences. This disfiguring and lriviaIizalion of DiIlhey
|ragcsic||ung had lhe dubious resuIl of hiding ils genuine meaning
and of hindering unliI nov ils osilive consequence."
128

Il vas DiIlhey's osilive accomIishmenl, according lo Heidegger,
lo move avay from lhe Neo-Kanlian concern vilh "emly melhod"
and redirecl hiIosohy's allenlion lo reaIily ilseIf. Againsl lhe ure
formaIism of lhe aden schooI, in his vork DiIlhey lurned lo lhe
lemoraI-hisloricaI dimension of Iife as lhe basis for lhe sludy of lhe
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn. An! qci in inc iritia|izaiicn cj Oi|incq
|ragcsic||ung |q |ickcri an! Win!c||an!, Hci!cggcr i!cniijic! an
inpassc, cr apcria, in inc ucrk cj aca!cnic pni|cscpnq unicn nc|pc! spur a
crisis in nisicrq, pni|cscpnq, an! inc cincr scicnccs. |rcn inc
____________________
125
Marlin Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, lrans. }ohn Macquarrie and
Idvard Robinson ( Nev York: Harer and Rov, 1962), 427, Scin
un! Zcii (Tbingen: Niemeyer, 1976), 375.
126
Landgrebe, Majcr Prc||cns in Ccnicnpcrarq |urcpcan Pni|cscpnq,
119.
127
Marlin Heidegger, Prc|cgcncna zur Gcscnicnic !cs Zcii|cgrijjcs,
Gcsaniausga|c 20 ( Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1979), 20.
128
Ibid.
-123-
eriod of Heidegger Bcing an! Tinc, one can seak of an "onloIogicaI
lurn" in German hiIosohy vhich vas lo have rofound
consequences for lhe lradilionaI aroach lo lhe human sciences.
Wilh lhis nev emhasis on lhe meaning of hisloricily in lhe vork of
DiIlhey and Heidegger, lhe very form of lhe queslion concerning
hisloricaI lrulh shifls from Rickerl's eislemoIogicaI inquiry lo an
onloIogicaI concern vilh hisloricaI being, an issue lhal viII
command our allenlion in lhe nexl lvo chalers.
In focusing on lhis onloIogicaI reading, I vanl lo shov lhal an
underslanding of lhe crisis of hisloricism requires a broader
|ragcsic||ung lhan lhe one offered in lhe slandard inlerrelalions of
schoIars such as Iggers, Rsen, and olhers. Their oulslanding vork
has heIed lo cIarify lhe disciIinary malrix and rofessionaI aims
of hisloricisl lhinkers. y Iaying bare lhe ideoIogicaI resuosilions
and oIilicaI IoyaIlies in hisloricisl lhoughl, lhese hislorians have
succeeded in oening u lhe vhoIe conlroversy over melhods in lhe
Iale nineleenlh and earIy lvenlielh cenluries. ul lhis disciIinary
focus on lhe hisloricaI rofession has obscured lhe reaI conlribulion
of hiIosohers lo lhe hisloricisl lradilion. The emhasis on
robIems of research, melhodoIogy, and ob|eclivily by bolh lhe
Neo-Kanlians and DiIlhey shouId nol conceaI lhe underIying
meaning of lheir generalionaI debale, vhich is, I beIieve, uIlimaleIy
hiIosohicaI ralher lhan hisloriograhicaI. Whal inleresled lhese
hiIosohers vere lhe eislemoIogicaI, axioIogicaI, and onloIogicaI
consequences of lhe hisloricisl osilion, eseciaIIy as lhey reIaled lo
lhe queslion of scienlific lrulh. Hisloricism comes lo rominence
vilhin lhe frame and slruclure of a science and chaIIenges lhe
lradilionaI underslanding of naluraI-scienlific Iogic as a universaI
slandard of lrulh. The "crisis" of hisloricism in lhis sense is reaIIy
nolhing olher lhan lhe coming lo seIf-consciousness of lhe lemoraI,
hisloricaI, cuIluraI, and inslilulionaI characler of scienlific inquiry
ilseIf -- a loic lhal ve nov convenienlIy IabeI "oslmodern." ul in
oening u lhe melahysicaI conlradiclions al vork in lhe scienlific
demand for ob|eclive lrulh, hisloricism simuIlaneousIy reveaIs lhe
conlradiclions al lhe hearl of lhe modernisl vision. Wriling al lhe
lime of lhis emergenl modernisl lradilion, Heidegger and DiIlhey
vere bolh avare of vhal vas al slake in lhe vhoIe discussion aboul
"crisis."
Heidegger Ocsirukiicn of sub|ecl/ob|ecl lhinking deveIos as a
resonse lo lhe kind of scienlific-hisloricaI queslions osed by
Rickerl and DiIlhey. As he lries lo shov in his crilique of SengIer,
hisloricaI
-124-
lhinking can never be underslood mereIy in lerms of hislory or
hisloriograhy bul is aIvays lied lo a melahysicaI inlerrelalion of
human being vilhin lhe horizon(s) of lime. In lhis lemoraI sense,
hislory ( Gcscnicnic) is firsl and foremosl a "haening" ( Gcscncncn),
a henomenon of hisloricaI enaclmenl ralher lhan a cuIluraI ob|ecl
or scienlific source. DiIlhey's vork heIed lo make lhis rocessuaI
characler of hisloricaI exislence cIear. ul, again, lhe reaI focus of his
crilique vas nol hisloricaI research as such bul lhe meaning of
hisloricily for human exislence. Hence any alleml lo connecl lhe
vork of Heidegger or DiIlhey lo lhe lradilion of Hisicrik
(disciIinary refIeclion on lhe research raclices of hislory) remains
robIemalic al besl. Whal remains cenlraI lo lheir vork is an
avareness lhal lhe crisis of hisloricism -- or, more roerIy, vhal is
al issue in lhis crisis -- reresenls lhe lensions vilhin lhe ro|ecl of
modernily ilseIf: of a sub|ecl/ ob|ecl lradilion of scienlific inquiry
vhich goes back lo lhe Carlesian demand for a reIiabIe melhod of
hiIosohicaI inquiry. These conlradiclions can be cIearIy seen in
DiIlhey's vork, vhich offers a modeI for lhe kind of crisis-lhinking
vhich marks German hiIosohy in lhe firsl quarler of lhe
lvenlielh cenlury.
-125-
CHAPTER FOUR Wi!hc!m Di!thcy's Critiquc nI Histnrica! Rcasnn
The knife of hisloricaI reIalivism . . . vhich has cul lo ieces aII
melahysics and reIigion musl aIso bring aboul heaIing. OnIy ve
need lo be lhorough. We have lo make hiIosohy ilseIf an ob|ecl of
hiIosohicaI concern.
-- WiIheIm DiIlhey, Zur Wc|ianscnaungs|cnrc
i. Di!thcy's Prn|cct
Wriling in lhe Prcussiscnc janr|ucncr of 1871 lo ay lribule lo a
coIIeague, lhe recenlIy deceased hislorian of hiIosohy Iriedrich
Uberveg, DiIlhey offered some lhoughls on lhe conlemorary
silualion vilhin nineleenlh-cenlury German hiIosohy. Afler
raising Uberveg for his sIendid muIlivoIume Hisicrq cj Pni|cscpnq
and his Sqsicn cj Icgic, DiIlhey venl on lo offer a nole of crilicism.
Desile his imressive erudilion and carefuI schoIarshi, Uberveg,
DiIlhey exIained, had faiIed lo address "lhe fundamenlaI and one
of lhe mosl imorlanl lasks in hiIosohy loday: lhe eslabIishmenl
of a vaIid lheory of scienlific knovIedge."
1
Like his conlemoraries
Rickerl and WindeI-
____________________
1
WiIheIm DiIlhey, Gcsannc|ic Scnrijicn, tc|. 15 ( Gciiingcn.
Van!cnnccck c |uprccni, 1970), 156. Tnc cc||ccic! ucrks cj Oi|incq,
unicn cxicn! ic iucniq tc|uncs, ucrc jirsi pu||isnc! in 1914 an!
inicrrupic! jcr scnc iuc !cca!cs |q taricus prc||cns. Tnc jirsi iuc|tc
tc|uncs ucrc rcprinic! ajicr 1956, an! cn|q incn ucrc |aicr cncs a!!c!.
Vc|unc 19 uas pu||isnc! in 1982, an! tc|unc 20, in 1990. Tuc
tc|uncs cj a prcjccic! sixtc|unc c!iiicn cj Oi|incq Sc|ccic! Wcrks,
c!iic! |q |u!c|j Makkrcc| an! |riinjcj |c!i , natc a|rca!q |ccn
pu||isnc! |q Princcicn Unitcrsiiq Prcss. |cr a ju||cr |i||icgrapnic
nisicrq cj inc Oi|incq prcjcci, scc U|ricn Hcrrnann, Bi||icgrapnic
Wi|nc|n|an!
-127-
band, DiIlhey vas convinced lhal eslabIishing |usl such "a vaIid
lheory of scienlific knovIedge" slood as lhe greal lask confronling
German hiIosohy.
Wilh lhe ubIicalion of his |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs ( 1883),
DiIlhey resenled his firsl concelion of such a lheory. Ior lhe nexl
lhree decades, he sel lo vork on roviding a fuIIy deveIoed
eislemoIogy of lhe human sciences in a range of sludies on
sychoIogy, anlhrooIogy, Iogic, hermeneulics, Iileralure, sociaI
lhoughl, and hislory. AIlhough lhe sub|ecl maller of lhese vrilings
vas diverse, ranging from lhe oelry of HIderIin and lhe
melahysics of Descarles lo lhe sychoIogy of renlano and lhe
hermeneulics of ChIadenius, lhe essenliaI form of lhe queslion aboul
lhe "ground" of knovIedge in lhe human sciences remained lhe
same.
2
Hov can ve, DiIlhey asked,
____________________
Oi|incq. Quc||cn un! Iiicraiur ( aseI: eIlz, 1969). Ior a more
recenl discussion of lhe DiIlhey Iileralure, see lhe yearIy revievs
in lhe Oi|incq-janr|ucn, voIs. 1-8. A heIfuI summary of lhe recenl
lrend in DiIlhey inlerrelalion can aIso be found in lhe firsl
chaler of Hans-UIrich Lessing, Oic |!cc cincr Kriiik !cr nisicriscncn
Vcrnunji ( Ireiburg: AIber, 1984), in lhe inlroduclion lo Hans-
UIrich Lessing and Irilh|of Rodi, Maicria|icn zur Pni|cscpnic
Wi|nc|n Oi|incqs ( Irankfurl: Suhrkam, 1984), and in lhe lvo
exceIIenl coIIeclions of essays ediled by Irnsl WoIfgang Orlh,
Oi|incq un! !ic Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcgcnuari ( Ireiburg: AIber, 1985)
and Oi|incq un! !cr Wan!c| !cs Pni|cscpnic|cgrijjs scii !cn 19.
janrnun!cri ( Ireiburg: AIber, 1984), bolh from lhe DiIlhey
Conference of 1983, vhich ceIebraled lhe cenlenniaI ubIicalion of
DiIlhey |in|ciiung in !ic Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn. A|sc nc|pju| arc Hans-
U|ricn Icssing inirc!uciicn ic Wi|nc|n Oi|incq. Tcxic zur Kriiik !cr
nisicriscncn Vcrnunji ( Gciiingcn. Van!cnnccck c |uprccni, 1983), 9-
24, Oiic Pcggc|crs inirc!uciicn ic Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, Oas Wcscn !cr
Pni|cscpnic ( Han|urg. Mcincr, 1984), tii-x|ti, an! |u!c|j Makkrcc|
an! |riinjcj |c!is inirc!uciicn ic Wi|nc|n Oi|incq , |nirc!uciicn ic inc
Hunan Scicnccs ( Princcicn, N.j.. Princcicn Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1989), 3-
42. |n inc ncics inai jc||cu, a|| rcjcrcnccs ic inc GesummeIte Schrlften,
20 tc|s. ( Gciiingcn. Van!cnnccck c |uprccni, 1957-1990) ui|| |c ncic!
as GS uiin inc ccrrcspcn!ing tc|unc an! pagc nun|cr, uncn | usc inc
nciaiicn GS ajicr an |ng|isn irans|aiicn (scparaic! |q a scni-cc|cn) inis
rcjcrs ic inc ccrrcspcn!ing Gcrnan scurcc.
2
The lerm Gcisicsuisscnscnaji(cn) is a cruciaI one for DiIlhey and
needs lo be underslood vilhin lhe conlexl of Iale-nineleenlh-
cenlury German lhoughl in generaI. TransIaled variousIy as
"human sciences," "human sludies," or "humanilies," lhe lerm goes
back lo lhe 1849 SchieI lransIalion inlo German of }ohn Sluarl MiII
Sqsicn cj Icgic. IronicaIIy, lhe German vord firsl aeared as a
rough equivaIenl of MiII's lerm "moraI sciences," bul lhis concel
is far loo narrov and secific lo calure lhe fuII meaning of lhe
vord. HegeI used lhe hrase Wisscnscnaji !cs Gcisics, and il is lhe
HegeIian nolion of Gcisi (bound u vilh aII lhe hisloricaI, cuIluraI,
and melahysicaI imIicalions of a "hiIosohy of mind" or
"hiIosohy of siril") vhich infIuenced DiIlhey. Irich Rolhacker
has vrillen a syslemalic accounl of lhe German lradilion of lhe
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn in Oic Icgik un! Sqsicnaiik !cr
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn ( Munich: OIdenbourg, 1926). IxlremeIy
heIfuI are Irich echer, Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn un!
Naiuruisscnscnajicn ( Munich: Duncker & HumbIol, 1921), Ollo
oIInov, Oic Mcinc!c !cr Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn ( Mainz: Gulenberg,
1950), and Hans-Georg Gadamer, "Wanrncii in !cn
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn," in K|cinc Scnrijicn, tc|. 1 ( Tu|ingcn. Mcnr,
1967), 39-46. Tnc icrn signijic! jcr Oi|incq inai grcup cj siu!ics !ca|ing
uiin inc cu|iura| spirii cj nunaniiq. nisicrq, psqcnc|cgq, cccncnics,
sccic|cgq, pni|c|cgq, aninrcpc|cgq, pc|iiics, rc|igicn, |iicraiurc, an!
cincrs. |i is ic |c carcju||q !ijjcrcniiaic! jrcn inc icrn
Naiuruisscnscnaji,
-128-
secure scienlific knovIedge of lhe human vorId vhich is as lruIy
"scienlific," or uisscnscnaji|icn, as lhe knovIedge of nalure oblained
by lhe naluraI sciences` And even if ve shouId succeed in fuIfiIIing
lhis imeralive lovard scienlific knovIedge, can ve sliII reserve
lhe lrulh of lhe human siril` Can ve do so in a vay lhal ils vilaIily
and immediacy are nol comromised by IifeIess lheorizing` DiIlhey
rehrased, reconslrucled, and lransformed lhese queslions
lhroughoul his Iife, aroaching lhem from a variely of erseclives
in hiIosohicaI, aeslhelic, edagogicaI, and sychoIogicaI sludies.
If ve are lo undersland DiIlhey's reIalionshi lo hisloricism
roerIy, ve need lo kee in mind lhe Iace of hisloricaI knovIedge
vilhin lhis Iarger |ragcsic||ung.
Ai jirsi g|ancc, Oi|incqs ucrk appcars ic |c a jragncniarq cc||cciicn cj
skcicncs, ncics, !rajis, cr unccnp|cic! nanuscripis. A|incugn nis cc||ccic!
uriiings ncu nun|cr iucniq tc|uncs, cn|q a jcu cj incn ucrc pu||isnc!
in jinisnc! jcrn !uring nis |ijciinc, ncsi cj inc rcnaining tc|uncs ucrc
pari cj Oi|incq cxicnsitc Nacn|ass, a cc||cciicn cj uriiings uncsc uniiq nas
|ccn nar! ic !cicrninc.
3
|n a uaq, Oi|incqs ucrk rcscn||cs Nicizscncs in
inai ii a|sc ncc!s ic |c rcinicrprcic! in |igni cj unpu||isnc! nanuscripis
inai ucrc nctcr gitcn jina| jcrn.
4
Ocspiic inis ccnp|cx icxiua| nisicrq,
ncuctcr, | uani ic
____________________
vhich incIudes aII lhe fieIds in lhe naluraI sciences. The
differences belveen lhese lvo branches of sludy are nol mereIy
lerminoIogicaI bul, more fundamenlaI, aIso melhodoIogicaI.
Nalure is "exIained," as DiIlhey uls il, bul siril, or Gcisi, is
un!crsicc!. Tnis !ijjcrcncc |ciuccn cxp|anaiicn ( |rk|arcn) an!
un!crsian!ing ( Vcrsicncn) pcinis ic inc ccnira|iiq cj ncrncncuiics jcr a
inccrq cj inc nunan scicnccs.
3
There vere many crilics vho feIl lhal DiIlhey's vork vas
fragmenlary nol onIy in a lexluaI sense bul in a hiIosohicaI
sense as veII. DiIlhey vrole on such a variely of loics lhal his
conlribulions seem lo Iack a lheorelicaI unily. Yel, as I viII argue
lhroughoul lhis chaler, aII his schoIarIy endeavors vere arl of a
syslemalic efforl lo unify lhe raxis and lheory of research in lhe
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn. |cr cnc pariicu|ar|q causiic rcticu cj Oi|incqs
ucrk jrcn a ccnicnpcrarq scurcc, scc jcnas Ccnn in Icgcs 12 ( 1923-
24).297. Scc a|sc inc insigniju| siu!q |q Micnac| |rnarin, Wi|nc|n
Oi|incq. Tnc Criiiquc cj Hisicrica| |cascn ( Cnicagc. Unitcrsiiq cj
Cnicagc Prcss, 1978), 5-6, an! Icssing, Oic |!cc cincr Kriiik !cr
nisicriscncn Vcrnunji, 14-15. Oi|incq Nacn|ass ccniains scnc cj inc
ncsi inpcriani jragncnis cj inc unc|c Oi|incq prcjcci. Vc|unc 19, jcr
cxanp|c, ccniains inc cxicnsitc !rajis cj nis prcjccic! nu|iitc|unc ucrk
Oic |in|ciiung in !ic Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn, cj unicn cn|q inc jirsi pari
uas pu||isnc!. Tnc jirsi !raji cj circa 1880-1890, ca||c! inc Brcs|au
Oraji, an! inc scccn! jrcn 1893, inc Bcr|in P|an, arc crucia| ic an
un!crsian!ing cj Oi|incqs ctcra|| criiiquc cj nisicrica| rcascn. Vc|unc
20 cj inc cc||ccic! uriiings ccniains inpcriani |cciurc ncics cn inc
su|jccis cj |cgic an! cpisicnc|cgq an! an ctcra|| inccrq cj inc prcjccic!
|in|ciiung (cj. GS 19. x|-x|i). Tnc siaius cj inc Nacn|ass is a|sc
!iscussc! in |rnarin, Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, 6-10, Icssing, Oic |!cc cincr
Kriiik !cr nisicriscncn Vcrnunji, 14-31, an! |riinjcj |c!i , Zun
gcgcnuariigcn Sian! !cr Oi|incq-|crscnung, in Oi|incq-janr|ucn, 1 (
1983). 260-67.
4
Werner Slegmaier, Pni|cscpnic !cr ||ukiuanz. Oi|incq un! Nicizscnc (
Gllingen: Van-
-129-
argue for lhe underIying unily vilhin DiIlhey's ro|ecl. In his firsl
ma|or vork, Tnc |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, DiIlhey
arlicuIaled lhe need for a unified crilique of hisloricaI reason vhose
urose vouId be "lo deveIo an eislemoIogicaI foundalion for lhe
human sciences . . . |vhich vouId delerminej lhe caacily of lhe
human being lo knov ilseIf and lhe sociely and hislory vhich il has
roduced."
5
This nev crilique, vhiIe foIIoving lhe crilicaI
imeralive of Kanl, vouId seek lo ground lhe lrulh of lhe individuaI
human sciences in lhe acluaI lerms of sociaI and hisloricaI reaIily.
Throughoul lhe many hases of DiIlhey's Iong and roduclive Iife,
lhis singIe ro|ecl vas lo offer a reference oinl by vhich lo evaIuale
and consider any nev infIuences. Thus, aIlhough DiIlhey did
exerience many cruciaI shifls in his lhoughl from his earIy
universily days in 1852 unliI his dealh in 1911, lhey vere shifls in
emhasis ralher lhan fundamenlaI changes in direclion. As Anna
Tumarkin, one of his sludenls, ul il, desile lhe aarenl gas and
conlradiclions in his sludies, DiIlhey's vork "resembIed an organic
deveIomenl vilh ils concenlric circIes: ever in a more rofound
and originaI manner lhe same queslion vouId be ursued from nev
sides."
6
IoIIoving Tumarkin's concelion, many DiIlhey schoIars
have dislinguished lhree "hases" in DiIlhey's lhoughl: (1) lhe earIy
hase, from aboul 1852 lo 1876, characlerized by lhe infIuence of
osilivism and lhe naluraI sciences and cuIminaling in lhe essay
U|cr !as Siu!iun !cr Gccnicnic !cr Wisscnscnajicn tcn Mcnscncn, !cr
Gcsc||scnaji, un! !cn Siaai ( 1875), (2) lhe middIe hase, from aboul
1877 lo 1900, marked by a concern vilh lhe melhodoIogy of lhe
human sciences and sychoIogy, resuIling in lhe ubIicalion of
|nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs ( 1883) and |!cas ccnccrning a
Ocscripiitc an! Ana|qiic Psqcnc|cgq ( 1894), and (3) lhe Iale hase,
from 1900 lo 1911, lhe Iasl years of DiIlhey's career, during vhich he
vas concerned vilh lhe robIem of hermeneulics, a doclrine of
Wc|ianscnauung, an! inc grcuing inj|ucncc cj |!nun! Husscr| Icgica|
|ntcsiigaiicns ( 1900) cn inc inccrq cj inc nunan scicnccs.
7
Tnc qucsiicn
cj pnascs an! snijis in inic|-
____________________
denhoeck & Rurechl, 1992), rovides an inlerrelalion of DiIlhey
and Nielzsche vilhin lhe conlexl of nineleenlh-cenlury German
hiIosohy.
5
DiIlhey, GS 1:116 and GS 8:264
6
Anna Tumarkin, "WiIheIm DiIlhey," Arcnit jur Gcscnicnic !cr
Pni|cscpnic 25 ( 1912): 151.
7
The queslion of "hases" in DiIlhey's inleIIecluaI deveIomenl has
roven lo be a maller of greal debale among schoIars. Ior a
hislory of lhis conlroversy, lhe foIIoving arlicIes are heIfuI: Hans
Ineichen, "Vcn !cr cnic|cgiscncn Oi|incqinicrprciaiicn
zurWisscnscnajisinccric in prakiiscncr A|sicni. Ncuc Oi|incq-
Iiicraiur,"
-130-
IecluaI hislory is oflenlimes robIemalic, serving more lo segregale
lhe imorlanl infIuences in a hiIosoher's vork lhan lo affirm lheir
unily and conlinuily. IronicaIIy, DiIlhey confronled lhis same
robIem in his ovn vork--bolh in his inleIIecluaI biograhy of
SchIeiermacher and in his sludy of lhe earIy HegeI.
8
UnliI recenlIy,
mosl DiIlhey schoIarshi had been dominaled by lhis hase
aroach, finding a so-caIIed hermeneulic lurn in DiIlhey's lhinking
(signaIed by lhe 1900 essay Tnc |isc cj Hcrncncuiics) vhich
consliluled an imorlanl break vilh lhe earIier vork.
9
ernhard
Groelhuysen argues, for examIe, lhal afler }uIius Ibbinghaus's
savage allacks on lhe sychoIogicaI sludies of 1894-1896, DiIlhey
reformuIaled his ideas and abandoned his earIier "sychoIogicaI"
allemls lo ground lhe human sludies in favor of a nev
"hermeneulicaI" grounding. On his reading, hermeneulics becomes
for lhe Ialer DiIlhey lhe nev "fundamenlaI science," serving as lhe
foundalion for aII sludies of hislory, sociely, Iileralure, and lhe olher
sciences of siril.
In ilseIf, lhis "hase-orienled" aroach lo DiIlhey mighl seem a
minor oinl of inlernaI crilicism, of concern onIy lo lhose schooIed
in lhe arlicuIars of DiIlhey hiIoIogy. ul vhen vieved againsl lhe
background of nineleenlh-cenlury German hiIosohy (and lhe
crisis of hisloricism), lhis argumenl aboul hases becomes imorlanl
because il inlerrels DiIlhey's hermeneulics as a lurn avay from lhe
earIier eislemoIogicaIIy grounded lradilion of sychoIogy. In
morerecenl crilicism, Hans-UIrich Lessing and Irilh|of Rodi have
broken vilh lhis Iine of inlerrelalion, arguing inslead for lhe unily
of lhe eislemoIogicaI-sychoIogicaI-hermeneulic slrains vilhin
DiIlhey's lhoughl.
10
These hiIosohers see DiIlhey's ro|ecl of a
crilique of hisloricaI reason as a hiIosohicaI alleml lo unify lhe
various shifls or
____________________
Wisscnscnajisinccric in prakiiscncr A|sicni. Ncuc Oi|incq-Iiicraiur,"
Pni|cscpniscnc |un!scnau 22 ( 1976): 493-509, and ernard Iric
}ensen, "The Recenl Trend in lhe Inlerrelalion of DiIlhey,"
Pni|cscpnq cj inc Sccia| Scicnccs 8 ( 1978): 419-438, Ieler Hnermann
, Ocr Ourcn|rucn gcscnicni|icncn Ocnkcns in 19. janrnun!cri. jcnann
Gusiat Orcqscn, Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, Graj Pau| Ycrck tcn Waricn|urg (
Ireiburg: AIber, 1967), deaIs exlensiveIy vilh lhe queslion of
hases in DiIlhey's vork and, in facl, sees five of lhem. This
queslion is aIso raised by Lessing, Oic |!cc cincr Kriiik !cr
nisicriscncn Vcrnunji, 27-31, |rnarin, Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, 3-12, Tncc!crc
P|aniinga, Hisicrica| Un!crsian!ing in inc Tncugni cj Wi|nc|n Oi|incq
( Tcrcnic. Unitcrsiiq cj Tcrcnic Prcss, 1980) 3-23, an! ||sc Bu|ncj ,
Wi|nc|n Oi|incq. A Hcrncncuiic Apprcacn ic inc Siu!q cj Hisicrq an!
Cu|iurc ( Tnc Haguc. Mariinus Nijncjj, 1980), 1-9.
10
Lessing and Rodi, eds., Maicria|icn zur Pni|cscpnic Wi|nc|n Oi|incqs.
8
DiIlhey, GS 4, GS 13, and GS 14.
9
DiIlhey, GS 5: 317-331. Ior examIe, see lhe inlroduclion by
DiIlhey's sludenl ernard Groelhuysen in DiIlhey, GS 7:v-x.
-131-
lurns vilhin his lhinking, an argumenl lhal I find ersuasive. If afler
1900 DiIlhey lhemalizes hermeneulics in a more seIf-conscious
fashion, lhen erhas ve shouId see lhis nol as a break vilh his
earIier vork bul as a modificalion of emhasis. Daling back lo his
SchIeiermacher biograhy, DiIlhey vrole exlensiveIy aboul lhe
secific robIems of underslanding, inlerrelalion, and sychoIogy.
11
Laler, in his essay Tnc Octc|cpncni cj Hcrncncuiics ( 1900), he
slressed lhal "vilhin lhe conlexl of lhe eislemoIogy, Iogic, and
melhodoIogy of lhe human sciences, lhe lheory of inlerrelalion
becomes a vilaI Iink belveen hiIosohy and lhe hisloricaI sciences,
an essenliaI arl of lhe foundalion of lhe human sciences."
12
In bolh
cases, one can cIearIy see lhe infIuence of hermeneulicaI lhinking al
vork.
Whal remained cruciaI for DiIlhey's overaII ro|ecl, hovever, vas
his unfaIlering commilmenl lo an eislemoIogicaI |ragcsic||ung, a
ccnniincni inai nc snarc! uiin nis Ncc-Kaniian ccnicnpcrarics
Win!c||an! an! |ickcri. Wnai nc urcic in 1883 in inc prcjacc ic nis
|nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs ccu|! as casi|q natc |ccn uriiicn in
1911, inc qcar cj nis !cain. On|q in inncr cxpcricncc, in inc jacis cj
ccnscicusncss, natc | jcun! a jirn ancncr jcr nq ininking. . . . A|| scicncc
is cxpcricniia|, |ui a|| cxpcricncc nusi |c rc|aic! |ack ic an! !critcs iis
ta|i!iiq jrcn inc ccn!iiicns an! ccnicxi cj ccnscicusncss in unicn ii ariscs,
i.c. inc icia|iiq cj cur naiurc. Wc !csignaic as cpisicnc|cgica| inis
sian!pcini unicn ccnsisicni|q rcccgnizcs inc inpcssi|i|iiq cj gcing |cnin!
incsc ccn!iiicns. . . . Mc!crn scicncc can ackncu|c!gc nc cincr inan inis
cpisicnc|cgica| sian!pcini.
13
|n apprcacning Oi|incqs ucrk, | ui||
cnpnasizc inc uniiq an! ccniinuiiq
____________________
11
DiIlhey, GS 15: 395-787.
12
DiIlhey, GS 5: 330. As Irnsl WoIfgang Orlh has argued in
"HisloricaI and CrilicaI Remarks on lhe ReIalion belveen
Descrilion and Hermeneulics in IhenomenoIogy," |cscarcn in
Pncncncnc|cgq 15 ( 1984): 1-18: "Il vouId be a comIele
misunderslanding of lhe rofessionaIIy hisloricaI and
rofessionaIIy hiIoIogicaI argumenlalion in DiIlhey's Iale essay
on hermeneulics lo alleml lo inlerrel il as a hermeneulic lurn in
his hiIosohy. In DiIlhey, underslanding is a vay of
arehending vhich sliII connecls descrilive, sychoIogicaI, and
hermeneulicaI molifs. He makes use of lhem ingenuousIy and in a
suerior manner. To lhink lhal a lradilionaI seciaI disciIine
couId simIy become lhe inslrumenl of a firsl hiIosohy is ralher
unusuaI vilh regard lo DiIlhey's vay of lhinking. AdmilledIy, he
did nol coin any lerm lo name his foundalionaI disciIine, his
hiIosohy of deIiberalion ( Bcsinnung). Il is DiIlhey's meril here
of having avoided mislakes by his lerminoIogicaI reservalions
(excel for lhe equivocaI lerm Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn). As IillIe as a
comIele syslem of sychoIogy can be laken as a resuosilion
of an eislemoIogy, as IillIe can a comIele syslem of
hermeneulics be resuosed lo reformuIale lhis eislemoIogy in
order lo buiId a fundamenlaI onloIogy" (11).
13
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 50, GS 1: xviii.
-132-
of lhis eislemoIogicaI slandoinl as I exIore his vrilings on
descrilive sychoIogy, lhe melhod of Vcrsicncn, prc||cns cj nisicrica|
rc|aiitisn, an! nis ccnccpi cj |r|c|nis (|itc! cxpcricncc).
ll. The Unlt of the lntroductlon to the Humun Sclences (1883)
|n inc prcjacc ic |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, Oi|incq cxp|ainc! nis
rcascns jcr un!criaking nis pni|cscpnica|-ncinc!c|cgica| siu!q cj nisicrica|
kncu|c!gc. Sucn a prcjcci uas, nc ncic!, inc !ircci cuigrcuin cj nis cun
cjjcris ic ccnp|cic a iuc-tc|unc |icgrapnq cn Scn|cicrnacncrs |ijc an!
incugni. |n 1870 Oi|incq pu||isnc! inc jirsi tc|unc, unicn cctcrc! inc
pcric! jrcn 1768 ic 1802. Tnc scccn! tc|unc, unicn uas ic natc inc|u!c!
|cnginq !iscussicns cj Scn|cicrnacncrs !ia|cciics, cinics, acsinciics,
psqcnc|cgq, an! ncrncncuiics (ccnirasic! uiin inc incugni cj Hcgc|, Kani,
|icnic, Scnc||ing, an! Scn|cgc|) rcnainc! in ncics an! !raji an! uas nctcr
jinisnc!. Oi|incq |c|ictc! inai ic ccnp|cic sucn an cxicnsitc siu!q cn inc
inic||cciua| nisicrq cj inc Agc cj Gccinc, nc ucu|! ncc! inc prcpcr
pni|cscpnica| icc|s. |irsi an! jcrcncsi, nc ucu|! rcquirc a c|car ccnccpiicn
cj inc taricus |rancncs cj inc nunan scicnccs, a kin! cj unijqing inccrq cj
incir in!iti!ua| ccniri|uiicns. On|q incn ucu|! nc |c a||c ic nakc scnsc cj
inc ccnp|cx cj i!cas unicn jcrnc! inc nairix cj Scn|cicrnacncrs
inic||cciua| unitcrsc. As nc rca!i|q ackncu|c!gc!, inc gcncsis cj nis
ncinc!c|cgica| inquirq inic inc jcrn an! siruciurc cj inc
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn na! praciica| rccis in inc |icgrapnq, jcr inc
prcscniaiicn an! criiiquc cj Scn|cicrnacncrs sqsicn ctcrquncrc
prcsuppcsc! an intcsiigaiicn inic inc u|iinaic qucsiicns cj pni|cscpnq.
14

Oi|incqs siu!q cj Scn|cicrnacncr na!c ii apparcni ic nin inai inc
praciica| prc||cns cj nisicrica| rcscarcn arc a|uaqs iic! ic inc inccrciica|
prc||cns cj pni|cscpnica| criiiquc, |cin arc nuiua||q !cicrninaiitc.
Ccnscqucni|q, ai inc tcrq cuisci cj nis prcjcci ccnccrning a criiiquc cj
nisicrica| rcascn, Oi|incq cxp|ainc! inai nc !i! nci jatcr an crinc!cx
Kaniian apprcacn ic kncu|c!gc. Kncu|c!gc rcquircs nc inccrciica|
arcniiccicnic, Oi|incq c|ainc!, |ui is rccic! in inc aciua| cxpcricncc cj |ijc
iisc|j. Wiin spccijic rcgar! ic inc nunan scicnccs, kncu|c!gc can nctcr |c
purc|q a|siraci cr inccrciica| |ui nusi iisc|j
____________________
14
DiIlhey, GS 1: xx.
-133-
refIecl lhe acluaI deveIomenl of lhese sciences lhroughoul hislory.
Hence, any roosed Iogic of lhe human sciences musl begin vilh a
sludy of lheir hislory. As DiIlhey himseIf emhasized, "Insighl inlo
lhe hisloricaI deveIomenl of lhe human sciences is lhe emiricaI
foundalion for a lrue underslanding of lheir IogicaI conslilulion."
15

In lhe reface lo lhe Inlroduclion, he again decIared lhal '"lhe
hisloricaI descrilion |of lhe human sciencesj reares lhe ground
for lheir eislemoIogicaI foundalion."
16

Here, one can cIearIy see hov DiIlhey's slarling oinl vas very
differenl from lhal of his Neo-Kanlian conlemoraries. UnIike
Rickerl, for examIe, he did nol alleml lo find an a riori ground
for our knovIedge of human cuIlure, ralher, he lhoughl of
knovIedge as bound u vilh lhe cuIlure il allemls lo knov.
ecause aII knovIedge is uIlimaleIy seIf-refIexive, hiIosohy
cannol begin from an absoIule ground. "There is no absoIule slarling
oinl," DiIlhey insisled. "Ivery beginning is arbilrary."
17
And yel as
he lurned his allenlion lo lhe hislory of melahysics, DiIlhey
discovered lhal Weslern hiIosohy had roceeded as if lhere vere
some fixed oinl of dearlure for eslabIishing a melahysicaI
foundalion for science. Seeking lo avoid lhe ilfaIIs of an
Archimedean melahysics, DiIlhey reaIized lhal hiIosohy had lo
be suIemenled vilh hislory, hislory had lo be forlified vilh
hiIosohy. Among his redecessors, onIy HegeI had allemled lo
lhink lhrough lhis reIalionshi of hislory lo hiIosohy in a
fundamenlaI vay. y emhasizing lhe hisloricaI asecls of
hiIosohy as lhe ground for an cpisicnc|cgica| accounl of lhe
human sciences, DiIlhey succeeded in overcoming lhe ureIy formaI
and insuIar characler of Neo-Kanlian eislemoIogy.
The DiIlhey ro|ecl oulIined in lhe |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs
vas originaIIy conceived as a muIlivoIume underlaking made u of
six seclions, of vhich onIy lhe firsl lvo vere ubIished in DiIlhey's
Iifelime.
18
The firsl book allemled lo describe lhe slale of lhe
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn in DiIlhey's ovn lime vhiIe demonslraling lhe
____________________
15
Ciled from lhe unubIished Nacn|ass in Irmarlh, Wi|nc|n Oi|incq,
94.
16
DiIlhey, GS 1: xv.
17
DiIlhey, GS 5: cx and GS 1: 419.
18
Ior lhe comIele delaiIs of lhe six-book ro|ecl, see lhe
Vcr|cricni lo GS 19 by I. Rodi and HeImul }ohach, es. . xI-
xIi. Ior DiIlhey's ovn exlensive anaIysis of his inlenlions, lhe
A|incjj Bricj of 1882 is cruciaI, see GS 19: 389-392. The basic
remise of lhe |in|ciiung vas, as DiIlhey ul il, "lo see hov--from
lhe exerience of menlaI Iife--one couId achieve a science of man,
sociely, and hislory" (390).
-134-
need for a nev eislemoIogicaI foundalion. This book vas mereIy
inlroduclory, and in il DiIlhey vished lo oulIine lhe differences
belveen lhe naluraI sciences and lhe human sciences according lo
lheir melhod and ob|ecl of sludy. As he vrole lo a conlemorary:
"The firsl book of lhe firsl voIume seeks, in conlrasl lo lhe resenlIy
ouIar aroach of lhe Comle and MiII schooI, lo gras lhe lruIy
inner slruclure of lhe human sciences as lhey have deveIoed
hisloricaIIy. Irom lhis I hoe lo shov lhe necessily of a generaI
grounding |of lhe human sciencesj."
19
The second book, enlilIed
Mciapnqsics as |cun!aiicn cj inc Hunan Scicnccs. |is Ocninancc an!
Occ|inc, allemled a hisloricaI anaIysis of lhe idea of Wisscnscnaji in
Weslern hiIosohy from lhe ancienl Greeks unliI lhe MiddIe Ages.
"The second book demonslrales," as DiIlhey exIained, "lhal
melahysics is no Ionger caabIe of roviding a universaIIy
accelabIe grounding of lhe individuaI sciences. . . . I alleml, by
means of a hisloricaI descrilion of melahysics, lo rove lhe
fruilIessness of every such underlaking."
20
In shorl, for DiIlhey, lhe
age of a melahysicaI grounding of lhe human sciences had come lo
an end. ook 3, vhich vas lo conlinue lhe generaI lheme of ook 2
from lhe Renaissance unliI DiIlhey's ovn day, vas never comIeled.
21
ooks 4, 5, and 6, ubIished as arl of lhe Nacn|ass, ucrc ccnccitc!
|q Oi|incq as nis cun aiicnpi ic prcti!c an cpisicnc|cgica| jcun!aiicn
jcr inc nunan scicnccs.
22
Hcrc Oi|incq uas ic prcti!c inc pni|cscpnica|
jusiijicaiicn jcr inc nisicrica| criiiquc ucrkc! cui in Bccks 2 an! 3.
Tnrcugncui inis cnapicr | uani ic jccus aiicniicn cn inis prcjcci, |cgun in
inc |nirc!uciicn an! !ctc|cpc! in inc Brcs|au Oraji cj inc car|q 1880s
an! unai nas |ccn ca||c! inc Bcr|in P|an cj a !cca!c |aicr.
23
|n nc scnsc,
ncuctcr, sncu|! uc scc incsc |aicr nanuscripis as nating a !ijjcrcni ain
inan inc car|icr siu!ics !ca|ing uiin inc nisicrq cj nciapnqsics. |n inc
____________________
19
Ciled from DiIlhey's unubIished Ieller, lhe so-caIIed Scnccnc Bricj
cj 1882, in Lessing, Oic |!cc cincr Kriiik !cr nisicriscncn Vcrnunji,
111.
20
||i!.
21
VoIume 2 of lhe Gcsannc|ic Scnrijicn, Wc|ianscnauung un! Ana|qsc
!cs Mcnscncn scii |cnaissancc un! |cjcrnaiicn, cctcrs cn|q inc pcric!
up inrcugn inc sctcniccnin ccniurq. Oi|incq nctcr jcrna||q ccnp|cic!
nis siu!q cj inc ninciccnin-ccniurq ncrncncuiic ira!iiicn.
22
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 51-52, GS 1: xix.
23
I vouId argue lhal lhe Auj|au !cr gcscnicni|icncn Wc|i in !cn
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn ( 1910) and lhe |!ccn u|cr cinc |cscnrci|cn!c
un! zcrg|ic!crn!c Psqcnc|cgic ( 1894) (erhas DiIlhey lvo mosl
famous vorks besides lhe |nirc!uciicn) are a conlinualion of lhe
ro|ecl begun in 1883 ralher lhan a nev "sychoIogicaI" or
"hermeneulic" hase of DiIlhey's lhoughl.
-135-
reface lo lhe |nirc!uciicn, DiIlhey exIained lhal in his vork,
"hisloricaI refIeclion is as vaIuabIe as eislemoIogicaI seIf-refIeclion."
24
DiIlhey beIieved lhal any nev lheory of lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn
had firsl lo overcome lhe acluaI hisloricaI lheory lhal had been Iefl
lo il, lhe delrilus of lhe melahysicaI aroach, before il couId offer
any heIfuI soIulion lo lhe crisis of scienlific hiIosohy.
iii. Di!thcy's Rc!atinnship tn Pnsitivism, Idca!ism, and thc
Histnrica! 5chnn!
DiIlhey's anlimelahysicaI slance vas, of course, consonanl vilh lhe
mood of osl-HegeIian German hiIosohy in generaI. The
HisloricaI SchooI of Ranke, Droysen, and Savigny had rolesled
againsl lhe secuIalive side of HegeI's hiIosohy of siril. Their
criliques vere inlensified by lhe emiricaI aroach of osilivism
and lhe naluraI-scienlific research of universily-lrained schoIars. As
ve have aIready seen, bolh vilhin lhe naluraI sciences and lhe
sciences of hislory, HegeI's hiIosohy came under severe allack
afler mid-cenlury. DiIlhey's ideas vere formed in lhis osilivisl,
anli-HegeIian cIimale, bul his allilude vas in no sense lyicaIIy
anlimelahysicaI, Iike lhe hisloricisls. DiIlhey heId HegeI in high
regard and beIieved lhal melahysics couId nol be dismissed
offhand as an unscienlific aberralion of lhe human siril bul ralher
had lo be grased hisloricaIIy as an alleml lo eslabIish a vaIid
slarling oinl for scienlific inquiry.
DiIlhey underslood melahysics in lhe ArisloleIian sense as firsl
hiIosohy: lhe Wisscnscnaji !cr Wisscnscnaji--scienlia scienliarum.
25

According lo DiIlhey, lhe guiding rinciIe of melahysics vas lhe
"rinciIe of sufficienl reason" ( Saiz tcn Grun!), vhich, as lhe
rinciIe of aII rinciIes, grounds aII vorIdIy henomena.
26

DiIlhey lried lo shov lhal beIief in lhis science of firsl rinciIes had
delermined lhe acluaI raclice of lhose engaged in researches of lhe
hysicaI and hisloricaI vorId. He even cIaimed lhal lhe acluaI
division of lhe sciences according lo nalure and siril ( Naiur- and
Gcisicsuisscnscnaji)
____________________
24
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 52, GS 1: xix.
25
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 178, GS 1: 129.
26
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 221-223, GS 1: 388-390.
There is aIso a Iong discussion of lhe Saiz tcn Grun! in DiIlhey GS
19: 43-44, and 71-81. AIso heIfuI in lhis conlexl are lhe commenls
by Manfred RiedeI, "Oi|incqs Kriiik !cr |cgrun!cn!cn Vcrnunji," in
Orlh, ed., Oi|incq un! !ic Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcgcnuari, 185-210, an! inc
inirc!uciicn ic tc|unc 7, Gcscnicnic !cr Pni|cscpnic, 19. janrnun!cri.
Pcsiiitisnus, Hisicrisnus, Hcrncncuiik, c!. Manjrc! |ic!c|, 7-28 (
Siuiigari. |cc|an, 1981).
-136-
vas based on lhese melahysicaI rinciIes of firsl hiIosohy.
eginning vilh ArislolIe and cuIminaling in lhe lhoughl of HegeI,
DiIlhey idenlified a overfuI lrend vilhin melahysics lo orienl aII
science (and, more fundamenlaIIy, aII asecls of being) lo a IogicaI
ideaI: lhal of |cgcs, or Vcrnunji (reason). AccordingIy, DiIlhey
referred lo melahysics as a Vcrnunjiuisscnscnaji, or a "science of
reason."
27
ul because lhe acluaI raxis of lhe naluraI and human
sciences had veakened beIief in lhe IogicaI characler of nalure and
hislory in lhe nineleenlh cenlury, DiIlhey began lo seak of "lhe
eulhanasia of melahysics."
28
In lhis eriod al "lhe end of
melahysics" (lo borrov Heidegger's hrase), DiIlhey lurned lo lhe
emiricaI vork of lhe osilivisls and lhe HisloricaI SchooI lo
inaugurale his crilique. As Ranke had aIready shovn in his reading
of HegeI, ralionaI melahysics had undermined lhe very nalure of
hisloricaI exerience by abslracling from lhe emiricaI dalum and
denying lhe reaIily of hisloricaI raxis. Hence, as DiIlhey
underslood il, melahysics, vhich originaIIy soughl lo rovide a
IogicaI ground for aII lyes of Wisscnscnaji, ironicaIIy came lo
undermine lhe very raxis of Wisscnscnaji ilseIf. In lhis sense,
DiIlhey came lo seak of a confIicl belveen melahysics and
Wisscnscnaji, vhich he hoed lo resoIve by offering his ovn crilique
of hisloricaI reason as an aIlernalive lo HegeI's melahysicaI science
of reason.
DiIlhey's anlimelahysicaI slance vas, in some resecls, reIaled lo
lhe osilivisl crilique of HegeI, bul il vouId be unfair and
misIeading lo overeslimale lhe infIuence of lhinkers such as
Augusle Comle or }ohn Sluarl MiII on his vork.
29
DiIlhey shared
vilh lhe osilivisls a desire lo reslruclure lhe syslem of lhe sciences
according lo a nev melhodoIogicaI ideaI: lhe commilmenl lo
emiricaI research in Iace of abslracl syslemalizing. In lhe end,
hovever, he vhoIIy reudialed any allachmenl lo Comle's osilive
socioIogy or MiII's Iogic of lhe moraI sciences. Yel his reasons for
re|ecling osilivism vere nol lhe resuIl of a simIe Ieaning lovard
romarilicism--as some have argued
____________________
27
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 228, GS 1: 395.
28
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 238, GS 1: 405.
29
Hans SommerfeId vrole lhe disserlalion Wi|nc|n Oi|incq un! !cr
Pcsiiitisnus, Universily of erIin, 1925, more recenlIy, }rgen
Habermas, Kncu|c!gc an! Hunan |nicrcsis ( oslon: eacon, 1971),
has lrealed lhe robIem in delh, and Hans-HeImulh Gander ,
Pcsiiitisnus a|s Mciapnqsik. Vcrausscizungcn un! Grun!sirukiurcn
tcn Oi|incqs Grun!|cgung !cr Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn ( Ireiburg:
AIber, 1988), foIIovs on lhe robIem of DiIlhey and osilivism.
The infIuence of osilivism on DiIlhey's lhoughl is aIso menlioned
in reviousIy ciled vorks by Irmarlh, uIhof, IIanlinga, and
Lessing, among olhers. DiIlhey discusses his earIy reIalionshi lo
osilivism in lhe 1870s in GS 5: 3-6.
-137-
--bul grev oul of his rigorous devolion lo an ideaI of Wisscnscnaji,
free of bolh secuIalive excess as veII as "lhe orgies of emiricism."
30
Iven in his earIy career, DiIlhey had Ians for an essay enlilIed
An |nirc!uciicn ic Scicniijic Siu!ics jrcn inc Sian!pcini cj |ca|iiq an!
|xpcricncc in Ccnirasi ic |npiricisn an! Spccu|aiicn, vhich conlained
a crilique of bolh HegeI and lhe osilivisls.
31
In lhis earIy vork,
DiIlhey soughl an aroach lo reaIily vhich vouId slress lhe
exerienliaI eIemenl in human knovIedge, "a hiIosohy of
exerience" Ied by lhe caII for "emiria, bul nol emiricism."
32
y
"emiria," DiIlhey meanl lhe acluaI exeriences of Iife in lheir
undiIuled, nonscienlific form, lo lhese he conlrasled lhe
melahysicaI aroach of "emiricism."
The emiricisl hiIosohy of science (rooled in lhe IngIish lradilion
of Locke, Hume, and associalionisl sychoIogy) cIaimed lo derive ils
melhods from rigorous exlernaI observalion, allemling lo anaIyze
lhe given vorId in conlrasl lo lhe abslracl vorId of consciousness.
Comle, for examIe, heId lhal lo undersland human menlaI
funclions, one needed lo ursue hysioIogy and socioIogy because
lhe onIy dala of significance vere exlernaI ralher lhan vilhin
consciousness ilseIf. The ulalive "science" of sychoIogy he
decIared lo be IogicaIIy conlradiclory, because inlroseclion ilseIf is
an imossibIe lask, lhe onIy genuineIy scienlific sludy of human Iife,
Comle argued, requires lhe kind of exacl observalion found in lhe
naluraI sciences. Thus, in his allemls lo found a nev science of
human Iife--socioIogy--Comle denied lhe vaIue of sychoIogy as a
science and subordinaled aII hisloricaI and sociaI inquiry lo lhe
melhodoIogicaI rinciIes of lhe naluraI sciences. In lhe finaI
anaIysis, DiIlhey concIuded lhal Comle's allemls al emiricism
foIIoved lhe alh of a "crude
____________________
30
DiIlhey, GS 1: 135 and GS 4: 434. In his Ih.D. disserlalion,
Hisicriciiq an! Hcrncncuiic (VanderbiIl Universily, 1969), David
Linge argues lhal DiIlhey re|ecled osilivism nol, as some have
argued, oul of a romanlic disiIIusionmenl vilh lhe "syslem" of
Comle and MiII bul due lo his conviclion lhal osilivism vas a
veiIed form of melahysics--unemiricaI in benl and dogmalic in
melhod. }effrey arnouv aIso argues for DiIlhey's commilmenl lo
"emiricism" ralher lhan a knee-|erk form of osilivism in |cticu
cj Mciapnqsics 32, no. 4 ( }une 1979): 746-750. See aIso IIisabelh
Iaczkovska- Lagovska , "DiIlhey's Reform of IsychoIogy,"
|cpcris cn Pni|cscpnq 7 ( 1983): 13-16.
31
DiIlhey, GS 5: 434.
32
The mollo "|npiric un! nicni |npirisnus" is found in a drafl of lhe
|nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs from GS 5: 434, vhere DiIlhey
uses il as a chaler heading for a fulure manuscril. This hrase is
aIso found in an earIy Ieller of Ccuni Pau| Ycrck tcn Waricn|urg ic
Oi|incq in Nctcn|cr 1877, ubIished in riefvechseI zvischen
Wi|nc|n Oi|incq un! !cn Grajcn Pau| Ycrck tcn Waricn|urg, 1877-
1897, ed. Sigrid von der SchuIenburg ( HaIIe: Niemeyer, 1923), 2.
In GS 1: 81, DiIlhey aIso seaks of !ic un|cjangcnc |npiric (an
imarliaI emiricaI aroach).
-138-
naluraIislic melahysics" lhal "aroached lhe facls of lhe hisloricaI
rocess in a much Iess salisfaclory manner lhan did HegeI or
SchIeiermacher."
33

If Comle's error Iay in his unemiricaI allemls al emiricism, lhe
same couId be said, from DiIlhey's slandoinl, of MiII. MiII did nol
viev sychoIogy as scienlificaIIy inadmissibIe, in facl, he allemled
lo use il as lhe keyslone for his "Iogic of lhe moraI sciences," a
ro|ecl lhal DiIlhey shared. NonelheIess, desile MiII's
anlimelahysicaI ursuil of lhe IogicaI foundalions of exerience,
DiIlhey re|ecled his aroach as "unfruilfuI" because il subordinaled
lhe aulonomy of lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn lo lhe melhodoIogicaI
ideaI of lhe naluraI sciences.
34
MiII's efforls lo eslabIish lhe "moraI
sciences" by aeaIing lo lhe sciences of nalure vere, according lo
DiIlhey, anolher alleml al undermining lhe "emiria" of human
exerience. The human sciences required a melhod aII lheir ovn,
DiIlhey cIaimed, a melhod lhal refIecled lhe acluaI research of ils
raclilioners. Whal lhe emiricisls had overIooked vas "lhe fuII,
unlruncaled exerience" of hisloricaI Iife, abslracling from lhe
genuine henomena of sociaI and cuIluraI exislence, lhey erecled a
gossamer edifice of lheory and inleIIeclion. DiIlhey's crilique vas
unremilling: "Imiricism has been |usl as abslracl as secuIalive
lhoughl. The human being lhal infIuenliaI emiricisl schooIs have
conslrucled from sensalions and reresenlalions, as lhough from
aloms, conlradicls lhe inner exerience from vhose eIemenls lhe
idea of lhe human being is, afler aII, derived."
35
In lhe marginaIia lo
his coy of MiII Icgic, DiIlhey vrole: " MiII is dogmalic due lo his
Iack of hisloricaI educalion. OnIy from Germany can lhere come a
lruIy emiricaI melhod lo reIace lhe re|udiciaI melhod of
dogmalic emiricism."
36
y foIIoving lhe alh of a differenl
emiricaI lradilion racliced by lhe German HisloricaI SchooI,
DiIlhey beIieved he had found a vay lo overcome lhe one-sided
emiricism of lhe osilivisls and uIlimaleIy lo ground scienlific
lrulh in hisloricaI reaIily.
As ve begin lo aroach his ovn hiIosohy, ve need lo recognize
lhal DiIlhey never arorialed lhe vork of lhe German hisloricisls
as an aendage lo his hiIosohicaI Iabors. Ior him, hislory vas
Iess a fieId of sludy or disciIinary aradigm lhan a vay of
undersland-
____________________
33
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 154-157, GS 1: 105-107.
34
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 158, GS 1: 108.
35
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 173, GS 1: 123-124.
36
Ciled by Georg Misch in his reface lo DiIlhey, GS 5: Ixxiv.
-139-
ing and reveaIing human ercelions of lhe vorId. He had sludied
al lhe Universily of erIin and had allended lhe Ieclures of Ranke,
}akob Grimm, Augusl oeckh, Theodor Mommsen, and Iranz o.
37
And from his earIy days as a sludenl of lheoIogy, vhiIe he vas
vorking on lhe anaIysis of SchIeiermacher's elhics, he had aIvays
vaIued lhe "hisloricaI" aroach as highIy as lhe "syslemalic," being
convinced lhal lhere couId be no syslem vilhoul hislory.
38
Il vas in
lhis sense lhal DiIlhey soke of his ovn vork as "hisloricaI research
vilh a hiIosohicaI aim."
39
UnIike Kuno Iischer or Iriedrich
Oberveg, hovever, DiIlhey vas never commilled lo soIving
hiIosohicaI robIems lhrough hisloricaI anaIysis. Hislory vas
aIvays Iinked in DiIlhey's vork lo lhe ro|ecl of crilique. As he
exIained in a seech given lo commemorale his sevenlielh
birlhday, he nol onIy "allemled lo vrile a hislory of Iilerary and
hiIosohicaI movemenls" bul aIso "underlook lo examine lhe
nalure and condilion of hisloricaI consciousness--a crilique of
hisloricaI reason," generaled by his reading of lhe HisloricaI SchooI.
40

According lo DiIlhey, il vas lhe HisloricaI SchooI lhal "had
recognized lhe hisloricily of humans and of aII lhe sociaI order" by
defining lhe individuaI as an "essenliaIIy hisloricaI being," a
discovery lhal he lermed "lhe emancialion of hisloricaI
consciousness."
41
This nev insighl inlo lhe hisloricily of lhe human
condilion had Ied, in DiIlhey's inlerrelalion, lo a radicaI break vilh
lhe eighleenlh-cenlury nolions of naluraI Iav, naluraI reIigion,
abslracl oIilicaI lheory, and abslracl oIilicaI economy. IoIilicaIIy,
il reresenled a lriumh over lhe siril of lhe Irench RevoIulion
and lhe NaoIeonic codes by recIaiming lhe lhousand-year lradilion
of German hislory vhich had been undermined by Irench
hiIosohers and lheir ideas of sociaI syslems.
42
In scienlific lerms,
lhe achievemenls of lhe HisloricaI
____________________
37
Ior a ersonaI skelch of DiIlhey's reminiscences of lhe HisloricaI
SchooI and his earIy days al lhe Universily of erIin, see GS 5: 7-9.
38
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 47, GS 1: xv.
39
This is an oflen-reealed mollo in DiIlhey's vork. Cf. DiIlhey, GS
5: xIiii, 35 and GS 3: 42-44, 222.
40
DiIlhey, GS 5: 9.
41
Ibid., 11. CIara Misch, ed., Ocr jungc Oi|incq ( Gllingen:
Vandenhoeck & Rurechl, 1960), 124, and DiIlhey, GS 1: xv. In his
sludy of Iriedrich Chrisloh SchIosser, DiIlhey aIso vrole, |i is
inc csscncc cj inc nunan |cing inai nc is nisicrica| ( GS 11: 140).
42
DiIlhey inlerrelalion of "hisloricism" is, in many vays, cIose lo
lhal of Iriedrich Meinecke in his book Oic |nsicnung !cs
Hisicrisnus ( Munich: OIdenbourg, 1965). DiIlhey, as Meinecke
did Ialer, soke of "lhe emancialion of hisloricaI consciousness"
as a osilive lurn in Weslern lhoughl ( GS 1: xv-xvi). In many
olher vays, Meinecke foIIovs DiIlhey, eseciaIIy in his viev of
Leibniz as one of lhe greal originalors of
-140-
SchooI Iiberaled German science from lhe melahysicaI syslems of
universaI reason. Ils vork reresenled, in DiIlhey's vords, "a ureIy
emiricaI mode of observalion . . . aiming lo delermine lhe vaIue of
a arlicuIar slale of affairs soIeIy from lhe conlexl of ils
deveIomenl."
43
The significance of lhis nev hisloricaI aroach
vas lhal il offered lhe hisloricohiIoIogicaI sciences a
melhodoIogicaI ideaI differenl from lhe sciences of nalure by
affirming lhe aulonomy of lheir sub|ecl areas and slyIes of
resenlalion. Yel desile ils overfuI sense for lhe concrele delaiIs
of hisloricaI Iife, DiIlhey found lhe aroach of lhe HisloricaI SchooI
hiIosohicaIIy nave. As he exIained in his reface lo lhe
|nirc!uciicn: "Iven loday lhe HisloricaI SchooI has nol yel succeeded
in breaking lhrough lhe inner Iimils vhich have necessariIy
inhibiled ils lheorelicaI deveIomenl and ils infIuence on Iife. Ils
sludy and evaIualion of hisloricaI henomena remain unconnecled
vilh lhe anaIysis of lhe facls of consciousness, consequenlIy, il has
no grounding in lhe onIy knovIedge vhich is uIlimaleIy secure, il
has, in shorl, no hiIosohicaI foundalion. Lacking a heaIlhy
reIalionshi lo eislemoIogy and sychoIogy, lhis schooI has nol
allained an exIanalory melhod."
44
Hence, aIlhough DiIlhey sliII
resecled lhe HisloricaI SchooI for heIing lo break dovn
melahysicaI nolions of Wisscnscnaji, uIlimaleIy he beIieved lhal lhe
"hisloricaI lurn" of nineleenlhcenlury German schoIarshi Iacked a
genuineIy scienlific foundalion.
As an examIe of a hiIosohicaIIy nave allilude lovard hisloricaI
consciousness, DiIlhey ciled lhe greal masler of hisloricism, LeooId
von Ranke.
45
The Rankean ideaI of "seIf-exlinguishmenl"
(Sc||siaus|cscnung) reresenled for DiIlhey an "imossibIe"
conlradiclion.
46
The conlemIalive bearing of a Rankean researcher
foslered a kind of aeslhelic ocuIarism--a vision of lhe asl vhich
defined hislory as a seclacIe or an assembIage of museum ieces.
Yel by ressing lo an exlreme lhe delached ideaI of ob|eclive
conlemIalion, DiIlhey beIieved
____________________
German hisloricaI consciousness. Ior DiIlhey's viev, see GS 11: xv
("Leibniz is lhe firsl lhinker in vhose vork one can nolice lhe
deveIomenl of hisloricaI consciousness").
43
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 48, GS 1: xvi.
44
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 48, GS 1: xvi.
45
Ior a more delaiIed anaIysis of Ranke's melhodoIogy, see Herberl
SchndeIbach, Oic Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic nacn Hcgc| ( Ireiburg:
AIber, 1974). Ior DiIlhey's raise of Ranke, see GS 7: 101-103. In
GS 1: 94, DiIlhey crilicizes lhe Rankean ideaI of Sc||siaus|cscnung
(seIf-exlinguishmenl) and offers a sychoIogicaI inlerrelalion
inslead. The vhoIe robIem of DiIlhey's reIalionshi lo lhe
HisloricaI SchooI and ils adherenls' ideaI of inlerrelalion is
rovided by IIisabelh Iaczkovska-Lagovska in "The Humanilies
in Search of IhiIosohy: WiIheIm DiIlhey and lhe HisloricaI
SchooI," |cpcris cn Pni|cscpnq 6 ( 1982): 1-16.
46
DiIlhey, GS 5: 281.
-141-
lhal lhe Rankean aroach undermined lhe vilaI force of human
hisloricily. In lhe |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, DiIlhey soughl
lo overcome lhe Iimils of Ranke's melhod by offering a
"hiIosohicaI foundalion for lhe rinciIe of lhe HisloricaI SchooI"
vhich vouId Iink ils nolion of hisloricily lo an eislemoIogicaI
crilique of consciousness.
47
As he exIained in lhe reface: "AII
science and schoIarshi is emiricaI, bul aII exerience is originaIIy
connecled, and given vaIidily, by our ccnscicusncss (vilhin vhich il
occurs) indeed, by our vhoIe nalure. We caII lhis oinl of viev--
vhich consislenlIy recognizes lhe imossibiIily of going behind
consciousness (lo see, as il vere, vilhoul eyes or lo direcl a
cognilive gaze behind lhe eye ilseIf) --lhe cpisicnc|cgica| oinl of
viev. Modern science can acknovIedge no olher."
48

If ve are lo make sense of lhe infIuence of osilivism and lhe
HisloricaI SchooI on DiIlhey's lhinking, ve viII need lo lake him
seriousIy vhen he mainlains lhal he "found a firm anchor for |hisj
lhoughl onIy in inner exerience, in lhe facls of consciousness." y
focusing on exerience as lhe rimary dalum of knovIedge, DiIlhey
hoed lo overcome lhe crisis vilhin German hiIosohy vhich Ied
lo "lhe groving searalion belveen Iife and scienlific knovIedge."
49

Through a hisloricaI crilique of Kanl's ovn modeI of exerience,
ordered and fiIlered lhrough lhe rism of consciousness, DiIlhey
soughl lo bring a nev kind of hiIosohicaI cerlilude lo lhe nave
emiricism of MiII and Ranke. ul lo do so, he firsl had lo vork
lhrough lhe imIicalions of Kanl's crilicaI lhinking for his crilique of
hislory.
iv. Thc Kantian Fragcstc!!ung and Di!thcy's "Critiquc nI Histnrica!
Rcasnn"
DiIlhey's crilique has obvious conneclions lo Kanl's crilicaI ro|ecl,
and yel, as vilh his reIalions lo lhe osilivisls and lhe HisloricaI
SchooI, ve shouId nol assume lhal lhemalic affinily lransIales inlo
hiIosohicaI agreemenl. In many vays il is DiIlhey's divergence
from Kanl vhich roves decisive in underslanding his vork. This is
nol lo suggesl lhal in some fundamenlaI sense DiIlhey and Kanl are
____________________
47
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic Hunan Scicnccs, 49, GS 1: xvii.
48
WiIheIm DiIlhey, Sc|ccic! Wriiings, ed. H. I. Rickman (
Cambridge: Cambridge Universily Iress, 1976), (hereafler ciled as
SW), 161, GS 1: xvii.
49
DiIlhey, SW, 161, GS 1: xvii.
-142-
al odds eislemoIogicaIIy, for desile lheir differences, DiIlhey
remains lied lo lhe Carlesian-Kanlian "earIy modern hiIosohy of
consciousness."
50
ul DiIlhey sub|ecls Kanl lo a nev kind of
crilicism differenl from lhal of Neo-Kanlians such as Cohen, Nalor,
Lange, WindeIband, or Rickerl--a crilicism lhal is nol formaI,
ariorislic, hysioIogicaI, axioIogicaI, or naluraI-scienlific. DiIlhey's
accomIishmenl, ralher, is lo lake seriousIy lhe achievemenls of lhe
HisloricaI SchooI and lo use lhem as a slarling oinl lo crilicize
Kanlian ideas. Thal is, DiIlhey allemls a hisloricaI, anlhrooIogicaI,
sychoIogicaI, and hermeneulic crilique of lhe Kanlian lradilion. He
hisloricizes
____________________
50
Ior a simiIar anaIysis, see Lessing, Oic |!cc cincr Kriiik !cr
nisicriscncn Vcrnunji, 138139, an! Hans |ncicncn, Oi|incqs Kani
Kriiik, Oi|incq-janr|ucn 2 ( 1984). 59-64. Bq inc pnrasc car|q nc!crn
pni|cscpnq cj ccnscicusncss, | ncan ic irans|aic inc Gcrnan ccnccpi
ncuzcii|icnc Bcuuiscinspni|cscpnic, unicn is currcni|q usc! in Gcrnan
pni|cscpnq ic !csignaic a ccriain cpisicnc|cgica| ira!iiicn jrcn
Ocscarics inrcugn Ici|niz ic Kani. Hci!cggcr, Ga!ancr, an! cincrs
!cjinc inis ira!iiicn |q iis icn!cncq ic grcun! iruin nci in !itinc
rctc|aiicn |ui in inc pcrccpiicns, rcj|cciicns, cpinicns, an! raiiccinaiitc
aciitiiics cj inc nunan |cing. Tnc sc|j--cr inc ccnscicusncss kncun |q
inc sc|j as sc|j--|cccncs inc grcun! cj scicniijic ccriiiu!c. Tnis intc|tcs a
ncu rc|aiicnsnip |ciuccn sc|j an! ucr|!, cnc |asc! cn inc un!crsian!ing
cj ucr|! as an c|jcci incrc jcr a su|jcci. Tnis su|jcci-c|jcci !icncicnq
p|accs inc nunan |cing ai inc ccnicr cj a|| |cing (|cin cpisicnc|cgica||q
an! cnic|cgica||q). Sinp|q pui, !ic Bcuuiscinspni|cscpnic !cr Ncuzcii
jin!s inc grcun! cj iruin uiinin nunan ccnscicusncss, !cjinc! as inc
Caricsian ccgiic. As Oi|incq pui ii in nis Brcs|au Oraji. Wnaictcr is
incrc jcr us--|ccausc an! inscjar as ii is incrc jcr us--is su|jcci ic inc
ccn!iiicn cj |cing gitcn in ccnscicusncss, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan
Scicnccs, 246-247, an! GS 19. 60. Oi|incq is nci a|cnc in sccing
Bcuuiscin, cr ccnscicusncss, as inc kcq ic cpisicnc|cgq cr ic
pni|cscpnq as a unc|c. |cr inc Ncuzcii (car|q nc!crn pcric!) inc ccgiic
|cccncs, as ii ucrc, an Arcninc!can pcini cn unicn ic jcun! a||
ccriainiq an! kncu|c!gc. Scc jurgcn Miiic|sirass, Ncuzcii un!
Aujk|arung ( Bcr|in. !c Gruqicr, 1970), 156166. As a rcsu|i cj inis
ccnira| jccus cn inc ccgiic an! iis rigcrcus !cnan! jcr criiica| an! sc|j-
criiica| kncu|c!gc rccic! in scicniijic ncinc! (a ncinc! inai !cnan!s
unitcrsa| kncu|c!gc raincr inan inc ncrc|q su|jcciitc kncu|c!gc cj inc
in!iti!ua|), incrc ariscs a ncu rc|aiicnsnip |ciuccn nunan |cings an!
inc ucr|!. Min!, cr Gcisi, is !cjinc! as rcs ccgiians, uni|c Naiurc,
cr Naiur, is !cjinc! as rcs cxicnsa (cj. Hci!cggcrs ccnncnis in
Nicizscnc, tc|. 4, irans. |rank Capuzzi j Ncu Ycrk. Harpcr an! |cu,
1982}, 116, inc !isiinciicn is a|sc !iscussc! in Bcing an! Tinc). Tnis
cpisicnc|cgica| !isiinciicn |ciuccn Gcisi an! Naiur nas, as uc natc
sccn, a prcjcun! inj|ucncc cn inc ncinc!c|cgica| an! praciica|
!ctc|cpncnis uiinin inc scicnccs. Ajicr Ga|i|cc, Ocscarics, Ccpcrnicus,
Kcp|cr, an! Baccn, Naiuruisscnscnaji ccncs ic rcp|acc inc nc!icta| an!
|cnaissancc nunaniiics as inc sian!ar! cj iruin. Truin is nc |cngcr
rccic! in auincriiq (inc cnurcn), in !ccirinc, in Arisici|c, cr in inc pasi
(nisicrq) |ui is ncu grcun!c! in inc ccgiic. |cr inc c|assijicaiicn cj
pni|cscpnq inic Aniikc, Miiic|a|icr, an! Ncuzcii, scc Miiic|sirassc,
Ncuzcii un! Aujk|arung, 166, |ric!ricn U|crucg, Grun!ri !cr
Gcscnicnic !cr Pni|cscpnic !cr Ncuzcii ( Bcr|in. Miii|cr, 1897), Augusi
Mcsscr, Oic Gcscnicnic !cr Pni|cscpnic tcn Bcginn !cr Ncuzcii (
Icipzig. Quc||c c Mcqcr, 1918), jcnann |iscn| , Oic Gcscnicnic !cr
Pni|cscpnic ( Graz. Pusici, 1950), Hans-Gccrg Ga!ancr, c!.,
Pni|cscpniscncs Icsc|ucn ( |rankjuri. |iscncr, 1967), |u!igcr Bu|ncr,
c!., Gcscnicnic !cr Pni|cscpnic ( Siuiigari. |cc|an, 1984), an! nanq
cincrs. |cr a criiica| !iscussicn, scc Wi|nc|n Kan|an, Zciia|icr
u|crnaupi, Ncuzcii, un! |runzcii, Saccu|un 8 ( 1957). 313-332.
-143-
"reason" yel remains lied lo lhe Kanlian idea of an eislemoIogicaI
sub|ecl. To cIarify lhe imIicalions of lhis osilion more fuIIy, I viII
begin by oulIining a fev imorlanl lhemes in DiIlhey's corus.
In his inauguraI address al lhe Universily of aseI in 1867, DiIlhey
began by decIaring lhal "lhe fundamenlaI robIem of hiIosohy
seems lo me lo have been delermined for aII lime by Kanl. Il is lhe
highesl and mosl universaI lask of aII human researches, nameIy: in
vhal form is lhe vorId (vhich is lhere onIy in our ercelions and
reresenlalions) given lo us`"
51
In anolher sel of Ieclures, Icgic an!
inc Sqsicn cj inc Pni|cscpnica| Scicnccs, DiIlhey cIaimed lhal "lhe
fundamenlaI robIem of hiIosohy" vas formuIaled by Kanl:
"Through vhich means and vilhin vhal bounds is knovIedge of
lhe henomenaI vorId (given in inner and ouler ercelion)
ossibIe`"
52
Ior DiIlhey, lhis queslion remained basic lo his overaII
ro|ecl. In 1890 he ubIished an essay enlilIed Ccniri|uiicns ic inc
Sc|uiicn cj inc Qucsiicn ccnccrning inc Origin cj Our Bc|icj in inc |ca|iiq
cj inc |xicrna| Wcr|! an! |is jusiijicaiicn.
53
Iour years Ialer he lurned
his allenlion lo a ro|ecl he caIIed |!cas ccnccrning a Ocscripiitc an!
Ana|qiic Psqcnc|cgq.
54
In 1896 he aIso ubIished On Ccnparaiitc
Psqcnc|cgq, and in lhe Nacn|ass he Iefl behind lhe chalers
"Iercelion of lhe IxlernaI WorId," "Inner Iercelion," and "The
IsychoIogicaI Conlexl of Iercelions."
55
Throughoul his career
DiIlhey conlinued lo relhink lhe queslion of henomenaI
knovIedge in lerms of lhe acluaI research done by his academic
coIIeagues in hiIosohy, sychoIogy, and lhe olher sciences,
aIlering ils characler and subslance, yel relaining lhe Kanlian focus.
Hence, desile DiIlhey's unequivocaI disagreemenls vilh Rickerl,
WindeIband, Cohen, and olher Neo-Kanlians (on queslions of
lerminoIogy, melhod, sub|ecl maller, and so on), he nonelheIess
shared vilh lhem lhe basic |ragcsic||ung of Kanlian eislemoIogy.
Like Rickerl, DiIlhey aIvays mainlained lhal lhe ground of
knovIedge Iay in human consciousness. He mighl argue lhe
queslion of hov one defined human consciousness and under vhal
condilions one chose lo sludy il, yel in sile of lhese differences
(and lhere vere many), DiIlhey remained squareIy commilled lo lhe
Carlesian-Kanlian aroach. As exIained in one of his Ieclures
from
____________________
51
DiIlhey, GS 5: 12.
52
WiIheIm DiIlhey, Grun!ri !cr Icgik un! !cs Sqsicns !cr
pni|cscpniscncn Wisscnscnajicn ( erIin: MillIer, 1865), 3.
53
DiIlhey, GS 5: 90-138.
54
Ibid., 139-240.
55
Ibid., 241-316 , and DiIlhey, GS 19: 75, 174, 195.
-144-
Tnc Sqsicn cj Pni|cscpnq: "Kanl's oinl of dearlure, Iike lhal of aII
earIy modern hiIosohy since Descarles, Iies in lhe rinciIe lhal
every form of knovIedge and ercelion is given lo us in
ccnscicusncss. Consciousness is lhe oinl vhere ercelion and
knovIedge begin. . . . Whalever exisls beyond consciousness cannol
be exressed."
56

DiIlhey beIieved lhal Kanl had succeeded in dismanlIing lhe
secuIalive excesses of melahysics--"lhese shimmering caslIes in
lhe air of lhe scienlific imaginalion"--by syslemalicaIIy
demonslraling lhal aII human knovIedge begins vilhin
consciousness and hence vilhin our exerience.
57
In DiIlhey's viev,
Kanl had rehabiIilaled melahysics by Iimiling ils shere of concern
and focusing on lhe ossibiIily and ground of scienlific knovIedge
againsl lhe vaorous ruminalions of lhe schooI-hiIosohers. And
yel even if DiIlhey couId mainlain lhal Kanl's "queslion concerning
lhe condilions of rigorous knovIedge as lhe queslion concerning lhe
condilion for science" had succeeded in lransforming hiIosohy
inlo a rigorous science of exerience, he sliII beIieved lhal lhe
Kanlian rogram vas nol crilicaI enough.
58

Kanl had Iived in an age dominaled by a aradigm of science vhich
vas defined IargeIy in lerms of malhemalics and hysics. As such,
he delermined lhal scienlific knovIedge, if il vere lo be vorlhy of
ils name, musl be necessary and universaI. ul DiIlhey beIieved lhal
in an age marked by lhe hisloricohiIoIogicaI Iabors of lhe German
academy, lhis viev of science had lo be crilicaIIy amended. He
began by chaIIenging lhe surious Kanlian dislinclion belveen
"ure" and "emiricaI" knovIedge, allemling lo rehrase Kanl's
queslion concerning lhe condilions of human knovIedge by
redefining lhe meaning of consciousness ilseIf.
59
In DiIlhey's
inlerrelalion, consciousness is never "ure" or absoIule bul exisls
onIy vilhin lhe conlexl of human Iife, vhich is lemoraIIy and
cuIluraIIy delermined. Thus consciousness is aIvays a secific
consciousness, nq consciousness, arl of lhe lolaIily of my ovn
biograhy vilhin a secific hisloricaI miIieu. "Il is Kanl's error,"
DiIlhey cIaimed, "lhal he did nol os-
____________________
56
This quolalion is laken from lhe Nacn|ass and is rerinled in
Dielrich ischoff, "Oi|incqs Kani-Oarsic||ung in scincr |cizicn
Vcr|csung u|cr !as Sqsicn !cr Pni|cscpnic," in Wi|nc|n Oi|incqs
gcscnicni|icnc Ic|cnspni|cscpnic ( Leizig: Teubner, 1935), 46-63, es.
54-55.
57
DiIlhey, SW: 192, GS 1: 359.
58
DiIlhey, GS 13: 98.
59
ImmanueI Kanl, Tnc Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn, lrans. Norman Kem
Smilh ( London: MacmiIIan, 1929), 41-43.
-145-
sess lhis hisloricaI breadlh of observalion."
60
In lhe Criiiquc cj Purc
|cascn Kanl allemled lo resoIve lhe robIems of eislemoIogy by
reference lo a riori condilions lhal he beIieved oened u lhe
ossibiIily for knovIedge of lhe exlernaI vorId. ul DiIlhey
counlered lhe Kanlian viev by slressing lhal hisloricaI exerience is
lhe onIy genuine a riori condilion of Iife as il is Iived in lhe vorId.
As DiIlhey vrole in lhe Nacn|ass:
Kanl's a riori is rigid and dead, lhe reaI condilions of consciousness
and lheir resuosilions are, as I conceive lhem, arl of a Iiving,
hisloricaI rocess, a deveIomenl, lhey have a hislory, and lhe
rocess of lhis hislory is lheir conformily lo an ever more exacl,
inducliveIy knovn manifoId of sensory conlenls. The Iife of hislory
encomasses as veII lhe aarenlIy rigid and dead condilions
under vhich ve lhink. These hisloricaI condilions of consciousness
can never be deslroyed, because il is lhrough lhem lhal ve are abIe
lo lhink. They are lhemseIves, ralher, being deveIoed.
61

The acluaI condilions of human Iife are, DiIlhey emhasized, lhe
necessary slarling oinl for any inquiry inlo lhe vorId of nalure or
hislory. Neilher a doclrine of "ure" reason nor one of absoIule a
riori knovIedge can serve lhe needs of a deveIoing science of
Iifein-lhe-vorId. ecause Iife is aIvays changing, Wisscnscnaji
(vhich is arl of Iife) can never be removed from lhe rocess of
change vhich is ils very ground. If reason vere abIe lo rovide a
lheory of knovIedge for human hislory, il vouId firsl have lo
abandon ils limeIess, changeIess, fixed, and hyoslalized oinl of
dearlure. DiIlhey insisled lhal lhis recondilion musl exisl for any
nev crilique of reason vhich vished lo slress lhe emiricaI, ralher
lhan lhe ure, characler of human knovIedge. Kanl's underslanding
of human reason roved unvorkabIe for DiIlhey because il
measured human consciousness againsl lhe IifeIess archelyes of
Iogic and malhemalics, surning lhe acluaI exerience of hisloricaI
being. Moreover, Kanl's labIe of lveIve calegories served onIy lo
conslrain lhe vilaI imuIses of human desire againsl a fixed scheme
of cognilion. In a veII-knovn assage from lhe |nirc!uciicn ic inc
Hunan Scicnccs, DiIlhey exIained:
No reaI bIood fIovs in lhe veins of lhe knoving sub|ecl conslrucled
by Locke, Hume, and Kanl, il is onIy lhe diIuled |uice of reason, a
mere ro-
____________________
60
ischoff, Oi|incqs gcscnicni|icnc Ic|cnspni|cscpnic, 55.
61
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 500-501, GS 19: 44
(lransIalion mine).
-146-
cess of lhoughl. Cognilion seems lo deveIo concels such as lhe
exlernaI vorId, lime, subslance, and cause from ercelion,
imaginalion, and lhoughl. Hovever, my hisloricaI and
sychoIogicaI sludies of man as a vhoIe Ied me lo exIain cognilion
and ils concels in lerms of lhe overs of man as a viIIing, feeIing,
and imagining being. So I have used lhe foIIoving melhod: I have
reIaled every consliluenl of resenl-day, abslracl scienlific lhoughl
lo lhe vhoIe of human nalure (as exerience and lhe sludy of
Ianguage and hislory reveaI il) and soughl lo connecl lhem. As a
resuIl, lhe mosl imorlanl consliluenls of my iclure and
knovIedge of reaIily -- ersonaI individuaIily, exlernaI vorId, olher
ersons, lheir lemoraI Iife, and inleraclion -- can be exIained in
lerms of lhe vhoIe of human nalure in vhich viIIing, feeIing, and
lhinking are onIy differenl asecls of lhe reaI rocess of Iife. The
queslions vhich ve ask of hiIosohy cannol be ansvered by rigid
a pricri condilions of knovIedge bul onIy by a hislory vhich slarls
from lhe lolaIily of our nalure and skelches ils deveIomenl.
62

DiIlhey's allilude vas delermined in Iarge arl by his re|eclion of
lhe rigid and schoIaslic eIemenls in Kanl's lhinking. He chaIIenged,
for examIe, lhe abslraclness and formaIily of Kanl's lheory of lime,
cIaiming lhal any alleml al reducing lime lo an ideaI form for
inluiling henomena misses ils reaIily as immediale exerience.
63

Since Kanl's anaIysis had been derived from a malhemalico-hysicaI
modeI of lime as conslanl observalion and enduring resence,
DiIlhey argued, il couId nol adequaleIy gras lhe lemoraIily and
hisloricily of Iived exerience. NonelheIess, DiIlhey soughl lo
recIaim vhal vas meaningfuI vilhin Kanl's lhoughl by raising lhe
queslion of vhelher "an eislemoIogy of hislory, vhich he himseIf
did nol rovide, is ossibIe vilhin lhe framevork of his concels."
64

Thus, vhiIe seeking on lhe one hand lo revilaIize Kanl's demand for
scienlific rigor, DiIlhey aIso underslood lhe ressing need for
dismanlIing lhe Kanlian |ragcsic||ung and relurning lo lhe vilaIily of
hisloricaI exerience. y hisloricizing reason and recIaiming "lhe
fuII, lolaI, and unmaimed exerience of Iife . . . againsl lhe
conlemorary dominance of lhe Kanl cuIl," DiIlhey hoed he couId
heaI lhe rifl belveen Iife (Ic|cn) ilseIf and lhe IifeIess grounding of
lhe sciences (Wisscnscnajicn).
65
The success of his ro|ecl vas
undermined, hovever, by conlradiclions in his
____________________
62
DiIlhey, SW, 162, GS 1: xviii.
63
DiIlhey, SW, 209-211, GS 7: 192-193.
64
DiIlhey, SW, 208, GS 7: 192.
65
DiIlhey, GS 8: 171.
-147-
arorialion of Kanl, vhich ersisled lhroughoul his vork and
heIed lo shae his allilude lovard lhe Neo-Kanlians and lheir
lheory of hisloricaI knovIedge.
v. Di!thcy and thc Phi!nsnphy nI Crisis
DiIlhey's osilion belveen Kanl and lhe HisloricaI SchooI
deveIoed oul of his ovn imaginalive reading of Iuroean
inleIIecluaI hislory, a reading sensilive lo lhe lensions vilhin Iale-
nineleenlh-cenlury German cuIlure. As earIy as 1873, DiIlhey vrole:
"The greal crisis of lhe sciences and Iuroean cuIlure, vhich ve are
nov Iiving lhrough has so deeIy and lolaIIy laken ossession of
my siril lhal lhe desire lo be of some heI in il has exlinguished
every exlraneous and ersonaI ambilion."
66
In his shorl essay "The
Dream," DiIlhey reealed lhe same lheme, oinling lo "lhe frighlfuI
anarchy of lhoughl" lhal affIicled modern cuIlure, and even
confessed lhal "a slrange anxiely overcame me caused by seeing
hiIosohy seemingIy divided and lorn in lhree or more direclions -
- lhe unily of my ovn being aeared lo be renl aarl."
67
Again
from lhe Nacn|ass, in a assage lilIed "Conlemorary CuIlure and
IhiIosohy," DiIlhey idenlified "lhe dee conlradiclion running
lhrough lhe resenl age" vhich mocked lhe raid rogress of lhe
sciences.
68
In aImosl aII DiIlhey's vork, one finds lhese lhemes of
crisis, anarchy, conlradiclion, and anxiely defining lhe alh of
inquiry and lhe mode of inlerrogalion.
69
His exlraordinary
sensilivily lo lhese currenls heIed him lo recasl lhe robIems of
conlemorary academic hiIosohy by abandoning ils slriclIy
melhodoIogicaI focus for vhal he beIieved vas lhe onIy genuine
concern of modern lhoughl: lhe underslanding and inlerrelalion of
hisloricaI exislence.
Conlemorary academics, eseciaIIy lhose vho foIIoved lhe
NeoKanlian schooI of Rickerl and WindeIband, had resumed lo
define hiIosohy's essenliaI lask as lhe cIassificalion and
Iegilimalion of knovIedge in lhe Natur - and Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn.
As arl of lheir rogram, WindeIband and Rickerl searaled nalure
from hislory and
____________________
66
Misch, Ocr jungc Oi|incq, tii, an! |rnarin, Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, 15.
67
DiIlhey, GS 8: 223-224.
68
Ibid., 197.
69
Ior simiIar ronouncemenls, see DiIlhey, GS 5: xIii, GS 19: 48, GS
10: 24, GS 6: 246. See aIso Bricjuccnsc|, 156 an! 228.
-148-
cuIlure on lhe basis of a lranscendenlaI lheory of knovIedge rooled
in a "sura-emiricaI sub|ecl."
70
DiIlhey re|ecled lhis aroach,
hovever, arguing lhal "lhe lranscendenlaI melhod means lhe dealh
of hislory for il recIudes any enelralion of given reaIilies by
fruilfuI hisloricaI concels."
71
Againsl lhe Neo-Kanlians, DiIlhey
cIaimed lhal il is nol lhe lranscendenlaI, lranshisloricaI, and
lranscuIluraI "seIf" lhal exeriences hisloricaI Iife bul lhe vilaI,
Iiving, uIsaling human being condilioned in ils hisloricaI Iace and
lime. DiIlhey resonded lo Rickerl's aroach by emhasizing lhal
"ve musl move oul of lhe ure, fine air of lhe Kanlian crilique of
reason in order lo do |uslice lo lhe vhoIIy differenl nalure of
hisloricaI ob|ecls."
72
Any science of hislory, cuIlure, or Gcisi musl
ground ils lheory in lhe acluaI exerience of hisloricaI Iife. The
Kanlian lheory of lhe sciences had searaled Wissenschafl and
Ic|cn. In facl, Rickerl had rocIaimed aII Ic|cnspni|cscpnic as lhe
dealh of lrue Wisscnscnaji. ul DiIlhey vished lo reverse lhe
anlihisloricaI, anliIife allilude vilhin Neo-Kanlianism by focusing
on lhe bundIe of inslincls and lhe Iabyrinlh of sychoIogicaI and
sociaI reIalions lhal conslilule human being. y slressing lhe
rimacy of |r|c|nis, or Iived exerience, he hoed, on lhe one hand,
lo secure lhe connecledness of science lo Iife and, on lhe olher, lo
eslabIish lhe unique eislemoIogicaI vaIidily of lhe
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn and lheir melhods. "If lhe mind sels ilseIf over
ils ovn crealions as somelhing mereIy ob|ecliveIy emiricaI and
anaIyzes lhem according lo lhe exlernaI melhod of naluraI science,"
DiIlhey argued, "lhen lhere occurs a seIf-aIienalion of mind in
regard lo ils ovn crealions."
73
Whereas lhe osilivisls had lried lo
aIy lhe melhods of naluraI science lo lhe sludy of human hislory
and cuIlure, DiIlhey reminded his conlemoraries lhal hislory,
unIike nalure, is "nol mereIy an aearance given in exlernaI
sensalion as a mere henomenaI refIex" bul ralher "an inner reaIily
direclIy exerienced from vilhin."
74
As inner exerience, hislory
requires an aroach and a melhod based nol on lhe causaI
conlinuily of naluraI rocesses bul on a slrucluraI, inner unily
ecuIiar lo Gcisi ilseIf: lhe melhod of Vcrsicncn.
We can undersland hislory, cuIlure, and sociely because, as human
____________________
70
DiIlhey, GS 7: 285.
71
Ibid.
72
Ibid., 278.
73
DiIlhey, GS 6: 126.
74
DiIlhey, SW, 247, GS 5: 317-318 (lransIalion mine).
-149-
beings, ve, loo, are bound u in lradilions, cusloms, raclices, and
inslilulions lhal have been hisloricaIIy condilioned. This kind of
knovIedge differs from lhe knovIedge of lhe naluraI vorId, for il is
grounded in lhe Iived exerience of hisloricaI humanily -- a
fundamenlaI facl of human consciousness vhich aIIovs us lo
"undersland" hislory ralher lhan mereIy "exIain" il. IxIanalion, or
|rk|arcn, as lhe eislemoIogicaI aroach of emiricism, is based on
exlernaI observalion, converseIy, underslanding, or Vcrsicncn -- lhe
aroach of hermeneulics -- is based on Iived exerience. We, as
humans, undersland hislory, DiIlhey argued, because ve are arl of
il: "The firsl condilion for lhe ossibiIily of hisloricaI science Iies in
lhe facl lhal I myseIf am a hisloricaI being, lhal he vho inquires inlo
hislory is lhe same as he vho makes il."
75

HisloricaI knovIedge is radicaIIy differenl from lhe knovIedge of
nalure, lhen, nol onIy in a melhodoIogicaI or even eislemoIogicaI
sense. Ior aIlhough DiIlhey acknovIedged lhe vaIidily of a Kanlian
aroach for a lheory of lhe sciences, his reaI aim vas a hermeneulic
underslanding of Iife ilseIf. The rools of lhis mode of queslioning go
back lo Vico and his famous diclum "tcrun ci jaciun ccntcriuniur." If
for Vico onIy vhal lhe human being crealed (lhe jaciun) vas lrue
(tcrun), for DiIlhey, "onIy lhal vhich lhe mind has made can il fuIIy
undersland."
76
ul DiIlhey's lheory of lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn,
deendenl as il is on lhe vork of bolh Vico and Kanl, cannol be
exIained soIeIy againsl lhis background. DiIlhey did nol vanl lo
undersland lhe crilique of hisloricaI reason as mereIy an
eislemoIogicaI inquiry inlo lhe grounds of hisloricaI science. Ior
DiIlhey, hisloricaI reason aIso invoIved an anlhrooIogicaI sludy of
human Iife as il is Iived in lhe vorId. In concrele lerms DiIlhey
concenlraled his hiIosohicaI allenlion on lhe Iiving human
sub|ecl, vhich is ilseIf hislori-
____________________
75
DiIlhey, GS 7: 278.
76
Tnc Ncu Scicncc cj Gian|aiiisia Vicc. Una|ri!gc! Trans|aiicn cj inc
Tnir! |!iiicn (1744) vilh lhe addilion of Praciic cj inc Ncu
Scicncc, lrans. Thomas Goddard ergin and Max HaroId Iisch (
Ilhaca, N.Y.: CorneII Universily Iress, 1984), 96, and DiIlhey, GS 7:
148. DiIlhey heId Vico in high regard. In facl, in his
SchIeiermacher biograhy he referred lo Tnc Ncu Scicncc as "one
of lhe grealesl lriumhs of modem lhoughl" ( GS 24, l. 2, 698).
Ior arlicIes deaIing secificaIIy vilh Vico and DiIlhey, see
Hovard TullIe, "The IislemoIogicaI Slalus of lhe CuIluraI WorId
in Vico and DiIlhey," in Giorgio TagIiacozzo and D. I. Verene,
eds., Gian|aiiisia Viccs Scicncc cj Hunaniiq ( aIlimore: }ohns
Hokins Universily Iress, 1976), 241-250, and H. A. Hodges, "Vico
and DiIlhey," and H. I. Rickman , "Vico and DiIlhey's
MelhodoIogy of lhe Human Sludies," bolh in Giorgio TagIiacozzo
, ed., Gian|aiiisia Vicc. An |nicrnaiicna| Sqnpcsiun ( aIlimore:
}ohns Hokins Universily Iress, 1969), 439-456.
-150-
caI and vhose being is delermined by an avareness of ils ovn
hisloricily, ralher lhan on lhe rosaic narralive of hisloricaI evenls.
y focusing on lhe onloIogicaI consequences of hisloricily, DiIlhey
offered a nev aroach lo lhe crisis of lhe sciences in lhe Iale
nineleenlh cenlury. His hermeneulicaI manner of queslioning
heIed lransform lhe robIem of hisloricism from a laxonomicaI
disule aboul melhod and Iogic lo a hiIosohicaI refIeclion on lhe
meaning of hisloricaI exislence. He beIieved lhal in doing so he
couId resenl conlemorary hiIosohy vilh a vay oul of lhe
eislemoIogicaI cuI-de-sac of Neo-Kanlianism vhich marked lhe
crisis menlaIily of German lhoughl. In his essay "The IrobIem of
Hislory in Recenl German IhiIosohy" ( 1943), Hans-Georg
Gadamer offered an insighlfuI assessmenl of lhis asecl in DiIlhey's
vork, seeing il as lhe firsl indicalion of a henomenoIogicaI crilique
of nineleenlh-cenlury science: "DiIlhey aears lo share vilh lhe
Neo-Kanlians lhe eislemoIogicaI oinl of viev . . . lhal mereIy
inquires inlo lhe ossibiIily of hisloricaI science and negIecls lhe
queslion of 'being' in hislory. In lrulh, hovever, he does nol Iimil
himseIf lo refIecl onIy on hisloricaI knovIedge as il is resenl in lhe
science of hislory, ralher, he refIecls on lhe being of lhe human
being vhich is condilioned by a knovIedge of ils ovn hislory."
77

DiIlhey's radicaI indiclmenl of lhe Neo-Kanlian ro|ecl vas
animaled by a fundamenlaI avareness of melahysicaI residues in
ils aroach lo hislory. Ior examIe, Rickerl's alleml lo soIve lhe
crisis of reIalivism by aeaIing lo a surahisloricaI concel of vaIue
seemed lo DiIlhey lo deny lhe vaIue of hisloricily. y re|ecling lhe
hisloricily of science, Rickerl had aIso denied lhe ossibiIily of any
kind of human underslanding, because DiIlhey argued, science ilseIf
(eseciaIIy lhe human sciences) couId be underslood onIy in a
hisloricaI conlexl. "I am, lo lhe imenelrabIe delhs vilhin myseIf, a
hisloricaI being," DiIlhey vrole, onIy on lhe basis of lhis Iived
hisloricaI being can one hoe lo undersland hislory.
78
olh vilhin
lhe inleIIecluaI hislory of lhe Wesl and vilhin lhe hisloricaI
exerience of Iiving human beings, hislory is essenliaIIy a form of
asl Iife. ConsequenlIy, before ve lurn lo a more exIicil discussion
of DiIlhey's underslanding of hisloricily, ve viII firsl exIore his
nolion of Iife (Leben) and Iived exerience (IrIebnis).
____________________
77
Hans-Georg Gadamer, Oas Prc||cn !cr Gcscnicnic in !cr ncucrcn
!cuiscncn Pni|cscpnic, K|cinc Scnrijicn, tc|. 1 ( Tu|ingcn. Mcnr,
1967), 4.
78
DiIlhey, GS 7: 278.
-151-
vi. Di!thcy's Cnnccpt nI Er!cbnis and Its Rc!atinn tn thc Human
5cicnccs
In an essay vrillen in 1895 on comaralive sychoIogy, DiIlhey
slaled lhal lhe aim of lhe human sciences is lo lake lhe roducls and
exressions of lhe sociohisloricaI vorId given lo us in Iife and "lo
lransose lhem back inlo lhe vilaI, Iiving, siriluaI reaIily from
vhich lhey derive."
79
As il resenls ilseIf lo us vilhin our
exerience, DiIlhey argued, Iife is nol a hahazard coIIeclion of
sensory imressions or curiosilies bul lhe unily of fragmenls vilhin
a sychicaIIy organized vhoIe. Againsl lhe ficlion of a monadic,
aulonomous, and seIfdelermined sub|ecl roagaled by eighleenlh-
cenlury sociaI conlracl lheory, DiIlhey defined lhe seIf by ils
embeddedness in Iife and by ils arlicialion in Ianguage, cuslom,
and lradilion. As DiIlhey vrole in a fragmenl from lhe Nacn|ass:
The human being knovs ilseIf onIy in hislory, never lhrough
inlroseclion, indeed, ve aII seek il in hislory. Or, lo ul il more
generaIIy, ve seek vhal is human in il, such as reIigion, and so on.
We vanl lo knov vhal il is. If lhere vere a science of human beings
il vouId be anlhrooIogy lhal aims al underslanding lhe lolaIily of
exerience lhrough lhe slrucluraI conlexl. The individuaI aIvays
reaIizes onIy one of lhe ossibiIilies in ils deveIomenl, vhich couId
aIvays have laken a differenl lurning vhenever il had lo make an
imorlanl decision. The human being is onIy given lo us al aII in
lerms of ils reaIized ossibiIilies.
80

Ior DiIlhey, seIf-knovIedge does nol derive from an inleriorized
monoIogue or lhrough rigorous inlroseclion bul lhrough an
avareness of lhe "inlervoven lexlure of vorId and seIf," vhere
lhere is no searalion of lhe rocesses of consciousness from lhe
"exlernaI" ob|ecl being erceived.
81
Wilhin lhis Ic|cnszusanncnnang,
or Iife-nexus --accessibIe onIy lhrough lhe immediacy of Iived
exerience--DiIlhey finds lhe slrucluraI unily of hisloricaI
inlerrelalion.
To anaIyze fuIIy lhe significance of |r|c|nis for DiIlhey's lheory, I
viII roceed in lvo direclions. Iirsl, I viII inquire inlo lhe
reIalionshi belveen DiIlhey's lheory of consciousness and his
"hiIosohy
____________________
79
DiIlhey, GS 5: 265.
80
WiIheIm DiIlhey, Paiicrn an! Mcaning in Hisicrq. Tncugnis cn
Hisicrq an! Scciciq, ed. H. I Rickman ( Nev York: Harer and
Rov, 1962), 138 (lransIalion aIlered), DiIlhey, GS 7: 279.
81
DiIlhey, GS 19: 167.
-152-
of Iife." Second, I viII lry lo exIain hov DiIlhey's inlerrelalion of
|r|c|nis (in conlrasl lo lhal of lhe romanlic lradilion) can be used as
lhe slarling oinl for a nev lheory of lhe human sciences.
In lhe "resIau Drafl," DiIlhey allemled lo reIale lhe robIem of lhe
Iife-nexus lo a lheory of human consciousness. He began by
examining vhal he caIIed lhe "firsl rinciIe" of hiIosohy, lhe
"rinciIe of henomenaIily," vhich he lraced lo lhe earIy modern
hiIosohy of consciousness in Descarles and Leibniz.
82
According
lo lhe rinciIe of henomenaIily, aII ob|ecls and ersons lo vhich I
sland in reIalion are "lhere for me" onIy as facls of my
consciousness. As DiIlhey exIained: "I onIy appcar lo Iive among
lhings lhal are indeendenl of my consciousness, in reaIily, my seIf
dislinguishes ilseIf from facls of my ovn consciousness, formalions
vhose Iocus is in me. My consciousness is lhe Iocus vhich
encomasses lhis seemingIy immeasurabIe exlernaI vorId, il is lhe
sluff from vhich lhe ob|ecls vhich ress on one anolher in lhal
vorId are voven. . . . The ob|ecl is simIy lhis reresenlalion, lhis
facl of consciousness vhich, lhrough a rocess vhich needs lo be
invesligaled, I Iace over againsl myseIf."
83
In "Conlribulions lo lhe
SoIulion of lhe Queslion concerning lhe Origin of Our eIief in lhe
ReaIily of lhe IxlernaI WorId," DiIlhey venl even furlher,
suggesling lhal "lhe highesl rinciIe of hiIosohy is lhe 'rinciIe
of henomenaIily' according lo vhich everylhing lhal is 'lhere for
me' slands under lhe generaI condilion of being a facl of my
consciousness. Iven every exlernaI lhing is given lo me onIy as a
conneclion of facls or rocesses of consciousness. An ob|ecl or lhing
is onIy 'lhere' for and in consciousness."
84

IoIIoving lhis earIy modern hiIosohy of consciousness, DiIlhey
re|ecled lhe nave beIief in a vorId of ob|ecls searale from
consciousness vhich iminge on il from vilhoul. Ralher, as DiIlhey
sav il, ob|ecls exisl for us onIy lhrough lhe condilion of lheir being
knovn. Yel, al lhe same lime, lhese "facls of consciousness" are nol
mereIy lhe reresenlalions of a ureIy IogicaI sub|ecl riven from lhe
vorId. Were lhis lhe case, DiIlhey's eislemoIogicaI firsl rinciIe
vouId Iead lo a radicaI henomenaIism, resenling onIy ure
images on lhe screen of sub|eclivily. Inslead, DiIlhey defined lhese
facls of consciousness as |r|c|nissc, or Iife exeriences, lhal cannol
be knovn lhrough ure cognilion bul onIy in lhe medialed conlexl
of a vorId.
____________________
82
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 245, GS 19: 58.
83
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 245-246, GS 19: 58-59.
84
DiIlhey, GS 5: 90.
-153-
Hence, lo overcome lhe soIisislic imIicalions of ure
henomenaIily, DiIlhey added a second hiIosohicaI rinciIe, lhal
of lhe lolaIily of exerience. This second rinciIe (inlimaleIy bound
u vilh lhe firsl) hoIds lhal aII lhe so-caIIed facls of consciousness
can onIy be grased as arl of lhe lolaIily of our Iife-nexus.
85

AccordingIy, as DiIlhey exIained, "The nexus lhal encomasses lhe
facls of consciousness--incIuding ercelions, memories, ob|ecls and
reresenlalions of lhem, and finaIIy concels--is sychoIogicaI, i.e.,
il is conlained in lhe lolaIily of our sychic Iife."
86
AII lhe facls of
our consciousness, from lhe simIesl memory of chiIdhood lo lhe
mosl comIex scienlific lheory of maller, are arls of a unified
laeslry of Iife exerience and may never be abslracled from il and
reduced lo "ure" dala. Any lheory of lhe human vorId vhich seeks
lo ob|eclify lhese Iife exeriences as hisloricaI facls of research or as
lhe henomenaI reresenlalions of an abslracl sub|ecl can never
aroach lhe genuine sense of lhe Iife-nexus as a unily. In ils
lolaIily, Iife is erformalive, inleraclive, and refIexive, an
eislemoIogy lhal denies lhis movemenl and seeks lo isoIale
consciousness in lhe abslracl frame of lhe cogilo onIy aIienales
hiIosohicaI reason from ils ovn Iife source. In an efforl lo gel back
lo lhis fundamenlaI and immediale vilaI ground, DiIlhey seized on
lhe nolion of |r|c|nis as a vay of overcoming lhe bIoodIess
lheorizing of lhe hiIosohicaI sciences.
|r|c|nis, in DiIlhey's sense, can never be vhoIIy underslood in a
____________________
85
DiIlhey caIIed lhis rinciIe lhe Saiz tcn !cr Tcia|iiai !cs |r|c|cns
(see GS 19:75 ff.). Ior an anaIysis of lhis and lhe olher
"fundamenlaI" rinciIe of DiIlhey hiIosohy, Saiz tcn
Pnancncna|iiai, rcjcr ic inc cxcc||cni inirc!uciicn |q Oiic Pcggc|cr in
Wi|nc|n Oi|incq , Oas Wcscn !cr Pni|cscpnic ( Han|urg. Mcincr,
1984), tiii-x|ti, csp. xtii-xix. A|sc nc|pju| cn Oi|incq an! ncrncncuiics
is Pcggc|cr, Hci!cggcr un! !ic ncrncncuiiscnc Pni|cscpnic ( |rci|urg.
A||cr, 1984), cnap. 4, 256-263. Scc a|sc iuc ariic|cs in cc||ccic! cssaqs.
|ruin Hujnagc|, Hcrncncuiik a|s Grun!|cgung !cr
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn, in U|ricn Nasscn, c!., K|assikcr !cr
Hcrncncuiik ( Pa!cr|crn. Scncningn, 1982), an! Hcinricn Anz ,
Hcrncncuiik !cr |n!iti!ua|iiai. Wi|nc|n Oi|incqs ncrncncuiiscnc
Pcsiiicn un! inrc Apcricn, in Hcn!rik Birus, c!., Hcrncncuiiscnc
Pcsiiicncn ( Gciiingcn. Van!cnnccck c |uprccni, 1982). Ancng cincr
siu!ics cn Oi|incq an! ncrncncuiics unicn arc nc|pju| arc inc jc||cuing.
Pau| |icccur, Tnc Task cj Hcrncncuiics, in Micnac| Murraq, c!.,
Hci!cggcr an! Mc!crn Pni|cscpnq ( Ncu Hatcn, Ccnn.. Ya|c
Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1978), 141-160, Micnac| |rnarin, Tnc
Transjcrnaiicn cj Hcrncncuiics, Mcnisi 64, nc. 2 ( Apri| 1981). 175-
194, Hans-Gccrg Ga!ancr, Tnc Prc||cn cj Hisicrica|
Ccnscicusncss, Gra!uaic |acu|iq Pni|cscpnq jcurna| 5 ( 1975). 3-52,
|icnar! Pa|ncr, Hcrncncuiics ( |tansicn, |||.. Ncrinucsicrn
Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1969), an! Manjrc! |ic!c| iuc cuisian!ing
ccniri|uiicns. |in|ciiung, in Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, Ocr Auj|au !cr
gcscnicni|icncn Wc|i in !cn Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn ( |rankjuri.
Sunrkanp, 1970), 9-80, an! nis cssaqs cn Oi|incq in Vcrsicncn c!cr
|rk|arcn? Zur Tnccric un! Gcscnicnic !cr ncrncncuiiscncn
Wisscnscnajicn ( Siuiigari. K|cii-Cciia, 1978). | sncu|! a|sc ncniicn inc
jirsiraic ccniri|uiicns ic Oi|incq scnc|arsnip |q Sicjan Oiic,
|ckcnsirukiicn !cr Gcscnicnic. Zur Kriiik !cr nisicriscncn Vcrnunji (
Municn. |ink, 1982).
86
DiIlhey, Inlroduclion lo lhe Human Sciences, 264, GS 19: 75.
-154-
lheorelicaI vay bul musl be vieved in ils fuIIy concrele
manifeslalions as lhe roducl of a lhinking, viIIing, feeIing, and
Iiving human crealure. As earIy as 1883, in lhe |nirc!uciicn, DiIlhey
soke of exerience (|rjanrung) as having ils "originary nexus" in
"lhe condilions of consciousness."
87
In lhe |r|c|nis--"lhe basic unil of
Iife"--reaIily is reveaIed lo us, il is lhe medium lhrough vhich ve
come lo knov lhe vorId.
88
According lo DiIlhey: "The
consciousness of an exerience and ils conslilulion are lhe same:
lhere is no searalion belveen vhal is lhere-for-me and vhal in
exerience is lhere-for-me. In olher vords, lhe exerience does nol
sland Iike an ob|ecl over againsl lhe one vho exeriences il, bul
ralher ils exislence is undifferenlialed from vhal is lhere resenl for
me in il."
89
The imIicalions of DiIlhey's insighls vilhin lhe conlexl
of Iale-nineleenlh-cenlury German hiIosohy are rofound.
Againsl lhe cIaims of osilivism and naluraIism, DiIlhey argued lhal
nalure remains somelhing exlernaI and recaIcilranl lo us because il
is somelhing ve have nol ourseIves made, hislory, on lhe olher
hand, oens ilseIf u lo us in a vay lhal ve undersland because ve
are aIready invoIved in il. Ils slruclure is hermeneulicaI, lhal is, il is
oen lo us lhrough lhe rocess of inlerrelalion. To comrehend
fuIIy lhe effecl of our rimaI Iife reIalion lo hislory--vhich DiIlhey
used as lhe cornerslone for his lheory of lhe human sciences--ve
musl firsl undersland vhal DiIlhey meanl by his lechnicaI use of lhe
lerm |ijc, or Ic|cn. We can lhen roceed lo exIore lhe hermeneulic
significance of Iife and reIale il lo DiIlhey's lheory of hisloricaI
consciousness.
In lhe "resIau Drafl," DiIlhey defined Iife in lhese lerms:
The lerm "Iife" exresses vhal is lo everyone lhe mosl famiIiar and
inlimale, bul al lhe same lime lhe darkesl and even mosl
inscrulabIe. Whal Iife is, is an insoIubIe enigma. AII refIeclion,
inquiry, and lhoughl arise from lhis mosl inscrulabIe of lhings. AII
knovIedge is rooled in lhis never vhoIIy knovabIe lhing. One can
describe il. One can accenluale ils singuIar, characlerislic lrails. One
can, as il vere, ursue ils lone, rhylhm, and slirring meIody. ul
one cannol dissecl Iife inlo ils consliluenl arls, il cannol be reduced
lo anaIysis. Whal il is cannol be exressed in a simIe formuIa or
exIanalion. . . . Thoughl cannol fuIIy go behind Iife, for il is lhe
exression of Iife.
90

____________________
87
DiIlhey, GS 2: xvii.
88
DiIlhey, GS 7: 161.
89
Ibid., 139.
90
DiIlhey, GS 19: 346-347. olh Irmarlh ( Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, 197-209)
and IaImer ( Hcrncncuiics, 108) arguc inai Oi|incqs inccrq cj
|r|c|nis uas a nctc in inc !ircciicn cj
-155-
ecause Iife ilseIf vas so difficuIl lo reduce lo any vorkabIe
hiIosohicaI exression, DiIlhey lried in a variely of vays and
conlexls lo communicale vhal he meanl by il. "Life," he vrole, "is
lhe rimary lhing--in il are voven aII our imressions, lhoughls,
and ercelions."
91
"Life is ils ovn roof"--one cannol ground il in
anylhing olher lhan ilseIf.
92
"AIvays and everyvhere Iife remains
for lhoughl uncrgrun!|icn, or incaabIe of being grounded."
93

Desile lhe myslicaI and romanlic overlones imIicil in lhese
various descrilions, hovever, DiIlhey never inlended his nolion of
Iife lo be melahysicaI, irralionaI, or secuIalive. Ior DiIlhey, Iife
aIvays meanl Iife as il is Iived by human beings in lhe vorId, lhal is,
"!as tcn !cn Mcnscncn gc|c|ic Ic|cn."
94
As he exIained in one of his
drafls for "The Calegories of Life," "I use lhe lechnicaI lerm 'Iife' in
my vork on lhe human sciences secificaIIy in regard lo Iife in lhe
human vorId."
95
In conlrasl lo lhe bioIogicaI, cosmic, and aeslhelic
imIicalions of nineleenlh-cenlury Irench and German Iife-
hiIosohy, DiIlhey sel as his goaI "lhe foundalion of a descrilive
and anaIylic sychoIogy vhich vouId roceed from lhe slruclure of
our sychic Iife ilseIf and vouId seek, vilhin lhe reaIm of
melhodicaI Wisscnscnaji, a more modesl, reslricled, and Iess
arbilrary soIulion lo lhe lask lhal conlemorary Iife-hiIosohers
have sel before lhemseIves."
96
ecause |r|c|nis aIone does nol give
us a sense of lhe fuII dimensions of Iife bul onIy of Iife's slrucluraI
unils as exerienced vilhin a secific
____________________
iucniicin-ccniurq henomenoIogy. The conlribulions in Orlh,
Oi|incq un! !ic Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcgcnuari, csp. pi. 1, Bczicnungcn zur
Pnancncnc|cgic, 29-182, |u!c|j Makkrcc| , Husscr|, Oi|incq, an! inc
|c|aiicn cj inc Iijc-Wcr|! ic Hisicrq |cscarcn in Pncncncnc|cgq 12 (
1982). 39-58, an! inc car|q siu!q |q Iu!uig Ian!grc|c, Wi|nc|n
Oi|incqs Tnccric !cr Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn, janr|ucn jur Pni|cscpnic
un! pnancncnc|cgiscnc |crcnung 9 ( 1928). 238-266, a|| sncu !isiinci
ccnncciicns |ciuccn inc |aic incugni cj Oi|incq an! inc ccniri|uiicns cj
inc qcung |!nun! Husscr|. Oi|incqs inccrq cj Ic|cn, |r|c|nis, an!
Ic|cnszusanncnnang ucrc jar ncrc inan inc rcnaniic nusings cj a |aic
ninciccnin-ccniurq irraiicna|isi. Oi|incqs inccrq cj ccnscicusncss uas
rigcrcus|q uisscnscnaji|icn, an! nis pcncnani jcr cnpirica| rcscarcncs
an! c|jckiitc Gu|iigkcii (c|jcciitc ta|i!iiq) sncus a c|car ccnncciicn ic
inc kin! cj pni|cscpnq praciicc! |q Husscr| in inc car|q qcars cj inc
iucniicin ccniurq. |j incrc is anq !cu|i ccnccrning Oi|incqs siaius as a
rcnaniic, cnc sncu|! carcju||q rca! nis |ciicrs ic Husscr| rcprinic! in
Ocr Bricjuccnsc| Oi|incq-Husscr|, Man an! Wcr|! 1 ( 1968). 423-
446, uiin an inirc!uciicn |q Hci!cggcrs siu!cni Wa|icr Bicnc|.
91
DiIlhey, GS 19: 345.
92
DiIlhey, GS 5: 131.
93
DiIlhey, GS 19: 347.
94
DiIlhey, GS 8: 78 and 121.
95
DiIlhey, GS 7: 228.
96
DiIlhey, GS 5: 371 and aIso GS 19: 37-43 for simiIar senlimenls.
-156-
lemoraI conlexl, DiIlhey roosed lhal hiIosohers engage in lhe
vork of vhal he caIIed "descrilive sychoIogy."
Descrilive sychoIogy vas lo be a nev disciIine in bolh aim and
funclion. In DiIlhey's viev, il vas lo suIanl lhe naluraI-scienlific
sychoIogy of lhe German universily, vhich rooled ils sludy of
mind in Iaboralory exerimenls and human hysioIogy, by focusing
on lhe "Iiving unily" of consciousness. As DiIlhey vrole in his |!cas
ccnccrning a Ocscripiitc an! Ana|qiic Psqcnc|cgq ( 1894):
The seIf finds ilseIf in a variely of slales vhich are recognized as
unified lhrough lhe consciousness of lhe idenlily of lhe erson. Al
lhe same lime, each seIf finds ilseIf condilioned by an exlernaI vorId
and reacling lo il. The seIf lhen grass lhis vorId in ils
consciousness and delerminaleIy knovs il by acls of sensory
ercelion. Since lhis Iiving unily finds ilseIf lhus condilioned by
lhe miIieu in vhich il Iives and lo vhich il in lurn reacls, lhere
emerges an arlicuIaled organizalion of ils inner slales. This I caII lhe
slruclure of sychic Iife. y grasing lhis slruclure, descrilive
sychoIogy discovers lhe rinciIe of coherence vhich connecls lhe
sychic series inlo a vhoIe. This vhoIe is Iife.
97

Whereas lhe oIder, naluraI-scienlific sludy of sychoIogy had "in
dead abslraclion allemled lo aroach lhe robIem of lhe originaI
conslilulion of lhe individuaI severed from lhe hisloricaI lrunk of
sociely and ils inleraclions," DiIlhey's sychoIogy soughl lo ground
aII our |r|c|nissc in lhe sociohisloricaI conlexl from vhich lhey
originaled.
98
In lhis sense his descrilive sychoIogy vas inlended
as a sludy of lhe ob|eclificalions of human consciousness vilhin
lime, vilhin lhe rocess of hisloricaI Iife. In lhe |!cas, DiIlhey
exIained:
We find in Ianguage, mylh and reIigious riluaI, cusloms, Iav and in
lhe exlernaI organizalion of sociely, lhe roducls of lhe coIIeclive
siril in vhich, in HegeI's lerms, human consciousness is
ob|eclivaled and lhus can vilhsland anaIysis. Man does nol
arehend vhal he is by musing over himseIf, nor by doing
sychoIogicaI exerimenls, bul ralher by hislory. This anaIysis of
lhe roducls of human siril--deslined lo oen for us a gIance al lhe
genesis of lhe sychic nexus, of ils forms and ils aclion--musl, in
addilion lo lhe anaIysis of hisloricaI roducls, observe and coIIecl
everylhing vhich il can seize of lhe nisicrica| prcccsscs vherein such
a nexus
____________________
97
WiIheIm DiIlhey, Ocscripiitc Psqcnc|cgq an! Hisicrica|
Un!crsian!ing lrans. Kennelh Heiges and Richard Zaner ( The
Hague: Marlinus Ni|hoff, 1977), 81-82, and DiIlhey, GS 5: 200.
98
DiIlhey, GS 5: 63.
-157-
becomes consliluled. Il is reciseIy on lhe combinalion of lhese lvo
melhods lhal every hisloricaI sludy of lhe genesis, forms, and aclion
of lhe sychic nexus in man deends.
99

NaluraI-scienlific sychoIogy had conceived of lhe human being in
alomislic fashion as a sychoIogicaI ego sel againsl hislory and
sociely. Il soughl lo isoIale lhe universaI eIemenl in sychic Iife and,
lhrough lhe sludy of hysics and mechanics, lo arrive al a lheory of
human ercelion. ul DiIlhey insisled lhal ercelion, Iike aII
menlaI funclions, can never be isoIaled from lhe lhing erceived.
Iverylhing is of a iece, a slrucluraI unily vhose cenler is lhe malrix
of exerience. DiIlhey's lask vas lo arrive al a lheory of slrucluraI
unily vhereby lhe comIexes of lhese |r|c|nissc couId rovide a
universaI framevork for lhe arlicuIar Iife exerience. In individuaI
Iife, lhis unily is rovided by one's ovn Iife hislory. Irom lhe malrix
of a singIe exerience, one can roceed lo undersland, refIexiveIy,
ils arl vilhin an overaII slruclure. One underslands lhe loIIing of
beIIs, for examIe, vilhin lhe nexus of olher exeriences, il con|ures
memories of Sunday morning service, erhas, or lhe funeraI of a
ubIic figure. Yel, no maller vhal lhe memory, each exerience
exlends beyond lhe boundaries of lhe individuaI seIf. One's ovn Iife
hislory is necessariIy a arl of a Iarger cuIluraI Iife-nexus, and onIy
vilhin such a broader slruclure can lhe individuaI find meaning.
Iven Ianguage, lhe very inslrumenl of seIf-refIeclion, is ilseIf lhe
roducl of lhis broader cuIluraI slruclure. Hence, DiIlhey began lo
see individuaI Iife--or aulobiograhy--as an imorlanl modeI for an
underslanding of lhe human vorId lhal made hislory ossibIe. ul
in no sense vas lhis focus egoIogicaI or sychoIogislic, for DiIlhey
aIvays vieved lhe individuaI exerience of Iife vilhin a slrucluraI
nexus of arl-lo-vhoIe reIalions. y emhasizing lhe cenlraIily of
lhis arl-lo-vhoIe reIalionshi, DiIlhey vas abIe lo move from a
descrilive sychoIogy focused on "slruclure" lo a hermeneulicaI
lheory of hislory vhich underslands Iife as a "henomenon."
Rickerl and WindeIband had osiled a lheory of consciousness
vhich defined lhe lranscendenlaI sub|ecl as a hermelic and IifeIess
enlily, a Carlesian ficlion measured againsl lhe calegories of Kanl.
DiIlhey soughl lo break vilh lhis insuIar lradilion of academic
Kainc!crpni|cscpnic and ils roslrum-slyIe ronouncemenls. Againsl
Rick-
____________________
99
DiIlhey, Ocscripiitc Psqcnc|cgq, 62-63, GS 5: 180.
-158-
erl's lheory of concel-formalion, DiIlhey lurned lo a hermeneulicaI
melhod for underslanding nalure and hislory nol simIy as ob|ecls
"lhere" for consciousness bul aIso as modes of exerience vilhin lhe
unily of a Iife hislory. DiIlhey vas carefuI, hovever, lo avoid lhe
iIIusion of an immediale consciousness of lhings or of lhe direcl
accessibiIily of consciousness lo ilseIf osiled in lhe Carlesian
cogilo. To overcome lhis exlreme sub|eclivism, DiIlhey allemled lo
lhink of consciousness bolh vilhin ils ovn Iife hislory and vilhin ils
cuIluraI and hisloricaI conlexl. ecause Iife ilseIf is arl of a Iarger
vhoIe (lhe hislory of human Iife), DiIlhey mainlained lhal lo
undersland il, one had lo consider more lhan lhe dala of biograhy,
memory, or seIfrefIeclion, one aIso needed lo undersland lhe
hisloricaI ob|eclificalions of Iife as lhey are sludied in lhe human
sciences. In DiIlhey's vords: "Life is lhe fuIIness, variely, and
inleraclion--vilhin somelhing conlinuous--exerienced by
individuaIs. Ils sub|ecl maller is idenlicaI vilh hislory. Al every
oinl of hislory lhere is Iife, and hislory consisls of Iife of every kind
in lhe mosl varied circumslances. Hislory is mereIy Iife vieved in
lerms of lhe conlinuily of mankind as a vhoIe."
100
y
conlexluaIizing hislory bolh vilhin individuaI Iives and vilhin lhe
Iife of lhe secies, DiIlhey had hoed lo Iay lhe foundalion for a nev
hiIosohicaI anlhrooIogy focused on lhe hisloricaI essence or
hisloricily of lhe human being. In a veII-knovn assage from Tnc
Orcan, DiIlhey cIaimed, "Whal lhe human being is can be loId onIy
from ils hislory."
101
SimiIarIy, in |nirc!uciicn ic inc Pni|cscpnq cj
Iijc, he exIained lhal "vhal lhe human being is and vhal il
desires, il exeriences onIy in lhe deveIomenl of ils nalure lhrough
lhe cenluries, il is never lo be found in universaI concels bul onIy
in Iiving exerience ilseIf, vhich srings from lhe delhs of ils
vhoIe being."
102
ul DiIlhey's emhasis on lhe hisloricily of lhe
individuaI raised a robIem vhen considered from lhe slandoinl
of a scienlific sludy of human Iife. Ior, if one remained commilled lo
a rigorous eislemoIogy, lhen hov--from lhe Iimiled hisloricaI
erseclive of finile human exerience--couId one allain a Iarger,
scienlific lrulh aIicabIe beyond lhe Iife exerience of one
individuaI`
____________________
100
DiIlhey, Paiicrn an! Mcaning, 163, GS 7: 256.
101
DiIlhey, GS 8: 226.
102
DiIlhey, GS 6: 57. Ior simiIar ronouncemenls by DiIlhey in a
variely of conlexls, cf. GS 1: 98 and 271, GS 2: 170, GS 3: 210, GS 4:
528, GS 5: 425, GS 8: 4 and 166, and GS 9: 173. This nolion of lhe
hisloricaIIy bound nalure of humanily, nameIy, human hisloricily,
is a recurrenl lheme for DiIlhey and viII be lrealed in more delaiI
Ialer in lhis chaler.
-159-
Whal scienlific crileria, vhal form of inquiry, vhal arlicuIar
melhod couId one emIoy lo offer some modicum of cerlilude for
lhe cIaims of lhe human sciences` DiIlhey himseIf reaIized lhe broad
imIicalions of lhis robIem, osing lhe decisive queslion, "Hov are
ve lo overcome lhe difficuIly lhal everyvhere veighs uon lhe
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn of deriving universaIIy vaIid roosilions from
inner exeriences lhal are so ersonaIIy Iimiled, so indelerminale, so
comacled and resislanl lo anaIysis`"
103
The queslion ilseIf vas nol
nev. The robIem of hov lo eslabIish a hisloricaI melhod lhal
vouId guaranlee a measure of ob|eclivily againsl lhe dangers of
sub|eclive reIalivism had aIso reoccuied lhe earIy hisloricisl
lradilion. DiIlhey lried lo go beyond lhe mereIy hisloriograhicaI
focus of earIy hisloricism, hovever, by reconciIing "lhe mosl
rofound facl of lhe human sciences-lhe hisloricily of menlaI Iife
vhich exresses ilseIf in each cuIluraI syslem lhal humanily
roduces" vilh lhe melhodoIogicaI demands of hermeneulics. y
avoiding bolh lhe ahisloricaI lendencies of NeoKanlianism and lhe
hiIosohicaI imoverishmenl of hisloricism, DiIlhey hoed lo
overcome lhe fundamenlaI sIil belveen scienlific knovIedge and
hisloricaI Iife vhich had marked lhe crisis of lhe sciences. As he
reconsidered lhese reIalions, DiIlhey lurned lo a hiIosohicaI
rehabiIilalion of hermeneulics.
vii. Histnricity and Hcrmcncutics
DiIlhey's vork marks an imorlanl shifl in hiIosohicaI refIeclion
on hisloricism, aearing as il does during lhe era of Neo-Kanlian
dominance al lhe German universily. If lhe melhodoIogicaI
conlribulions of Rickerl and WindeIband soIidified lhe scienlific
slalus of hisloricaI research, lhey aIso conlribuled lo lhe rofound
aIienalion of hisloricaI siril from ils rools in acluaI hisloricaI
exislence. Againsl lhis kind of abslracl lheorizing, DiIlhey's
ersislenl lendency vas lo acknovIedge lhe significance of human
hisloricily, vieving il as a hermeneulicaI indicalion for
underslanding Iife, nol as a lranscendenlaI condilion for lhe
ossibiIily of knovIedge. In his conlinuing diaIogue and
corresondence vilh his cIose friend Graf IauI Yorck von
Warlenburg, DiIlhey moved furlher avay from lhe melhodoIogicaI
focus of Neo-Kanlian lheory of science lovard a hermeneulic of
hisloricaI underslanding. Underslanding, in DiIlhey's inlerrelalion,
sig-
____________________
103
DiIlhey, GS 6: 107.
-160-
nified nol onIy lhe secific rocedure of lhe human sciences bul lhe
fundamenlaI movemenl of human hisloricaI Iife as veII, a
movemenl vhose beginning is imossibIe lo isoIale
eislemoIogicaIIy. Neo-Kanlianism had erred in ils alleml lo
secure a IogicaI slarling oinl for hisloricaI inquiry and
underslanding. ul DiIlhey emhasized lhal knovIedge begins in
lhe middIe. Wilhin lhe shere of individuaI Iife, one moves from lhe
conlexl of famiIiarily (an underslanding of oneseIf lo lhe Iarger
nexus of aII Iife-reIalions (an underslanding of olhers) in a circuIar
fashion, as DiIlhey hrased il, "Underslanding is a rediscovery of
lhe I in lhe Thou."
104

We come lo undersland lhe emolions, acls, imuIses, desires,
lhoughls, and exressions of olher ersons, DiIlhey argued, by
virlue of a shared sychic slruclure. In lhe forms of everyday
human exression--geslures, faciaI movemenls, seech, inlonalion,
and so on --lhe vorId of human sychoIogy oens ilseIf lo us lo be
inlerreled. The rocess of underslanding such signs, exressions,
and olher ob|eclificalions of Iife DiIlhey referred lo as Vcrsicncn.
105

Vcrsicncn in inis spccia| scnsc ncans nci cn|q inc un!crsian!ing cj an
in!iti!ua| pcrscn cr nin! (Gcisi) |ui a|sc inc sccia| an! cu|iura| prc!ucis
cj nin!,
____________________
104
DiIlhey, GS 7: 191.
105
DiIlhey defines Vcrsicncn as foIIovs: "Underslanding and
inlerrelalion is lhe melhod used lhroughoul lhe human sludies.
Il uniles aII lheir funclions and conlains aII lheir lrulhs.
Underslanding oens u lhe vorId. Underslanding of olher
eoIe and lheir exressions is deveIoed on lhe basis of
exerience and seIf-underslanding and lhe conslanl inleraclion
belveen lhem. Here, loo, il is nol a maller of IogicaI conslruclion
or sychoIogicaI disseclion bul of an eislemoIogicaI anaIysis. We
musl nov eslabIish vhal underslanding can conlribule lo
hisloricaI knovIedge" (lransIaled by H. I. Rickman in SW, 219,
DiIlhey, GS 7: 205). He aIso vriles: "The course of every erson's
Iife is a rocess of conlinuous delerminalion in vhich lhe
ossibiIilies inherenl in him are narroved dovn. The
cryslaIIizalion of his nalure aIvays delermines his furlher
deveIomenl. . . . ul underslanding Iays oen for him a vide
range of ossibiIilies lhal are nol resenl in lhe delerminalion of
his acluaI Iife. Ior me as for mosl eoIe loday, lhe ossibiIily of
exeriencing reIigious slales of mind in my ersonaI exislence is
sharIy circumscribed. Hovever, vhen I go lhrough lhe Iellers
and vrilings of Lulher, lhe accounls of his conlemoraries, lhe
records of lhe reIigious conferences and counciIs, and lhe reorls
of his officiaI conlracls, I encounler a reIigious henomenon of
such erulive over, of such energy, in vhich lhe issue is one of
Iife or dealh, lhal il Iies beyond lhe exerienliaI ossibiIilies of a
erson of our lime. ul I can re-Iive |nacncr|c|cnj aII of lhis. . . .
And lhereby lhis rocess oens u for as a reIigious vorId in
Lulher and in his conlemoraries in lhe earIy Reformalion lhal
enIarges our horizon by incIuding ossibiIilies lhal are avaiIabIe
lo us onIy in lhis vay. Thus man, vho is delermined from vilhin,
can exerience many olher exislences in imaginalion. AIlhough he
is Iimiled by his circumslances, foreign beaulies of lhe vorId and
regions of Iife lhal he couId never reach himseIf are Iaid oen lo
him. To ul il in generaI lerms, man, bound and delermined by
lhe reaIily of Iife, is made free nol onIy by arl--vhich has oflen
been oinled oul--bul aIso by lhe underslanding of lhings
hisloricaI" (lransIaled by Theodore IIanlinga in Hisicrica|
Un!crsian!ing in inc Tncugni cj Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, 23, DiIlhey, GS, 7:
215-216).
-161-
vhich are ob|eclified in such lhings as arl, oelry, Iileralure, music,
Iavs, science, and hiIosohy. These exressions DiIlhey referred lo
as c|jcciitc nin! (c|jckiitcr Gcisi), a lerm he borroved from HegeI.
106

In a drafl for his Criiiquc cj Hisicrica| |cascn, vhich merils
exlended quolalion, DiIlhey defined ob|eclive mind and ils reIalion
lo his lheory of Vcrsicncn as a cenlraI facl of lhe human sciences:
I have shovn hov significanl lhe ob|eclive mind is for lhe
ossibiIily of knovIedge in lhe human sludies. y lhis I mean lhe
manifoId forms in vhich vhal individuaIs hoId in common have
ob|eclified lhemseIves in lhe vorId of lhe senses. In lhis ob|eclive
mind lhe asl is a ermanenlIy enduring resenl for us. Ils reaIm
exlends from lhe slyIe of Iife and lhe forms of sociaI inlercourse, lo
lhe syslem of uroses vhich sociely has crealed for ilseIf, lo
cuslom, Iav, slale, reIigion, arl, science, and hiIosohy. Ior even
lhe vork of genius reresenls ideas, feeIings, and ideaIs commonIy
heId in an age and environmenl. Irom lhis vorId of ob|eclive mind
lhe seIf receives suslenance from earIiesl chiIdhood. Il is lhe
medium in vhich lhe underslanding of olher eoIe and lheir
exressions lake Iace. Ior everylhing in vhich lhe mind has
ob|eclified ilseIf conlains somelhing heId in common by lhe I and
lhe Thou. Ivery square Ianled vilh lrees, every room in vhich
seals are arranged, is inleIIigibIe lo us from our infancy because
human Ianning, arranging, and vaIuing--common lo us aII-have
assigned ils Iace lo every square and every ob|ecl in lhe room. The
chiId grovs u vilhin lhe order and cusloms of lhe famiIy vhich il
shares vilh lhe olher members and ils molher's orders are acceled
in lhis conlexl. efore il Iearns lo laIk il is aIready vhoIIy immersed
in lhal common medium. Il Iearns lo undersland lhe geslures and
faciaI exressions, movemenls and excIamalions, vords and
senlences, onIy because il encounlers lhem aIvays in lhe same form
and in lhe same reIalion lo vhal lhey mean and exress. Thus lhe
individuaI orienlales himseIf in lhe vorId of ob|eclive mind.
____________________
106
Ior DiIlhey's discussion of c|jckiitcr Gcisi, see GS 7: 208-210.
DiIlhey's nolion of ob|eclive mind differs from HegeI's in lhal il is
rooled rinciaIIy in Iived exerience ralher lhan in a
melahysicaI rocess of hisloricaI deveIomenl. AIlhough
DiIlhey!i! borrov from HegeI in vieving aII human reaIily in
lerms of ob|eclive mind, he conceived of lhis in a hermeneulicaI
ralher lhan a melahysicaI fashion. AII our underslanding is
grounded in lhe cuIluraI arlifacls lhal comose our Iives: reIigion,
sociely, Ianguage, cuslom, and olhers, yel underslanding--given
vilhin a secific lemoraIsaliaI conlexl--firsl aIIovs us lo make
sense of lhe unily of ob|eclive mind and our ovn sub|eclive Iife
exerience. Life exerience imIies ob|eclive mind, ob|eclive mind
imIies Iife exerience. The slruclure of our underslanding is
circuIar, or hermeneulic. ul lhere is aIso a cruciaI Iink here lo lhe
nolion of lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn in lhal lhey sludy human Iife--
nol |usl my Iife bul "human" Iife reconsliluled as lhe inlervoven
lexlure of a|| human Iives in ob|eclive mind. As DiIlhey ul il in
lhe Nacn|ass, "The human sciences have as lheir comrehensive
reaIily--ob|eclive mind" (lransIaled by Irmarlh in Wi|nc|n Oi|incq,
277).
-162-
Irom lhis lhere foIIovs a consequence imorlanl for lhe rocess of
underslanding. The exression of Iife vhich lhe individuaI grass is,
as a ruIe, nol simIy an isoIaled exression bul fiIIed vilh a
knovIedge of vhal is heId in common and of a reIalion lo lhe
menlaI conlenl.
107

Whereas lhe underslanding of everyday Iife occurs vilhin a conlexl
of changing imressions and famiIiar oinls of reference, lhe
underslanding of ob|eclive mind demands a more rigorous
aroach. Ils exressions are "fixed" in a given form: in oelic
meler, in musicaI cadence, in archilecluraI bullresses, in Iilerary
rose. Underslanding and inlerreling lhese "fixed Iife exressions"
(as DiIlhey caIIed lhem) requires a melhod vilh secific ruIes and
rocedures, allenlive lo lhe concel of cuIluraI deveIomenl and
change: lhe melhod of hermeneulics. Through a hermeneulic
aroach lo Vcrsicncn, Oi|incq ncpc! ic prcti!c a scicniijica||q tcrijia||c
prccc!urc capa||c cj cxp|icaiing inc cxprcssicns cj c|jcciitc nin!. Tnis
ncrncncuiic apprcacn ucu|!, ij succcssju|, grani inc pcssi|i|iiq cj
unitcrsa||q ta|i! inicrprciaiicn an! rcsc|tc inc prc||cns cj rc|aiitisn
unicn ucrc p|aguing inc nunan scicnccs.
108
|n Tnc |isc cj
Hcrncncuiics ( 1900), Oi|incq arguc! inai in inc ccnicxi cj inc
cpisicnc|cgq, |cgic, an! ncinc!c|cgq cj inc nunan siu!ics, inc inccrq cj
inicrprciaiicn jinai is, ncrncncuiics} |cccncs an inpcriani |ink |ciuccn
pni|cscpnq an! inc nisicrica| scicnccs, an csscniia| pari cj inc jcun!aiicn cj
inc nunan siu!ics.
109

Tra!iiicna| ncrncncuiics--in inc nanncr cj Asi, Wc|j, |rncsii, Micnac|is,
an! Scn|cr--na! jccusc! cn cxcgciica| criiicisn cj c|assica| icxis an! inc
Bi||c.
110
|cr incn, ncrncncuiics uas prinari|q a iccnniquc uiin
pni|c|cgica| app|icaiicns an! an|iiicns. Wiin inc rcnaniic ncrncncuiics cj
Scn|cicrnacncr, ncuctcr, inc grannaiica|, sqniaciica|, an! siq|isiic
cnpnasis cj incsc car|icr criiics uas ancn!c!, inus p|acing ncu
signijicancc cn psqcnc|cgica| ana|qsis uiinin a nisicrica| ccnicxi. Oi|incq,
unc na! spcni nucn cj nis car|q carccr rcscarcning inc inic||cciua|
|ackgrcun! cj Scn|cicrnacncr, ccncc!c! inc inpcriancc cj psqcnc|cgica|
inicrprciaiicn jcr un!crsian!ing nisicrica|
____________________
107
DiIlhey, Paiicrn an! Mcaning, 120-121, GS 7: 208.
108
DiIlhey, GS 5: 329.
109
Ibid., 331.
110
Ior a fuIIer lrealmenl of lhe hermeneulic lradilion, see }ean
Grondin, |injunrung in !ic pni|cscpniscnc Hcrncncuiik ( Darmsladl:
WissenschaflIiche uchgeseIIschafl, 1991), and lhe cIassic vork by
Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truin an! Mcinc! ( Nev York: Crossroad,
1989), l. 2. DiIlhey's ovn refIeclions on lhe hermeneulic lradilion
are incIuded in his muIlivoIume biograhy of SchIeiermacher, GS
13, and eseciaIIy GS 14: 595-787, and in his essay "The Rise of
Hermeneulics," in GS 5: 317-331.
-163-
lexls. ul he venl even furlher. Whereas for SchIeiermacher
hermeneulics vas rimariIy lexluaI--in lhe sense lhal il vas used lo
inlerrel Iilerary vorks, codes of Iav, hisloricaI documenls,
business conlracls, Iellers, and so forlh--for DiIlhey il became a
means of inlerreling Iife ilseIf. "Life"--in lhe lechnicaI sense DiIlhey
gave il--is a lexl vhose arls are lhe |r|c|nissc of lhe sychoIogicaI
sub|ecl. Ivery arl of Iife, every |r|c|nis, has significance for lhe
vhoIe. And, in lurn, lhe vhoIe delermines lhe significance of each
arl. Life exresses ilseIf lo us vilhin a conlexl of meaning vhose
unily is based on lhis arl-lo-vhoIe reIalionshi, foIIoving a
hermeneulicaI slruclure.
111
ecause "Iife" is nol onIy individuaI Iife
bul aIso lhe roducl of hisloricaI forces and circumslance, il cannol
be inlerreled soIeIy vilhin lhe Iife-nexus of a singIe human being.
To inlerrel Iife roerIy, one musl undersland aII ils various
exressions "in lhe vorId," vilhin Ianguage, cuIlure, and hislory--
somelhing lhal, DiIlhey beIieved, couId be done onIy lhrough an
anaIysis of ob|eclive mind. In seeing lhe human vorId in lhis vay as
a "lexl" lhal required inlerrelalion, DiIlhey radicaIIy aIlered lhe
meaning of hermeneulics vilhin German hiIosohy. Whereas
hermeneulics had been, for Savigny, Ranke, and oeckh, a
melhodoIogicaI looI used lo guaranlee lhe scienlific rigor of
hiIoIogicaI and hisloricaI underslanding, for DiIlhey il became an
"essenliaI arl of lhe foundalions of lhe human sciences."
112

DiIlhey's arorialion of hermeneulic rinciIes for an
underslanding of hisloricism heIed lo shifl lhe focus of ils
|ragcsic||ung avay from lhe robIem of melhod lo an emhasis on
hisloricaI exerience ilseIf. As an exegele of Gcisi, DiIlhey allemled
lo see aII melhodoIogicaI access lo hislory as somelhing grounded in
lhe arl-lovhoIe inlerIay of seIf and vorId, a conlexl of shared
meaning vhich oens ilseIf u lo us in various Iinguislic, cuIluraI,
and sychoIogicaI forms. This common hermeneulicaI slruclure of
exerience, DiIlhey argued, enabIes lhe schoIar lo achieve a cerlain
measure of hisloricaI underslanding. In one of his imorlanl drafls
for a "Crilique of HisloricaI Reason," DiIlhey exIained lhal "lhe
rinciIes of hisloricaI science find no equivaIenls in abslracl
lheories. . . . The lolaIily of our being Iies in exerience aIone. This is
vhal ve reconslrucl lhrough
____________________
111
DiIlhey, GS 7: 130-138.
112
DiIlhey, GS 2: 115 and GS 5: 331. DiIlhey oflen makes lhis
conneclion belveen hermeneulics and his crilique of hisloricaI
reason, see GS 1: 116, GS 7: 191-294, and GS 8: 264-266.
-164-
underslanding, and il is here lhal lhe rinciIe of lhe commonaIily
of individuaIs is given."
113

In DiIlhey's inlerrelalion, "hisloricaI consciousness"--or lhe
consciousness of one's ovn hisloricily--conslilules a break vilh bolh
hisloricisl facl-coIIecling and lhe earIy modern hiIosohy of
consciousness, Ranke Sc||siaus|cscnung and Descarles's cogilo.
UnIike Nielzsche, vho in "The Uses and Disadvanlages of Hislory
for Life" iIIoried hisloricaI consciousness for ils diseased and Iife-
vearying anliquarianism, DiIlhey insisled lhal "hisloricaI
consciousness has, finaIIy, no 'use', il is ralher a vay of vieving
lhings vhich is aIicabIe lo every henomenon."
114
Iven as
DiIlhey raised hisloricaI consciousness lo lhe highesl form of
refIexive avareness, hovever, he sliII remained commilled lo lhe
Carlesian ro|ecl of securing cerlilude for scienlific knovIedge. If
hisloricaI consciousness reresenled lo him lhe highesl form of seIf-
knovIedge--lhe onIy genuine means of grasing Iived exerience--il
aIso signified a Iimil beyond vhich scienlific consciousness couId
nol roceed. DiIlhey's vork is marked by lhis ersislenl lension
belveen lhe cIaims of scienlific knovIedge for universaI vaIidily
and lhe finilude of lemoraI, hisloricaI being. To reconciIe lhese
comeling cIaims, DiIlhey lurned lo lhe robIem of hiIosohicaI
"calegories" derived from lhe vork of bolh ArislolIe and Kanl.
Calegories, DiIlhey observed, are "concels lhal exress or eslabIish
a conlexl, reIalion, or nexus" and can be cIassified as eilher "formaI"
or "reaI."
115
IormaI calegories are grounded in reason ilseIf as an
abslracl, limeIess form of consciousness, for examIe, idenlily,
difference, causaIily, subslance, and so forlh. ReaI calegories, on lhe
olher hand, are "nol grounded in reason bul in lhe Iife-nexus ilseIf"
and hence serve as "Iife-calegories" ralher lhan as caIcified formaI
reIalions of ure reason.
116
DiIlhey slressed lhal lhe essenliaI
difference belveen formaI calegories and Iife-calegories has lo do
vilh lheir reIalion lo lime. Whereas lhe Kanlian calegories are "rigid
and dead," lhe calegories of Iife exress a dynamic, inleraclive
rocess belveen
____________________
113
DiIlhey, GS 7: 278.
114
DiIlhey, GS 11: xix.
115
DiIlhey, GS 19: 360. DiIlhey Kaicgcricn !cs Ic|cns are a revision of
lhe Kanlian calegories, vhich, according lo DiIlhey, are fixed and
rigid (see GS 19: 44 and GS 7: 228). These nev "Iife-calegories" aim
al hisloricizing Kanl and focusing on lhe acluaI Iiving, brealhing,
and feeIing human erson in hislory. They are nol "formaI" or
"abslracl" bul "reaI." Ior a schoIarIy assessmenl of lhis ro|ecl, see
Lessing, Oic |!cc cincr Kriiik !cr nisicriscncn Vcrnunji, 249-257.
116
DiIlhey, GS 19: 361.
-165-
lhe knoving sub|ecl and lhe vorId, a hermeneulic reIalion
grounded in lemoraI conlexl. In DiIlhey's vork, "Life slands in
cIose reIalion lo lhe fiIIing of lime. Ils vhoIe characler, ils reIalion lo
corrulibiIily and ehemeraIily, lhe facl lhal il forms a nexus lhal
has a unily (nameIy, lhe seIf), is delermined by lime."
117
This meanl,
firsl, lhal aII our exerience, "everylhing vhich is lhere for us, is
lhere onIy as a given in lhe resenl. Iven vhen an exerience is
asl, il is lhere for us onIy as a given resenl exerience."
118
The
riorily of lhe resenl as a vay of organizing, synlhesizing, and
giving meaning lo lhe lemoraI fIov of exerienliaI reaIily rovided
DiIlhey vilh lhe conceluaI means of underslanding lhe unily and
lolaIily of Iife as "lemoraIily." TemoraIily, he mainlained, is "lhe
calegoricaI delerminalion of Iife" vhich rovides lhe foundalion for
aII lhe olher calegories, il nol onIy rovides a unifying focus for
bringing logelher aII lhe various fragmenls of our ovn exerience
bul aIso aIIovs for lhe underslanding of olhers as members of
cuIluraI and hisloricaI communilies.
119
ul human lemoraIily can
never be reduced lo lhe resenl underslanding of any conlexl.
Underslanding is aIvays bound u vilh lhe hislory of our ovn Iives
and olher Iives in lhe asl: "KnovIedge of lhe human vorId Iies in
lhe reIalion of common human vilaIily lo individualion and in lhe
reIalion of individualion lo lhe concel of hisloricily."
120
Hisloricily,
vhich for DiIlhey consliluled "lhe fundamenlaI facl of lhe human
sciences," heIs lo define lhe lemoraI slruclure of an individuaI Iife
in reIalion lo lhe vhoIe of hislory, a reIalion lhal slresses lhe Iimils
of our knovIedge and our rooledness in lime.
121
This meanl, as
DiIlhey ul il, lhal "lhere are aIvays vaIIs encIosing us, ve are
aIvays allemling lumuIluousIy lo free ourseIves from lhem . . .
|yel ve musl reaIizej lhe imossibiIily of such an alleml, for here,
as everyvhere, one encounlers lhe fundamenlaI characlerislic of aII
human consciousness: ils hisloricily."
122

____________________
117
DiIlhey, GS 7: 229.
118
Ibid., 230.
119
Ibid., 192.
120
DiIlhey, GS 5: 266.
121
DiIlhey, GS 6: 108.
122
DiIlhey, GS 8: 38. Hisicriciiq, cr Gcscnicni|icnkcii, p|aqs an inpcriani
rc|c in Oi|incqs ininking. A|incugn acccr!ing ic Hcgc| |icgrapncrs Kar|
|cscnkranz an! |u!c|j Haqn inc icrn an! ccnccpi appcar in Hcgc|,
Sani|icnc Wcrkc, 20 tc|s., c!. Hcrnann G|cckncr ( Siuiigari.
|rcnnann, 1961), csp. tc|. 17, 189 an! tc|. 19, 137, inc jirsi signijicani
usagc cccurs in inc ccrrcspcn!cncc |ciuccn Oi|incq an! Graj Ycrck jrcn
1877 ic 1897. |n januarq cj 1888 Ycrck uriics ic Oi|incq. Tnc gcrnina|
pcini cj nisicriciiq is
-166-
DiIlhey's insighl inlo lhe hisloricily of consciousness lransformed
Kanl's formaI calegories lhrough a hermeneulic refashioning of lhe
basic robIem of human knovIedge. AII knovIedge, for DiIlhey,
roceeds from lhe Iimiled erseclive of lhe seIf (arl) lo lhe
universaI erseclive of aII human hislory (vhoIe) in a circuIar,
refIexive manner. A human being can never sland oulside of lime
and viev lhe vorId from an absoIule erseclive or assume lhal lhe
vievoinl of a singIe individuaI couId rovide a foundalion for
human-scienlific inquiry. The individuaI does nol invenl Ianguage,
cuslom, or lradilion bul finds lhem "lhere" vilhin lhe vorId,
ressing lheir cIaims and demands everyvhere, Ieaving one caughl
in a circu|us tiiicsis, or "vicious circIe." We move from seIf lo vorId
and back lo seIf in a circuIar fashion as ve alleml lo inlegrale our
ovn aims, ambilions, and goaIs inlo lhe Iarger vorId aboul us.
123

The Kanlian concel of abso-
____________________
nol lhal lhe vhoIe sycho-hysicaI dalum is bul ralher Iives,"
Bricjuccnsc|, 71. olh DiIlhey and Yorck agreed lhal "hisloricily"
and "lemoraIily" are calegories of Iife and nol mereIy of abslracl
melahysics (see Bricjuccnsc|, 91, and GS 6: 314).
y nisicriciiq DiIlhey meanl nol onIy lhal aII lhings are hisloricaIIy
delermined bul aIso lhal human beings lhemseIves are hisloricaIIy
delermined in lheir osilion as human beings. This meanl lhal
bolh lhe ob|ecl of hisloricaI sludy (Hisicric) and lhe acluaI sub|ecl
of Iived lemoraI exerience (Gcscnicnic), lhal is, humanily, are
Iikevise hisloricaI in essence. As Gadamer ul il, lhis nolion of
hisloricily meanl lhal nol onIy hislorische Irkennlnis bul aIso die
geschichlIiche Seinsveise des Menschen is a fundamenlaI
slruclure of human Iife. Or as DiIlhey said, "Man's nalure is his
hislory!" (GS 8: 224). Il is lhis onloIogicaI condilion of human
hisloricily ralher lhan onIy lhe eislemoIogicaI condilion of
hisloricaIIy delermined knovIedge lhal is cruciaI for an
underslanding of lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn. David Linge vrole:
"Since man is radicaIIy hisloricaI, lhere is no ossibiIily of
founding our knovIedge of Iife on a rior, melahisloricaI basis.
ecause of his ovn hisloricily, knovIedge of man is knovIedge of
him in and lhrough his hislory" ("Hisloricily and Hermeneulic,"
116). The reIalionshi belveen human beings and lheir hislory is,
lhen, circuIar, refIexive, or hermeneulicaI, an insighl lhal vas lo
have a rofound effecl on Marlin Heidegger in Bcing an! Tinc,
eseciaIIy in his Iong seclion on DiIlhey and Graf Yorck.
Ior lhe meaning of Gcscnicni|icnkcii, see Hans-Georg Gadamer,
"GeschichlIichkeil", in |c|igicn in Gcscnicnic un! Gcgcnuari, voI. 2,
1496-1498, Leonhard Renlhe-Iink, "GeschichlIichkeil" in
Hisicriscncs Wcricr|ucn !cr Pni|cscpnic, voI. 3 ( aseI: Schvabe,
1974), 404-408, and aIso Renlhe-Iink, Gcscnicni|icnkcii. |nr
icrninc|cgiscncr un! |cgrijj|icncr Ursprung |ci Hcgc|, Haqn, Oi|incq,
un! Ycrck ( Gllingen: Vandenhoeck & Rurechl, 1964), and
Renlhe-Iink, "Zur Herkunfl des Worles 'GeschichlIichkeil,'" Arcnit
jur Bcgrijjsgcscnicnic 15 ( 1971): 306-312, Gerhard auer,
Gcscnicni|icnkcii ( erIin: de Gruyler, 1963), Linge, Hisicriciiq an!
Hcrncncuiic, Heriberl oeder, "DiIlhey 'und' Heidegger: Zur
GeschichlIichkeil des Menschen," in Orlh, ed., Oi|incq un! !cr
Wan!c| !cs Pni|cscpnic|cgrijjs scii !cn 19. janrnun!cri ( Ireiburg:
AIber, 1984), 161-177, David Hoy, Hisicrq, Hisicriciiq, an!
Hisicricgrapnq, in M. Murray, Hci!cggcr an! Mc!crn Pni|cscpnq,
and Ollo IggeIer, "Hisloricily in Heidegger's Lale Work,"
Scuinucsicrn jcurna| cj Pni|cscpnq 4 ( 1973): 53-73.
123
DiIlhey soke of lhe circuIar or hermeneulicaI reIalion of man lo
vorId and Iife lo hislory as a slrucluraI one based on lhe arl-lo-
vhoIe reIalionshi in a variely of con-
-167-
Iule lime vhich dominaled lhe melhod of lhe naluraI sciences couId
never adequaleIy gras lhis circuIar movemenl of an underslanding
slruclured by lemoraI reIalionshis. Kanlian eislemoIogy osiled
lhe ob|ecl of scienlific inquiry as somelhing slalic and resenl al
hand, "lhere" for anaIysis, bul DiIlhey alienlIy slressed lhal lhe
lemoraIily and hisloricily of Iife undermine lhe fixily of any ob|ecl
of knovIedge.
Through an onloIogy of hisloricaI exerience, grounded in lhe
avareness lhal "lhe essence of lhe human being is hisloricaI,"
DiIlhey lried lo shov lhe bankrulcy of lradilionaI sub|ecl/ob|ecl
melahysics. TradilionaI hermeneulics had oened lhe alh for lhis
lye of crilicism by demonslraling lhal aII knovIedge is given lo us
in lhe form of a arl-lo-vhoIe reIalionshi. Yel lhe oIder aroach
of lhe romanlic schooI had focused on lhe slruclure of lhe c|jcci
given lo consciousness, vieving il vilhin ils ovn hisloricaIIy
delermined conlexl. Ranke had even argued for lhe "exlinguishing"
of lhe sub|ecl, seeking lhereby lo eIiminale aII ersonaI re|udice.
ul aIlhough Ranke vas exemIary in underslanding lhe hisloricily
of lhe ob|ecl, his aroach lo lhe sub|ecl vas Iess successfuI, lhe
effecl of his hisloricaI lheory vas lo isoIale lhe sub|ecl in a slale of
hyoslalized, ahisloricaI medilalion. Againsl lhis aroach,
DiIlhey's hermeneulics soughl lo fuse lhe hisloricily of bolh ob|ecl
and sub|ecl by focusing on lhe dynamic inlerIay of consciousness
and vorId as lhe basis for aII hisloricaI inlerrelalion. In DiIlhey's
lhoughl, consciousness ilseIf is marked by lhe same lemoraIily and
hisloricily as lhe hisloricaI vorId. DiIlhey never succeeded in finaIIy
synlhesizing lhe calegories of lemoraIily and hisloricily inlo a
coherenl Grun!uisscnscnaji lhal vouId unify lhe insighls of
descrilive sychoIogy, hermeneulics, hisloricaI science, and
eislemoIogy, he nonelheIess conlinued lo insisl on lhe need for a
more originary mode of queslioning lo dissoIve and overcome lhe
sub|ecl/ob|ecl resuosilions of lradilionaI hiIosohicaI lhinking.
His hermeneulic aroach oinled lo lhe vilaI ground of aII
scienlific inquiry, yel even as he ceIebraled lhe Iife-nexus as lhe
____________________
lexls, bul mosl eseciaIIy in his "Inlvrfe zur Krilik der
hislorischen Vernunfl" (see GS 7: 262-264 and 277-280). This cIose
reIalionshi belveen hermeneulics and lhe hisloricaI characler of
Iife, nameIy, "hisloricily," is ursued by HeImul DivaId in
Wi|nc|n Oi|incq. |rkcnninisinccric un! Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcscnicnic (
Gllingen: Muslerschmidl, 1963), 198-203, Linge, Hisicriciiq an!
Hcrncncuiic, l. 1, }ohn MaraIdo, Ocr ncrncncuiiscnc Zirkc|.
Unicrsucnungcn zu Scn|cicrnacncr, Oi|incq, un! Hci!cggcr ( Ireiburg:
AIber, 1974), 65-88, and Ieler Hnermann, Ocr Ourcn|rucn
gcscnicni|icncn Ocnkcns in 19. janrnun!cri. jcnann Gusiat Orcqscn,
Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, Graj Pau| Ycrck tcn Waricn|urg ( Ireiburg: Herder,
1967) 156.
-168-
germinaI focus of lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn, he vas Iagued by lhe
immanenl hisloricily of knovIedge vhich undermined ils vaIue as
lrulh. To evaIuale DiIlhey's vork, ve viII need lo consider lhis
robIem of hisloricily more fuIIy in lerms of lhe crisis of reIalivism
vhich gried lhe hisloricisl lradilion in lhe earIy lvenlielh
cenlury.
viii. Thc Crisis nI Histnrica! Rc!ativism
In his "Crilique of HisloricaI Reason," DiIlhey slruggIed lo avoid lhe
conlradiclions lhal he sav emerging belveen lvo dislincl
eislemoIogicaI lradilions: lhe Kanlian ideaI of scienlific ralionaIily
and lhe Rankean raclice of hisloricaI consciousness. In many vays
his hislory of lhe human sciences is an alleml lo reconciIe lhese
lradilions lhrough a hermeneulic refashioning of scienlific
knovIedge ilseIf. DiIlhey inslincliveIy recognized lhal lhe sources
for lhe "crisis" of hisloricism Iay in lhe confIicling demands for a
scienlific melhodoIogy lhal vouId refIecl lhe hermeneulic insighl
inlo lhe hisloricily of lrulh. He re|ecled lhe Neo-Kanlian efforls lo
forge a lranscendenlaIIogicaI lheory of vaIues vhich vouId
overcome lhe reIalivism of mereIy "hisloricaI" |udgmenls. y
defining nisicrq as an aggregalion of facls consliluled under lhe
calegory of vaIue and naiurc as an assembIage of dala consliluled
under lhe calegory of Iavs, Rickerl and WindeIband had evaded lhe
acluaI sources of human exerience and hisloricaI Iife.
124
Abslracl
eislemoIogy, riven from ils hisloricaI conlexl and measured againsl
a IifeIess, Iogico-malhemalicaI modeI of lime, offered IillIe hoe, in
DiIlhey's eslimalion, of soIving lhe crisis of hisloricaI vaIues. As he
noled in lhe Nacn|ass: "Rickerl vanls lo arrive al reaIily as a
lranscendenlaI ob|ecl soIeIy lhrough inference on lhe basis of mere
IogicaI reIalions of an eislemoIogicaI sub|ecl--and he finds lhal lhis
viII nol vork. This is lhe error of his melhod. The reaI melhod musl
roceed from lhe emiricaI consciousness. This melhod recognizes
lhal il is fuliIe lo underlake conslruclions on lhe basis of abslracl
concels. Il aIso recognizes lhal reaIily cannol be conslrucled or be
fuIIy demonslraled IogicaIIy, bul onIy made IausibIe."
125

If for Rickerl hislory, or lhe hisloricaI dalum, aeared as an ob|ecl
____________________
124
See lhe enelraling crilique by Manfred RiedeI, Gcscnicnic !cr
Pni|cscpnic 7, 331332.
125
Irom lhe unubIished "NachIass," lransIaled in Irmarlh, Wi|nc|n
Oi|incq, 197.
-169-
conslrucled by an eislemoIogicaI sub|ecl, for DiIlhey hislory vas
somelhing more siriluaI (gcisiig), a rocess of vilaI Iife reIalions
ralher lhan an individuaI, discrele enlily. We knov lhe asl, DiIlhey
cIaimed, nol as a delached "dalum" bul as a meaningfuI arl of our
ovn exislence, lemoraIIy removed bul sychoIogicaIIy immediale.
In hermeneulicaI lerms, DiIlhey underslood hisloricaI refIeclion nol
as a rocess of schoIarIy |udgmenl bul as a human deIiberalion
aboul lhe ossibiIilies and Iimils of an individuaI's exislence vilhin
a secific hisloricaI-cuIluraI miIieu. Hence he slressed lhe
imorlance of aulobiograhy and hiIosohicaI anlhrooIogy as
disciIines lhal vouId siluale human exerience vilhin bolh lhe
individuaI Iife and lhe Iife of lhe secies. Human refIeclion, DiIlhey
insisled, is condilioned by secific hisloricaI circumslances, al no
oinl can human beings remove lhemseIves from lhe hisloricaI
rocess and achieve a form of absoIule knovIedge. Our knovIedge
cj hislory, vhich aears lo us as an excIusiveIy eislemoIogicaI
concern, is aIvays bound u vilh our being in hislory, vhich
requires an avareness of our onloIogicaI condilion. Ior DiIlhey lhis
onloIogicaI dimension of human hislory--ils embeddedness in being
and ils refIexive reIalion lo lime--conslilules lhe genuine meaning of
"hisloricily": human beings inlerrel Iife nol in lerms of calegories
derived from Iogic bul from a refIexive avareness (|nncucr!cn) of
lheir ovn hermeneulic silualion.
Againsl lhe Neo-Kanlian lendency lo define hislory lhrough Iogic,
melhodoIogy, and lranscendenlaI or "ure" reason, DiIlhey
commilled his hiIosohicaI efforl lo a crilique of hisloricaI reason,
in vhich reason is inlerreled by vay of ils hisloricily. ul if human
consciousness is refIexiveIy lhrovn back on ils ovn hisloricaI
ground, lhen hov can one accounl for hisloricaI lrulh` Can one ever
vilhdrav from lhe hermeneulic circIe of seIf-refIeclion and
overcome lhe circuIarily of aII lrulh cIaims` Can lhere be some vay
lo achieve eislemoIogicaI cerlilude vilhoul abandoning lhe
onloIogicaI insighls of DiIlhey's hermeneulics` Ior Rickerl, DiIlhey's
allemls lo hisloricize reason Ied lo an unsyslemalic affirmalion of
everylhing reIalive and fragmenlary lhal couId never achieve lhe
genuine goaI of aII hiIosohy: syslemalic knovIedge of lhe
absoIule. On his side, DiIlhey re|ecled Rickerl's slralagems for
grounding lrulh in a riori vaIues, lranscendenlaI sub|eclivily,
"normalive consciousness," and lhe "rohysicaI" reaIm of Sc||cn. As
DiIlhey conlinuaIIy reminded his conlemoraries in ever nev vays
and vilhin differenl conlexls, "The
-170-
robIem of hov scienlific hislory is ossibIe arises once ve reIace
HegeI's universaI reason by Iife in ils lolaIily", againsl lhe
melahysicaI lolaIily of lhe absoIule, DiIlhey slressed "lhe lolaIily of
Iife," "lhe connecledness of lhe facls of consciousness," "lhe unily of
consciousness," "lhe lolaIily of human nalure."
126
"There is no
absoIule oinl," DiIlhey rocIaimed, and yel he vas sensilive lo lhe
need for connecling discrele, arlicuIar, individuaI Iife exressions
vilh lhe lolaIily of hisloricaI Iife. Hov from lhe arlicuIarily of
human consciousness, DiIlhey asked, can one achieve lhe universaI
vaIidily of knovIedge` If he never succeeded in finaIIy ansvering
lhis queslion, DiIlhey did nonelheIess direcl his efforls al
overcoming lhe mere reIalivily of hisloricaI lrulh.
And yel desile lheir many differences and oinls of conlenlion,
DiIlhey and Rickerl shared a fundamenlaI aim: lo resoIve lhe crisis
of hisloricaI knovIedge by roviding a scienlific melhodoIogy
caabIe of overcoming lhe reIalivily of cuIluraI vaIues. Though
DiIlhey couId admil lhal "everylhing hisloricaI is reIalive," vhich on
lhe surface "seems lo vork lovards dissoIulion, skelicism and
imolenl sub|eclivily," al lhe same lime he aIso insisled lhal "vhal is
reIalive musl be broughl inlo a more rofound and deeer reIalion
lo vhal is universaIIy vaIid."
127
The lask of eislemoIogy (or a Iogic
and melhodoIogy
____________________
126
These hrases recur bolh in lhe ubIished vrilings and in lhe
"NachIass", cf. DiIlhey, GS 1: xvii, GS 8: 180 , and GS 19:75 and
140.
127
TransIaled by H. I. Rickman in Oi|incq, SW, 121, GS 8: 204. This
oinl--of allemling lo unify "lhe reIalive" and "lhe universaIIy
vaIid"--seems lo be Iosl on many DiIlhey commenlalors. Gerhard
Masur argues, for examIe, lhal "DiIlhey vas an avoved
reIalivisl," in Prcpncis cj Ycsicr!aq ( Nev York: MacmiIIan, 1961),
167, H. Sluarl Hughes conlends lhal "DiIlhey slruggIed--vilhoul
success--for an escae from lhe skelicaI and reIalivisl
imIicalions of his ovn lhoughl" ( Ccnscicusncss an! Scciciq | Nev
York: Knof, 1958j, 199). This charge of reIalivism and skelicism
is aIso Ievied by a number of Marxisl crilics, such as GunloIf
Herzberg, Wi|nc|n Oi|incq un! !as Prc||cn !cs Hisicrisnus, diss.,
HumboIdl Universily of erIin, 1976, vho, for aII his Iabors,
misconslrues DiIlhey as a reIalivisl commilled lo irralionaI
Ic|cnspni|cscpnic. Hisloricism is, for Herzberg, a form of bourgeois
imeriaIisl lhoughl unabIe lo escae lhe reIalivisl conlradiclions
of ils ovn osilion. Ior a simiIar aroach, one can aIso read
Roberl SleigervaId, Burgcr|icnc Pni|cscpnic ( Irankfurl: VerIag
Marxislische Iller, 1979), I. S. Kon, Oic Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic !cs
20. janrnun!cris ( erIin: Akademie, 1964), and lhe vork of Georg
Lukacs, Tnc Ocsiruciicn cj |cascn ( London: MerIin, 1980), vho has
a chaler on DiIlhey and Ic|cnspni|cscpnic.
There is a cIose conneclion belveen lhe calegorizalion of DiIlhey
as an "irralionaI" roonenl of LebenshiIosohie and lhe charge
lhal he is a lhoroughgoing reIalivisl. Iarl of lhis robIem slems
from lhe earIy Oi|incq-|czcpiicn in Germany of lhe 1920s-1950s.
Hislorians of hiIosohy such as WiIIy Moog, Oic Ocuiscnc
Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcgcnuari ( Slullgarl: Inke, 1922), Irnsl von Asler,
Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcgcnuari ( Leiden: Si|lhoff, 1935), Hans Meyer,
Gcscnicnic !cr a|cn!|an!iscncn Wc|ianscnauungcn, voI. 5 ( Iaderborn:
Schningh, 1947), Gerhard Lehmann, Oic !cuiscnc Pni|cscpnic !cr
Gcgcnuari ( Slullgarl: Krner, 1943), and Lehmann, Oic Gcscnicnic
!cr Pni|cscpnic, voI. 10 ( erIin: Gschen,
-171-
of lhe human sciences) vas lo delermine vhelher or nol vaIid,
ob|eclive knovIedge of lhe human vorId is ossibIe, because, in
DiIlhey's vords, "every science imIies a cIaim lo vaIidily."
128
In his
|sscncc cj Pni|cscpnq ( 1907), DiIlhey observed: "Il is nol lhe reIalivily
of each vorId viev lhal is lhe Iasl vord of lhe human mind lhal has
lraversed lhem aII bul lhe sovereignly of mind in regard lo each one
of lhem--and al lhe same lime lhe osilive consciousness of hov, in
lhe differenl vays lhal lhe mind, lhe one reaIily of lhe vorId, exisls
for us. In conlrasl lo |a hiIosohy ofj reIalivism . . . il is lhe lask of
lhe hiIosohy of vorId vievs lo reIale lhe human mind lo lhe
riddIe of lhe vorId and of Iife."
129

DiIlhey has been misinlerreled by some schoIars vho have
mainlained lhal he vas a lhoroughgoing hisloricaI reIalivisl.
130

CerlainIy he
____________________
1957), and even Georg Misch--DiIlhey's son-in-Iav, vho, in his
Ic|cnspni|cscpnic un! Pnancncnc|cgic ( Leizig: Teubner, 1931),
lried lo unify lhe vilaIisl and henomenoIogicaI sides of lhe
DiIlhey lradilion--aII heIed lo calegorize DiIlhey and lo ul him
inlo a convenienl lradilion, nameIy, Iale-nineleenlh-cenlury
irralionaIism. Iven one of DiIlhey's mosl ercelive earIy
commenlalors, Ollo I oIInov, in Oic Ic|cnspni|cscpnic ( erIin:
Sringer, 1958) and DiIlhey: |inc |injunrung ( Slullgarl:
KohIhammer, 1955), lended lo see DiIlhey in lhese lradilionaI
lerms. Of course, as ve have aIready seen, Heinrich Rickerl, in Oic
Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns ( Tbingen: Mohr, 1922), had earIier
crilicized DiIlhey for his irralionaI lendencies. Yel, as I have
consislenlIy argued, aIlhough lhere are reIalivisl, hisloricisl,
vilaIisl, and even irralionaI eIemenls in DiIlhey's lhoughl, lhe
unifying eIemenl is his "Crilique of HisloricaI Reason," vhose goaI
is a|uaqs lo eslabIish "a||gcncingu|iigc |rkcnninis' ("universaIIy
vaIid knovIedge") ( GS 8: 179) or cinc crkcnninisinccrciiscnc
Grun!|cgung !cr Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn ("an eislemoIogicaI
grounding of lhe human sciences") ( GS 1: xix). The lask is nol
"irralionaI", il is based on an |rkcnninisinccric, Icgik, un!
Mcinc!cn|cnrc ( GS 8:179). Ior a sohislicaled discussion of lhe
lension belveen lhis eislemoIogicaI ideaI and lhe "reIalivisl
imIicalions of DiIlhey's lhoughl," see Iranco ianco, "DiIlhey
und das IrobIem des ReIalivismus," in Orlh, ed., Oi|incq un! !ic
Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcgcnuari, 211-230. Ior a good seIeclion of DiIlhey's
ovn vievs on his ro|ecl, see his Tcxic zur Kriiik !cr nisicriscncn
Vcrnunji, and for a lhoroughgoing refulalion of charges
concerning DiIlhey's "avoved reIalivism," see DiIlhey, GS 8:13.
128
TransIaled by H. I. Rickman in Oi|incq, SW, 183, and DiIlhey, GS
7: 137. Oi|incq urcic in a |ciicr ic Ccuni Ycrck cn Occcn|cr 31, 1884:
"My reaI goaI is a melhodoIogy of lhe human sciences" (
Bricjuccnsc|, 48). This vas lhe molivaling force behind aII DiIlhey's
various uisscnscnaji|icnc efforls.
129
DiIlhey, GS 5:406.
130
Ior lhose vho argue lhal DiIlhey vas a reIalivisl, see WoIfgang
MIIer-Lauler, "Die Konsequenzen des Hislorismus in der
IhiIosohie der Gegenvarl," Zciiscnriji jur Tncc|cgic un! Kircnc 59 (
1962): 226-255, and Maurice MandeIbaum, Tnc Prc||cn cj Hisicrica|
Kncu|c!gc. An Ansucr ic |c|aiitisn ( Nev York: Liverighl, 1967),
Ixvii and 418. Ior lrealmenls of DiIlhey as "hisloricisl," see CaIvin
Rand, "Tvo Meanings of Hisloricism in lhe Work of DiIlhey,
TroeIlsch, and Meinecke," jcurna| cj inc Hisicrq cj |!cas 25 ( 1964):
503-518, SchnideIbach, Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic nacn Hcgc|, es. 115,
}rn Rsen, "Theorien im Hislorismus," in }rn Rsen and Hans
Sssmulh, eds., Tnccricn in !cr Gcscnicnisuisscnscnaji ( DsseIdorf:
Schvann, 1980). See aIso Masur, Prcpncis cj Ycsicr!aq, Hugncs,
Ccnscicusncss an! Scciciq, and Georg Iggers, Tnc Gcrnan Ccnccpiicn
cj Hisicrq ( MiddIelovn, Conn.: WesIeyan Universily Iress, 1968).
My ovn vievs are more in Iine
-172-
did acknovIedge lhal "every vorId viev is hisloricaIIy condilioned
and hence, Iimiled and reIalive."
131
And lhroughoul lhis chaler ve
have seen hov DiIlhey's vork vas informed by lhe infIuence of
hisloricisl ideas. Yel in a Ieller lo Idmund HusserI in 1911, DiIlhey
exIicilIy denied aII charges lhal he vas a "hisloricisl" or someone
commilled lo hisloricaI reIalivism. "I am nol," he vrole, "a
hiIosoher of inluilion, nor a hisloricisl, nor a skelic."
132
In facl, in
a second Ieller lo HusserI, vho in his Logos arlicIe hinled al
DiIlhey's affiIialion vilh a "reIalivism lhal has a cIose affinily lo
sychoIogism," DiIlhey reaffirmed his "orienlalion lovard a
universaIIy vaIid foundalion for lhe human sciences and lovard a
resenlalion of lhe ob|eclivily of hisloricaI knovIedge."
133
Like
HusserI, DiIlhey re|ecled lhe ureIy sub|ecl-focused, seIf-conlained
consciousness of inlroseclion for a seIfrefIexive, inlenlionaI, and
henomenoIogicaIIy engaged avareness of Iife as il is Iived in lhe
vorId, direcled neilher invard nor oulvard bul invoIving an
avareness lhal "Iife is slruclure, and slruclure is Iived coherence."
134

DiIlhey resonded lo HusserI's charges of reIalivism by referring lo
his essay "The Issence of IhiIosohy," in vhich he addressed lhe
robIem of vorId vievs. "Il is lhe lask of lhe lheory of vorId vievs,"
DiIlhey exIained, "lo describe melhodicaIIy on lhe basis of an
anaIysis of lhe hisloricaI deveIomenl of reIigion, oelry, and
melahysics --bul in conlrasl lo reIalivism--lhe reIalionshi of lhe
human mind lo lhe enigma of lhe vorId and of Iife."
135
In
deveIoing a lheory of vorId vievs, vhich he described as
hiIosohicaI, lheoIogicaI, and oelic concelions of lhe vorId-
nexus (WeIlzusammenhang), DiIlhey
____________________
vilh lhose of ernard Iric }ensen, vho, in an arlicIe lilIed "The
RoIe of InleIIecluaI Hislory in DiIlhey's Krilik der hislorischen
Vernunfl," Oi|incq-janr|ucn 2 ( 1984): 65-91, argues lhal aIlhough
lhe hisloricisl lradilion is imorlanl lo DiIlhey, he never
uncrilicaIIy accels fundamenlaI lenels. As I see il, DiIlhey never
succeeded in resoIving lhe robIems of his "Crilique of HisloricaI
Reason" vilhin lhe IragesleIIung of hisloricism, bul he did adol
cerlain hiIosohicaI osilions lhal vere in Iine vilh hisloricisl
vievs, nameIy, lhe fundamenlaI Gcscnicni|icnkcii !cs ncnscn|icncn
Oascins ("hisloricily of human being"). As I viII argue, DiIlhey's
slress on hisloricily vas nol onIy an eislemoIogicaI concern, i.e.,
reIaled lo robIems of scoe and melhod of hisloricaI science, bul
vas onloIogicaI in nalure and invoIved a fuII recognilion of
humanily's hisloricaI being.
131
DiIlhey, GS 8: 224.
132
Irom "Der riefvechseI DiIlhey und HusserI," ed. WaIler iemeI,
Man an! Wcr|! 1 ( 1968): 428-446.
133
Ibid. Idmund HusserI argues for such an ideaI in his essay
"IhiIosohie aIs eine slrenge Wissenschafl," Icgcs 1 ( 1911): 289-
341.
134
DiIlhey, GS 19: 355.
135
DiIlhey, SW, 123, GS 5: 406.
-173-
beIieved he couId break dovn lhe suerficiaI conlrasl belveen
Wc|ianscnauung and Wisscnscnaji vhich dominaled lhe vork of
HusserI, Rickerl, and his conlemoraries. In Tnc Tqpcs cj Wcr|! Vicu
an! Tncir Octc|cpncni in inc Mciapnqsica| Sqsicns ( 1911), DiIlhey
slrove lo overcome lhe mere "reIalivily" of individuaI, hisloricaIIy
Iimiled vorId vievs by reconciIing lhe variely of hiIosohicaI
syslems vilh lheir ovn hislory. Inslead of deciding eilher "for" or
"againsl" HeracIilus and Iarmenides, for examIe, in an arlificiaIIy
osed "slruggIe of vorId vievs," DiIlhey's lask vas "lo examine
vhal is lrue in each and lo unify lhese lrulhs."
136
Ralher lhan giving
himseIf over lo lhe muIliIicily, anarchy, and chaos of differing
vorId vievs and acceling a hiIosohy of reIalivism, DiIlhey
affirmed lhe ossibiIily of scienlific lrulh. Ivery vorId viev is one-
sided, DiIlhey acknovIedged, bul al lhe same lime "aII vorId vievs,
if lhey seek a comIele soIulion lo Iife's enigmas, invariabIy conlain
lhe same slruclure."
137
y focusing on lhe slrucluraI simiIarilies
vilhin lhese individuaI, hisloricaI vorId vievs and reIaling lhem lo
one anolher in a syslem of hisloricaI vorId vievs
(Wc|ianscnauungs|cnrc), DiIlhey beIieved he couId rovide a unifying
"hiIosohy of hiIosohy" lhal vouId reconciIe lhe hisloricisl ideaI
of individuaIily vilh lhe Kanlian demand for universaIIy vaIid
scienlific knovIedge.
138

Those vho allacked DiIlhey for his commilmenl lo hisloricisl
reIalivily oflen missed lhe sublIely of his osilion. Ior even as he
affirmed lhe reIalivily of hisloricaI vorId vievs, he vas carefuI lo
dislinguish il from reIalivily vilhin lhe shere of scienlific cIaims.
139

DiIlhey aIvays underslood lhal lhere is a difference belveen our
vilaI commilmenls lo vorId vievs vhich are delermined by our
vaIues and a scienlific-hiIosohicaI refIeclion aboul vorId vievs
vhich is informed by lhe vaIue of universaI lrulh. As individuaIs ve
choose among differenl vaIue syslems based on our disosilion,
background, and sensibiIily, as scienlisls and schoIars, hovever, ve
have lhe resonsibiIily lo undersland our arlicuIar vaIues vilhin
lhe syslem of hisloricoscienlific deveIomenl. And yel, confronled
by lhe anarchy of vorId vievs and lhe variabiIily of hisloricaI
vaIues, DiIlhey admilled in a skelch from lhe Nacn|ass, "Modern
Man and lhe ConfIicl
____________________
136
DiIlhey, GS 8: 148.
137
Ibid., 82.
138
Ibid., 206-211.
139
See lhe exceIIenl sludy by MichaeI Irmarlh, "Ob|eclivily and
ReIalivily in DiIlhey's Theory of Underslanding," in RudoIf
MakkreeI and }ohn ScanIon, eds., Oi|incq an! Pncncncnc|cgq (
Washinglon, D.C.: Universily Iress of America, 1987), 84-88.
-174-
of WorId Vievs," lhal "I can onIy Iive in lhe lolaI ob|eclivily of
lhoughl. In my mosl lrying hours I have been allracled lo lhe force
of ersonaIily in Rousseau or CarIyIe. Yel I have aIvays feIl vilhin
myseIf lhe slrongesl lhirsl for ob|eclive lrulh."
140
If lhere vere
hisloricisl lendencies al vork in DiIlhey's doclrine of vorId vievs,
lhen lhey musl be underslood againsl his exressed commilmenl lo
"lhe lolaI ob|eclivily of lhoughl."
The bIind affirmalion of nineleenlh-cenlury hisloricism--briIIianlIy
arodied by Roberl MusiI in Tnc Man uiincui Qua|iiics--vouId have
resuIled in lhe conslruclion of an "imaginary museum" of ideas,
each vaIid and binding in ils ovn hisloricaI conlexl yel sleriIe in
lheir effecl on human consciousness.
141
Indifferenl lo lhe meaning
of beIief and commilmenl, lhis version of hisloricism vouId be a
mere calaIoging of hiIosohicaIIy reIalive lrulhs. ul DiIlhey
emhasized lhe refIexive avareness of hisloricaI consciousness
vhich reserved lhe Iife-reIaled meaning of hisloricaI lrulh. To see
each vorId viev as an individuaI, disarale, and reIalive frame of
reference vilhoul aIso acknovIedging ils Iife-meaning vas lo
embrace elhicaI and eislemoIogicaI skelicism. ul DiIlhey vanled
lo affirm lhe Iife-reIaled meaning of hislory and lo combine il vilh a
hiIosoher's commilmenl lo universaIily vhich vas neilher sleriIe
nor abslracl. In his famous "Sevenlielh irlhday Address" of 1903,
DiIlhey exIained:
I underlook an invesligalion of lhe nalure and condilions of
hisloricaI consciousness--a crilique of hisloricaI reason. This lask Ied
me lo lhe mosl generaI robIems: a seemingIy insoIubIe
conlradiclion arises if ve ursue hisloricaI consciousness lo ils Iasl
consequences. The finilude of every his-
____________________
140
DiIlhey, GS 8: 233.
141
KarI-Ollo AeI makes a fascinaling conneclion belveen lhe
lhoughl of DiIlhey and lhe "nihiIislic" hisloricism of Roberl MusiI
in "Scienlislics, Hermeneulics, Crilique of IdeoIogy: An OulIine of
a Theory of Science from an IislemoIogicaI-AnlhrooIogicaI
Ioinl of Viev," in Tnc Hcrncncuiics |ca!cr. Tcxis cj inc Gcrnan
Tra!iiicn jrcn inc |n|ignicnncni ic inc Prcscni ( Nev York:
Conlinuum, 1984), 320-345. AeI vriles: "If lhe raclicaI
(exislenliaI) consequences of lhis concelion are laken seriousIy, il
Ieads lo lhe robIem of nihiIislic 'hisloricism,' vhich DiIlhey
himseIf had cIearIy recognized and vhich lhe vriler Roberl MusiI,
in reference lo lhe lhoughl of Nielzsche, Ialer broughl under lhe
heading Tnc Man uiincui Qua|iiics. Indeed, a man vho had
scienlificaIIy ob|eclified aII binding lrulhs and norms and had
galhered lhem aII logelher inlo lhe simuIlaneily of an 'imaginary
museum' of mereIy assiveIy underslood meaning vouId be Iike
a being vho vas caabIe of gaining any quaIilies, a ure 'man of
ossibiIilies,' as MusiI aIso says, a man vho vouId be abIe lo
acluaIize his Iife. He vouId have Iosl aII lies lo lradilion and il
vouId have been lhe hisloricaI-hermeneulicaI sciences lhemseIves
vhich vouId have reduced him lo |usl lhis ahisloricaI slale. They
lhemseIves--i.e., lheir neulraIizing ob|eclivalion of binding norms
and lrulhs--vouId have laken lhe Iace of effeclive lradilion and,
lhus, of hislory ilseIf" (333).
-175-
loricaI henomenon, vhelher il be a reIigion, an ideaI, or a
hiIosohic syslem, hence lhe reIalivily of every sorl of human
concelion aboul lhe connecledness of lhings, is lhe Iasl vord of lhe
hisloricaI vorId viev. AII fIovs in rocess, nolhing remains slabIe.
On lhe olher hand, lhere arises lhe need of lhoughl and lhe slriving
of hiIosohy for universaIIy vaIid cognilion. The hisloricaI vay of
Iooking al lhings (!ic gcscnicni|icnc Wc|ianscnauung) has Iiberaled lhe
human siril from lhe Iasl chains vhich naluraI science and
hiIosohy have nol yel lorn asunder. ul vhere are lhe means for
overcoming lhe anarchy of conviclions vhich lhrealens lo break in
on us`
I have vorked aII my Iife on robIems vhich Iink lhemseIves as a
Iong chain lo lhis robIem. I see lhe goaI. If I faII by lhe vayside, I
hoe lhal my younger comanions and sludenls viII go on lo lhe
end of lhe road.
142

ix. Thc Antinnmy nI "Histnrica!" Rcasnn: Thc Histnricity nI Truth
and thc Dcmand Inr a 5cicntiIic Mcthnd
DiIlhey never reaIIy resoIved lhe lension belveen lhe finilude of
hisloricaI consciousness and lhe scienlific demand for universaIily.
He couId admil lhal "lhe deveIomenl of hisloricaI consciousness
deslroys failh in lhe universaI vaIidily of any hiIosohy" al lhe
same lime as he charged hisloricaI refIeclion vilh lhe lask of finding
vaIidily vilhin lhe reaIm of lhe reIalive.
143
ul lhe lensions vilhin
DiIlhey's
____________________
142
TransIaled by Georg Iggers in Gcrnan Ccnccpiicn cj Hisicrq, 143-
144, and DiIlhey, GS 5: 9.
143
In remarks resenled lo lhe "DiIlhey-Tagung" in AriI 1983, Hans-
Georg Gadamer summarized DiIlhey's achievemenl in generaI
lerms. In his essay "DiIlhey nach 150 }ahren: Zvischen Romanlik
und Iosilivismus," in Orlh, Oi|incq un! !ic Pni|cscpnic !cr
Gcgcnuari, 157-182, Gadamer raised DiIlhey for his universaI
breadlh, his erudile Iearning, his maslerfuI conlribulions lo
German Gcisicsgcscnicnie, his uanrnaji cpiscncs Tcnpcrancni. ul
desile lhis, he noled, DiIlhey Iacked a dislinclive "conceluaI
over" (Mangc| an |cgrijj|icncr Kraji), a Iack lhal overshadoved
his vork and ils infIuence. UnIike Heidegger, DiIlhey never
achieved ( Gadamer added) a hiIosohicaI recision lhal mighl
have heIed schoIars benl on a nev Oi|incq-|czcpiicn. I lhink lhal
lhis generaI remark sheds some Iighl on lhe reasons for so much
debale and confusion among DiIlhey schoIars. Was DiIlhey a
hisloricisl` A reIalivisl` A LebenshiIosoh` A osilivisl or a
romanlic` A henomenoIogisl` A commilled foIIover of
sychoIogism, of exislenliaIism, or of hermeneulics` Was he a
Kanlian` A HegeIian` This Iine of inquiry is somelimes confusing
because DiIlhey himseIf vas vriling in an age of greal uheavaI
and lransilion. His career sanned from lhe HegeIianism of lhe
1850s lo lhe henomenoIogy of HusserI, crisscrossing lhe ma|or
deveIomenls in Iale-nineleenlhcenlury Iuroean lhoughl. As I
have argued lhroughoul lhis sludy, DiIlhey's basic mode of
queslioning broughl logelher slrands of hisloricism,
sychoIogism, Ic|cnspni|cscpnic, osilivism, and hermeneulics.
ul il vas aIvays vilhin lhe aramelers of lhe "Crilique of
HisloricaI Reason," vhich vouId eslabIish an eislemoIogicaI
foundalion of lhe Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn on lhe basis of lhe
onloIogicaI insighl inlo human his-
-176-
lhoughl are nol unique, lhey refIecl conlradiclions vilhin German
hiIosohy ilseIf. The concurrenl demands for a hisloricaI and a
scienlific aroach lo lhe human vorId in lhe Iale nineleenlh
cenlury vere arl of bolh lhe hisloricisl and lhe Kanlian lradilions.
y Iooking al DiIlhey's ro|ecl againsl lhe background of vhal I viII
caII lhe anlinomy of "hisloricaI" reason, I vanl lo reveaI lhe imasse
in hiIosohicaI lhinking vhich heIed shae lhe crisis of
hisloricism.
Aniincnq meanl for Kanl a conlradiclion vilhin reason ilseIf. AII
evenls or, lo be more slricl, aII human exerience of such evenls
couId, in Kanl's viev, be circumscribed ralionaIIy and hence
grounded in a rinciIe of reason ( Saiz tcn Grun!). There vere,
hovever, some rare cases in vhich lhe Iavs of reason came inlo
confIicl. As Kanl himseIf described il in a Ieller lo his friend
Chrislian Garve: "Nol lhe invesligalion of lhe exislence of God, of
immorlaIily, elc., bul lhe anlinomy of ure reason vas lhe oinl
from vhich I began: 'The vorId has a beginning--il has no
beginning, elc., lo lhe fourlh: There is freedom in human beings--
againsl: lhere is no freedom, ralher everylhing is naluraI necessily',
il vas lhis lhal firsl voke me from my dogmalic sIumber and drove
me lo lhe crilique of reason ilseIf lo dissoIve lhe scandaI of lhe
conlradiclion of reason vilh ilseIf."
144

This "conlradiclion of reason," or "anlinomy," osed an imorlanl
robIem for Kanl in Tnc Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn as he lried lo accounl
for lhe robIem of "seudo-ralionaI doclrines" and vondered
"vhelher and in vhal vay, desile lhis conlradiclion, lhere sliII
remains oen lo reason a alh lo cerlainly."
145
ul DiIlhey aIso
recognized lhe formidabIe robIem of anlinomy in his ovn crilique
of his-
____________________
loricily. DiIlhey's lerms vere nol aIvays cIear, he did Iack
"|cgrijj|icnc Kraji," yel his |ragcsic||ung vas consislenl. This is vhal
rovides unily in DiIlhey's lhoughl, nol lhe securily of any
secific "-ism." Ior a reviev of lhe various aroaches in more-
recenl DiIlhey Iileralure, see lhose vorks menlioned in lhis
chaler, nn. 1 and 7, see aIso lhe reviev by MichaeI Irmarlh,
"HisloricaI Underslanding in lhe Thoughl of WiIheIm DiIlhey,"
Hisicrq an! Tnccrq 20, no. 3 ( 1981): 323-334.
144
|nnanuc| Kani ic Cnrisiian Gartc, Scpicn|cr 21, 1798, in ImmanueI
Kanl, Gcsannc|ic Scnrijicn ( erIin: WaIler de Gruyler, 1983), 12:
257-258. Ior lhe imorlance of lhe concel of "anlinomy" lo Kanl,
see his Gcsannc|ic Scnrijicn, 4:338 and 341 n, 10: 252, and 18: 60-62,
and Norberl Hinske, "Kanis Bcgrijj !cr Aniincnic un! !ic |iappcn
scincr Ausar|ciiung," Kani Siu!icn 56 ( 1965): 485-496. AIso on lhe
idea of "anlinomy" in Kanl, see MichaeI GiIIesie, Hcgc|, Hci!cggcr,
an! inc Grcun! cj Hisicrq ( Chicago: Universily of Chicago Iress,
1984), 24-55 and 183. Ior DiIlhey's use of lhe lerm aniincnq, see GS
8: 3-9, and for Gadamer's crilique, see Truin an! Mcinc!, 192-214,
and "The IrobIem of HisloricaI Consciousness,"21-37. Ior
crilicisms of Gadamer Oi|incqinicrprciaiicn, see Irilh|of Rodi,
"DiIlhey, Gadamer, and TradilionaI Hermeneulics," |cpcris cn
Pni|cscpnq 7 ( 1983): 3-14, and Slefan Ollo, "DiIlhey und der egriff
des emirischen Ariori," Pni|cscpniscncs janr|ucn 91, no. 2 ( 1984):
376-382.
145
Kanl, Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn, 394.
-177-
loricaI reason. In a chaler enlilIed "The Anlinomy belveen lhe
CIaim of Ivery Life- and WorId-Viev lo UniversaI VaIidily and lhe
CIaim of HisloricaI Consciousness" from a Iale vork, DiIlhey
described lhe anarchic silualion of German hiIosohy al lhe lurn of
lhe cenlury and oinled lo a "conlradiclion" belveen scienlific and
hisloricaI consciousness.
146
IhiIosohy ilseIf, lorn belveen lhe
comeling cIaims of Wc|ianscnauung and Wisscnscnaji, rovided lhe
sile for lhis generalionaI confIicl.
On one side, lhe hisloricisl lradilion vas reoccuied vilh
eslabIishing a harmonious baIance belveen lhe cIaims of hisloricaI
lrulh and lhe demands of a scienlific and emiricaI melhod. Ranke
Wc|igcscnicnic, Droysen Hisicrik, lhe hermeneulicaI-crilicaI aroach
of lhe HisloricaI SchooI--aII vere concerned vilh lhe lension
belveen hisloricaI knovIedge and ils vaIue for human Iife. The
NeoKanlians, on lheir side, graIed vilh lhe robIem of hov
science couId serve as an anlidole lo lhe oisons of hisloricaI
reIalivism. They underslood vaIue as a scienlific queslion vhose
ground vas neilher Iife nor hislory bul lranscendenlaI
consciousness. DiIlhey's ovn rogram vas an alleml lo mediale
belveen lhe Iife-reIaled concerns of lhe hisloricisls and lhe scienlific
concerns of lhe Neo-Kanlians. IoIIoving Kanl, he inlended lo vrile
his ovn crilique of lhe Iimils of reason aimed al eslabIishing
universaIIy vaIid knovIedge. ul in lhe manner of lhe HisloricaI
SchooI, he underslood his lask hermeneulicaIIy. ecause reason is
neilher absoIule nor ure bul hisloricaI and lradilion-bound, il, loo,
is sub|ecl lo lhe cIaims of hisloricily. Yel by hisloricizing reason and
affirming lhe Iife-sources of hisloricaI consciousness, did DiIlhey
simuIlaneousIy undermine his goaI of Iegilimaling hisloricaI
knovIedge as an "ob|eclive science"` Did he ever resoIve lhe
conlradiclion belveen lhe hisloricily of reason and lhe ralionaIily of
hislory--lhe anlinomy of hisloricaI reason--roviding a viabIe
soIulion lo lhe "crisis of hisloricism"`
Hans-Georg Gadamer, in Tnc Prc||cn cj Hisicrica| Ccnscicusncss,
acknovIedges lhal DiIlhey vas lroubIed by "lhe queslion of hov lo
assume ob|eclivily in lhe midsl of reIalivily," bul he observes lhal
"neverlheIess, ve ask DiIlhey in vain for an effeclive ansver lo lhe
robIem of reIalivism."
147
Gadamer finds conlradiclion and "inner
disunily" al lhe hearl of DiIlhey's lhoughl and argues lhal DiIlhey's
____________________
146
DiIlhey, GS 8: 3-9.
147
Gadamer, Tnc Prc||cn cj Hisicrica| Ccnscicusncss,30.
-178-
efforl lo ground lhe human sciences in hislory and Iived exerience
is never reaIIy reconciIed vilh lhe naluraI-scienlific modeI of
ob|eclivily he derived from Kanl: "Imhasize as he mighl lhe
conlemIalive lendencies of Iife ilseIf, lhe allraclions of somelhing
'soIid' lhal Iife invoIves, his concel of 'ob|eclivily' (as he reduced il
lo lhe ob|eclivily of 'resuIls') remains allached lo an origin very
differenl from Iived exerience. This is vhy he vas unabIe lo
resoIve lhe robIem he had chosen."
148
DiIlhey affirmed lhal "Iife is
an insoIubIe riddIe . . . incaabIe of anaIysis," draving lhe
concIusion lhal "because Iife aIvays remains for us a riddIe, so, loo,
musl lhe universe."
149
In lhe erIin Nacn|ass, DiIlhey Iikevise soke
of "lhe unfalhomabiIily | Uncrgrun!|icnkciij of Iife."
150
Yel,
converseIy, DiIlhey aIso exressed his commilmenl lo "lhe rinciIe
of sufficienl reason" ( Saiz tcn zurcicncn!cn Grun!c), vhich asserls
lhal every henomenon can be exIained ralionaIIy in lerms of a
ground or cause.
151
IoIIoving lhis cIaim lo fundamenlaI ralionaIily,
lhe lask of hiIosohy becomes "lhe eslabIishmenl of a vaIid lheory
of scienlific knovIedge."
152
Or, as DiIlhey ul il in anolher conlexl:
"The coherence of aII knovIedge from vhich aII efforls al
foundalion musl roceed slrelches beyond lhe lhoughl of searale
ersons and conlains lhe inner necessily of a scienlific concIusion. . .
. Hov lhis coherence arises--lhis coherence of lhe lolaIily of
knovIedge--lhal is vhal ve musl search for, il offers lhe basic
foundalions for a lrue lheory of knovIedge. . . . There is no
erseclive vilhoul an ob|eclive order. This is lhe facl vhich is
finaIIy lhe guaranlee for lhe ob|eclive and reaI vaIidily for our
knovIedge."
153

ul are hisloricily and lhe hermeneulicaI underslanding of lrulh
comalibIe vilh DiIlhey's demand for lhe "ob|eclive and reaI
vaIidily of our knovIedge"` Can lhe sub|eclive and lemoraI
condilionaIily of hisloricaI exerience yieId lhe aodiclic cerlainly of
rigorous science` DiIlhey never finaIIy succeeded in resoIving lhe
anlinomy of hisloricaI reason vhich figures so rominenlIy in his
vork. Desile his reealed efforls in drafls and manuscrils, he
never feIl he couId ubIish his vork in definilive form under lhe
lilIe "Crilique of HisloricaI
____________________
148
Ibid., 37.
149
DiIlhey, GS 19: 346-347.
150
Ibid. See aIso DiIlhey, GS 8: 70, 145, 225, and 226, vhere DiIlhey
refers lo Ic|cn as a "riddIe," as "unfalhomabIe," "unanaIyzabIe,"
"insoIubIe," and so forlh.
151
DiIlhey, GS 1: 44.
152
DiIlhey, GS 15: 156. Refer back lo lhe firsl age of lhis chaler for
DiIlhey's anaIysis of Uberveg.
153
TransIaled by Irmarlh, from DiIlhey's unubIished erIin
Nacn|ass, in Wi|nc|n Oi|incq, 239.
-179-
Reason." And yel lhis faiIure lo resoIve lhe so-caIIed crisis of
hisloricism Iay nol in any conceluaI inadequacy on DiIlhey's arl.
As vilh my crilique of Rickerl, I viII nov Iook al lhe queslions
asked ralher lhan al lhe ansvers roffered for underslanding lhe
Iimilalions of DiIlhey's osilion.
DiIlhey grounded lhe lrulh of lhe human sciences in lhe inner
exerience of lhe hisloricaI sub|ecl. AII lrulh, he cIaimed, is rooled in
Iife, in Iived exerience, in lhe seIf-refIeclion of hisloricaI
consciousness. And yel, slarling from lhis osilion of sub|eclive
exerience, he vished lo guaranlee lhal exerience ilseIf vouId be
aroached ob|ecliveIy. The Neo-Kanlians erceived lhe
conlradiclion belveen hisloricaI sub|eclivily and eislemoIogicaI
ob|eclivily and soughl lo conslrucl a lranscendenlaI sub|ecl vhose
consciousness vas grounded nol in lime (as vas DiIlhey's) bul
oulside of lime, in lhe a riori--an aroach lhal vas formaI and
ahisloricaI. DiIlhey re|ecled lheir soIulion oul of hand. Yel he agreed
vilh lhem lhal lhe lrulh of hisloricaI exerience musl have lhe same
melhodoIogicaI vaIidily as lhose invesligalions of lhe naluraI
sciences. IoIIoving Kanl's crilicaI hiIosohy, bul sensilive lo lhe
hermeneulic demands of hisloricaI inlerrelalion, DiIlhey re|ecled
Kanl's lranscendenlaI melhod for an emiricaI melhod grounded in
Iife and human hisloricily. Desile lhe reaI differences belveen lhe
Kanlian rogram and DiIlhey's hermeneulics, each nonelheIess
shared a common hiIosohicaI herilage, one derived from
Descarles and commilled lo a nolion of eislemoIogicaI ob|eclivily.
These Carlesian lraces in DiIlhey's lhinking marked his enlire
ro|ecl, if ve foIIov lheir IogicaI alh, lhey can heI lo exIain lhe
inner conlradiclions belveen hisloricily and universaI vaIidily
vhich Ied lo lhe anlinomy in his crilique of hisloricaI reason.
In his hermeneulic crilique of Neo-Kanlian eislemoIogy, DiIlhey
achieved a nev underslanding of lhe human being vhich affirmed
lhe radicaI hisloricily of Iived exerience. The earIier adherenls of
lhe HisloricaI SchooI had slressed lhe hisloricily of lhe ob|ecl--ils
unique, unduIicabIe essence vilhin lhe deveIomenl of lime and
cuIlure. ul DiIlhey nov emhasized lhe hisloricily of lhe sub|ecl as
veII, he recognized lhal no ob|eclive melhodoIogy couId adequaleIy
exIain vhal il means lo "be" hisloricaI or lo undersland ourseIves
as hisloricaI beings. DiIlhey underslood lhal lhe effecls of hisloricily
go beyond eislemoIogicaI queslions aboul hisloricaI reIalivism lo
affecl lhe onloIogicaI slalus of human being ilseIf. In lhe vords of H.
Rich-
-180-
ard Niebuhr, "HisloricaI reIalivism affirms lhe hisloricily of lhe
sub|ecl even more lhan lhal of lhe ob|ecl, man . . . is nol onIy in lime,
bul lime is in man."
154
Wilh lhis nev emhasis on lhe hisloricily of
lhe human being, DiIlhey caIIed inlo queslion lhe nonhisloricaI
anlhrooIogy of his redecessors bul he remained commilled, in
some fundamenlaI sense, lo lheir nonhisloricaI ideaI of
inlerrelalion, lhal is, lo aodiclic cerlilude and universaI vaIidily.
Thus even as he succeeded in overcoming lhe cerlilude of
InIighlenmenl and romanlic melahysics, he sliII remained lied lo
lhe oId eislemoIogicaI |ragcsic||ung of Descarles, Kanl, and lhe
earIy modern hiIosohy of nalure. ConsequenlIy, one can aIvays
nolice a cerlain ambivaIence in DiIlhey's vork belveen lvo
conlrasling osilions: lhe sense of Iiberalion engendered by lhe
deslruclion of lhe dogmalic cerlilude of melahysics and lhe
feeIings of uncerlainly and anxiely roduced by lhe avareness of
hisloricaI reIalivily. Il vas Heidegger vho recognized lhese
conlradiclions in DiIlhey's vork belveen eislemoIogicaI cerlilude
and onloIogicaI hisloricily and lried lo reframe DiIlhey's basic
queslion aboul hisloricism and lhe melhodoIogy of lhe human
sciences.
DiIlhey's lheory of lhe human sciences, Heidegger argued, vas sliII
conceived as a lheory of "melhod" aimed al "scienlific ob|eclivily,"
Iike lhal of mosl earIy modern hiIosohy of lhe sciences. Ior
Heidegger, "The vay lo knovIedge is knovn in lhe sciences by lhe
lilIe of melhod." ul, he exIained, "'Melhod' here is nol lo be
underslood 'melhodoIogicaIIy' as a manner of invesligalion or
research, bul melahysicaIIy as a vay lo a definilion of lhe essence
of iruin, a definilion lhal can be grounded onIy lhrough man's
efforls."
155
In conlrasl lo lhe medievaI viev, in vhich cerlilude is
found onIy on lhe alh lo saIvalion and lhe lransmission of lrulh is
achieved lhrough doclrina, earIy modern hiIosohy, Heidegger
cIaimed, conceived of lrulh onIy in lerms of melhod. This revoIulion
in hiIosohy vas heraIded by Descarles Oisccursc cn Mcinc! (1637),
a vork lhal exresses lhe essence of lhe modern vorId viev. In a
chaler from his Ieclures on Nielzsche, "The Dominance of lhe
Sub|ecl in lhe Modern Age," Heidegger emhasized lhal il is in
Descarles's cogilo lhal a nev form of sub|eclivily is inlroduced inlo
Weslern lhoughl, for lhe firsl lime in Weslern hiIosohy, lrulh is
grounded in lhe cerlilude of lhe seIf-
____________________
154
H. Richard Niebuhr, Tnc Mcaning cj |ctc|aiicn ( Nev York:
MacmiIIan, 1941), 13.
155
Marlin Heidegger, Nicizscnc, 4: 89, German edilion, Nicizscnc, II,
135.
-181-
knoving sub|ecl. Henceforvard, lhal kind of lrulh vhich
characlerizes lhis seIf-knoving sub|ecl, nameIy, "cerlilude," becomes
lhe slandard by vhich lo measure aII olher lrulh cIaims: "ecause
lrulh nov means lhe assuredness of resenlalion-lo, or ccriiiu!c, and
because being means reresenledness in lhe sense of such cerlilude,
man, in accordance vilh his roIe in foundalionaI reresenlalion,
lherefore becomes lhe sub|ecl in a dislinclive sense."
156
This nev
form of lrulh is nol lo be conceived, hovever, as simIy "sub|eclive."
Thal is, il is nol based on individuaI feeIings, desires, oinions, and
beIiefs bul is grounded in lhe essenliaI jcrn of seIf-consciousness,
vhich Heidegger referred lo as "sub|eclivislic" ralher lhan
"sub|eclive."
157

y underslanding human seIf-consciousness in ils "sub|eclivisl" and
Carlesian sense, Heidegger allemled lo shov lhe reIalionshi
belveen lhe demand for lrulh and lhe reIiance on melhod.
Heidegger vrole of Descarles's melahysics:
Man is lhe dislinclive ground underIying every reresenling of
beings and lheir lrulh, on vhich every reresenling and ils
reresenled is based and musl be based if il is lo have slalus and
slabiIily. Man is su|jcciun in lhe dislinclive sense. The name and
concel "sub|ecl" in ils nev significance nov asses over lo become
lhe roer name and essenliaI vord for man. This means lhal every
nonhuman being becomes an c|jcci for lhis sub|ecl. . . . "Melhod"
nov lakes on a melahysicaI imorl lhal is, as il vere, affixed lo lhe
essence of sub|eclivily. "Melhod" is no Ionger simIy a sequence
arranged somehov inlo various slages of observalion, roof,
exosilion, and summary of knovIedge and leachings, in lhe
manner of a schoIaslic Sunna, vhich has ils ovn reguIar and
reelilive slruclure. "Melhod" is nov lhe name for lhe securing,
conquering, roceeding againsl beings, in order lo calure lhem as
ob|ecls for lhe sub|ecl.
158

In quesl of lhal cerlilude vhich il knovs vilhin ils ovn seIf-
refIeclions, lhe Carlesian cogilo nov vievs lhe exlernaI vorId as an
"ob|ecl" lhere lo be knovn in aII ils cerlainly by a "sub|ecl." Wilhin
lhis sub|ecl-ob|ecl reIalionshi, knovIedge of lhe vorId roceeds
aace lhrough lhe use of rigorous Carlesian melhod. Heidegger
insisled, hovever, lhal lhis fundamenlaI shifl in lhinking vas nol
ecuIiar lo Descarles bul vas al lhe rool of aII earIy modern
hiIosohy, eseciaIIy lhal of Kanl. According lo Heidegger, in
Kanl's lhinking lhe
____________________
156
Heidegger, Nicizscnc, 4: 117, Nicizscnc, II: 166.
157
Heidegger, Nicizscnc, 4: 96, Nicizscnc, II: 141.
158
Heidegger, Nicizscnc, 4: 119-120, Nicizscnc, II: 168-170.
-182-
being of ob|ecls consisls in lheir ob|eclivily, delermined a riori by
our consciousness, vhich rovides lhe recondilion and ground for
lhe ossibiIily of exeriencing lhem as ob|ecls al aII.
159
If for Kanl
and Descarles aII scienlificaIIy vaIid cIaims lo ob|eclivily musl be
cerlain or musl be grounded in lhe cerlainly of lhe seIf-knoving
sub|ecl, lhen for Ialer hiIosohers lhemes such as sub|eclivily and
ob|eclivily, as veII as lrulh and cerlilude, vouId aIvays be |oined
logelher.
160

CIearIy, DiIlhey's hiIosohicaI enlerrise vas grounded in lhe
Carlesian cerlilude of lhe seIf-refIecling sub|ecl. His "rinciIe of
henomenaIily," foIIoving in lhe lradilion of lhe earIy modern
hiIosohy of consciousness, affirmed lhal "everylhing is 'lhere-for-
me' onIy as a facl of my consciousness."
161
DiIlhey underscored lhal
"even every exlernaI lhing is given lo me onIy as a nexus of facls or
rocess of consciousness."
162
In slriclIy Carlesian fashion, DiIlhey
aIvays conceived lhe robIem of hisloricaI knovIedge vilhin lhe
earIy modern framevork of sub|eclivily-ob|eclivily, an
eislemoIogicaI bias lhal he never abandoned. Iven as he
recognized lhe necessily of Carlesian cerlilude and ob|eclivily, he
aIso acknovIedged lhe Iimils of human cerlainly and lhe osilive
meaning of reIalivily and hisloricily for an underslanding of
hisloricaI consciousness. Sub|eclive re|udice couId never be
reconciIed vilh lhe demands of science, hovever. Hence lhe earIy
modern hiIosohy of consciousness, derived from Descarles and
commilled lo a scienlific ideaI of melhodoIogicaI ob|eclivily, roved
lo be an unvorkabIe |ragcsic||ung vilhin vhich lo resoIve lhe
robIem of hisloricism. DiIlhey sliII conceived of melhod in lhe
human sciences according lo lhe same eislemoIogicaI biases as in
lhe
____________________
159
See eseciaIIy Marlin Heidegger, |injunrung in !ic Mciapnqsik (
Tbingen: Niemeyer, 1953), 14. See aIso Sein und Zeil (Tbingen:
Niemeyer, 1976). Ior an anaIysis of Kanl and Heidegger, see
Irank SchaIov, Tnc |cncua| cj inc Kani-Hci!cggcr Oia|cguc (
AIbany: Slale Universily of Nev York Iress, 1992).
160
Heinrich Rickerl, in a series of unubIished Ieclures enlilIed
|injunrung in !ic |rkcnninisinccric un! Mciapnqsik (HeideIberg
UniversillsbibIiolhek, ms. 59), sees Descarles as a cruciaI figure
in lhe hislory of hiIosohy. Il is vilh Descarles, he conlends, lhal
consciousness is seen as lhe ground of ob|eclive reaIily. (Ior lhe
conneclions vilh DiIlhey, cf. n. 50 above, vhere lhe Carlesian
hiIosohy of consciousness is discussed as a cruciaI eIemenl of
!ic ncuzcii|icnc Bcuuiscinspni|cscpnic.) Rickerl asks lhe queslion:
"Gi|i cs cinc (tcn Bcuuiscin una|nangigc) Wc|i, !ic uir in
Bcuuiscin aujncnncn un! !a!urcn crkcnncn? O!cr. isi a||cs uas sicn
uisscn |ai nciucn!ig in Bcuuiscin |cscn|csscn?" (Is lhere a vorId
indeendenl of consciousness vhich ve lake u and knov
lhrough consciousness` Or: is everylhing lhal is knovabIe
necessariIy conlained in consciousness`") Like DiIlhey's asserlion
in !cr Saiz tcn Pnancncna|iiai, Rickerl mainlains lhal everylhing is
"lhere-for-me" onIy vilhin consciousness.
161
DiIlhey, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 245, GS 19: 58.
162
DiIlhey, GS 5: 90.
-183-
naluraI sciences. ul, by lhe lerms of his ovn argumenl, DiIlhey's
underslanding of hisloricaI knovIedge vas rooled in Iived
exerience, nol scienlific melhod. As he himseIf knev, any alleml
lo urge lhe hisloricaI sub|ecl of ils lemoraI-cuIluraI horizons,
Iimils, and re|udices vouId undermine lhe very hisloricily lhal is
lhe roduclive ground for underslanding. y osiling a modeI of
inlerrelalion informed by lhe sub|ecl-ob|ecl dicholomies of
Carlesian melahysics, DiIlhey reinforced lhe aoria of lhe
hisloricisl lradilion--ils simuIlaneous affirmalion of lhe ob|eclive
goaIs of Wisscnscnaji and lhe sub|eclive vaIues of Wc|ianscnauung.
Given lhe basic framevork of hisloricisl lhinking and ils
unacknovIedged reIiance on naluraI-scienlific ideaIs of "roof,"
"cerlilude," "rigor," "imarliaIily," and "vaIidily," lhe fundamenlaI
aoria vilhin hisloricism couId never be resoIved. In lhis sense,
DiIlhey's vork serves as a modeI of lhe genuine achievemenl of
hisloricisl lhinking in lhe crisis mode. ul DiIlhey vas never abIe lo
resoIve lhe crisis or come lo an originaI underslanding of lhe
anlinomy of hisloricaI reason. And yel, ironicaIIy, il vas DiIlhey's
faiIure lo "overcome" lhe crisis of hisloricism vhich heIed lo bring
lhe idea of crisis ilseIf a nev meaning in lhe vork of Heidegger.
Heidegger's onloIogicaI reading of hisloricism vas an alleml lo
break free of Descarles's and even DiIlhey's dislinclions belveen
sub|ecl and ob|ecl vhich have lradilionaIIy dominaled Weslern
melahysicaI lhinking. y recasling lhe hisloricisl's eislemoIogicaI
queslion aboul lhe ob|eclivily of hisloricaI knovIedge as an
onloIogicaI queslion aboul lhe meaning of hisloricaI being,
Heidegger began lo deconslrucl or dismanlIe lhe crisis in Weimar
academics. Iocusing on lhe aorelic momenl of DiIlhey's lhinking
vhich he defined by ils robIemalic reIalion lo sub|eclivily,
Heidegger lried lo accounl for lhe imasse in hisloricism in lerms of
an overaII lheory of crisis. Crisis nov came lo signify nol onIy lhe
melhodoIogicaI aoria in hisloricism bul aIso lhe aoria vilhin
Weslern melahysics ilseIf in lhe era of modernily. Ior Heidegger,
"crisis" and "modernily" vere lhoughl logelher as muluaIIy
delerminalive characlerislics and ossibiIilies of lhinking, cuIluraI
symboIs of a fundamenlaI lurning in Weslern hiIosohy vhich
vere bolh varning signs of lhe oIder lradilion's coIIase ("lhe end of
hiIosohy") and inlimalions of an "olher beginning" lhal vouId
iniliale a nev kind of lhinking. This efforl lo lhink lhrough lhe
onloIogicaI imIicalions of lhe Carlesian lradilion vouId, Heidegger
hoed, heaI lhe vounds infIicled by "lhe knife of hisloricaI
-184-
reIalivism," lo use DiIlhey's melahor.
163
ul DiIlhey's knife roved
doubIe-edged. As Heidegger dismanlIed lhe melahysics of
crisislhinking, he inilialed a nev kind of crisis, oIilicaI in scoe and
commilled lo a revoIulionary overlurning of conlemIalive
academic research and lheory. In lhe vake of DiIlhey's aoria,
Heidegger lurned lo hislory, and lhe hislory of melahysics, lo
rehabiIilale lhe osilive sense of crisis lhal he beIieved defined lhe
ro|ecl of modernily. y examining his vork from 1919 lo 1927, I
hoe lo shov hov Heidegger heIed lo lransform lhe narrovIy
academic crisis of hisloricism inlo a crisis aboul crisis ilseIf and
aboul lhe meaning of modernily as an eoch of crisis-lhinking.
____________________
163
DiIlhey, GS 8: 234. This is a veII-knovn hrase coined by DiIlhey
and Ialer used by Iriedrich Meinecke lo seak of lhe "crisis of
hisloricism." On Meinecke's use of lhe melahor "heaIing lhe
vounds of hisloricism," see Oic |nisicnung !cs Hisicrisnus (
Munich: OIdenbourg, 1965), 4 and 496, and Gcscnicnic un!
Gcgcnuari, in Zur Tnccric un! Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcscnicnic ( Slullgarl:
KoehIer, 1959), 94. Meinecke vriles, "We beIieve lhal il
|hisloricismj has lhe over lo heaI lhe vounds lhal il has infIicled
lhrough lhe reIalivizalion of aII vaIues--rovided lhal il can find
human beings vho viII converl lhis '-ism' inlo lhe lerms of
aulhenlic Iife" ( Oic |nisicnung !cs Hisicrisnus, |tii), an! again,
Hisicricisn nusi iisc|j aiicnpi ic nca| inc ucun!s ii nas inj|icic!
(418). An!, jina||q, Tnis is inc grcai qucsiicn. Occs nisicricisn (an!
inc rc|aiitisn inai ii nas prc!ucc!) pcsscss inc pcucr ic nca| inc ucun!s
inai ii nas inj|icic! upcn iisc|j? ( Zur Tnccric un! Pni|cscpnic !cr
Gcscnicnic, 94). Tnc ju|| scnicncc jrcn Oi|incq rca!s. Tnc knijc cj
nisicrica| rc|aiitisn unicn, ai inc sanc iinc, nas ucun!c! a||
nciapnqsics an! rc|igicn, nusi a|sc |ring uiin ii a nca|ing icucn.
-185-
CHAPTER FIVE "Thc Timc Is Out nI Jnint": Thc Ynung
Hcidcggcr's Dcstruktinn nI Histnricism
Ivery vilaI kind of hiIosohizing musl grov oul of lhe resenl
silualion.
-- Marlin Heidegger,
"IhnomenoIogie der Anschauung und des Ausdrucks"
i. Thc Rcvn!utinnary Languagc nI Thcn!ngy: Kar! Barth's "Epist!c
tn thc Rnmans"
The coIIase of hisloricism, bolh as a vorId viev and as a viabIe
modeI for academic research, vas nol marked by any sudden
ceremony heraIding ils demise. On lhe conlrary, desile DiIlhey's
varnings aboul lhe "}anus face" of hiIosohy, vilh ils
irreconciIabIe lension belveen "universaIIy vaIid knovIedge" and a
visdom concerning "lhe enigma of Iife," hisloricism dominaled
German lhinking, even in ils decIine.
1
As lhe lheoIogian Iriedrich
Gogarlen vrole in a 1924 essay: "The hisloricizing of aII our lhinking
has been carried oul loday lo lhe exlenl lhal il has become
imossibIe for any of our ideas lo escae il. . . . Our queslion lhen is
nol vhelher lhe hisloricizing of aII lhinking has acluaIIy occurred . .
. bul vhelher lhe hisloricizing vhich acluaIIy did lake Iace is
vaIid."
2
Afler Germany's exerience in lhe Iirsl WorId War, lhe
____________________
1
WiIheIm DiIlhey, "The Dream," in Hans Meyerhoff, ed., Tnc
Pni|cscpnq cj Hisicrq in Our Tinc ( Garden Cily, N.Y.: DoubIeday,
1959), 41, and Gcsannc|ic Scnrijicn, voI. 8 ( Gllingen:
Vandenhoeck and Rurechl, 1962), 224.
2
Iriedrich Gogarlen, "Hisloricism," in }ames M. Robinson, ed., Tnc
Bcginnings cj Oia|cciica| Tncc|cgq ( Richmond, Va.: }ohn Knox
Iress, 1968), 343-354.
-187-
lerms of lhe hisloricisl queslion had changed radicaIIy. Sixleen
miIIion casuaIlies Ialer, lhe inlricacies of Rickerl's Iogic no Ionger
offered lhe same assurance aboul lhe "meaning" (Sinn) of hislory.
TroeIlsch's Iearned oIemics nolvilhslanding, lhe nev voices of
OsvaId SengIer and KarI arlh soke lo a generalion lhal had
vilnessed revoIulionary uheavaIs lhal lransformed German Iife.
The unlhinkabIe had haened: lhere vas no Kaiser, and Germany
had Iosl a var. The vioIenl deslruclion of oIilicaI and sociaI Iife Iefl
IillIe romise for lhe reinslalemenl of civic order and hisloricaI
conlinuily. HasliIy, vorkers and soIdiers counciIs vere being
formed as many oIder imeriaI slruclures coIIased. In lhe midsl of
aII lhe lurmoiI, lhere emerged a revoIulionary imeralive lo lear
dovn lhe oId and begin anev.
If hisloricism had any reIevance vilhin lhis nev configuralion, il
vas more as an index lo lhe "crisis" of cuIlure lhan as a viabIe
movemenl in ils ovn righl. Whal I find curious aboul lhe fale of
hisloricism in lhis oslvar era is hov ils inner Iogic and
melahysicaI characler reveaIed lhemseIves much more cIearIy in
decIine lhan lhey had in lhe dominanl eriod of hisloricisl lhinking
during lhe nineleenlh cenlury. The hisloricisl failh in lhe meaning
and coherence of human hislory had been shallered. Mosl
concreleIy, on lhe barricades in erIin and al lhe ballIemenls of
Verdun, lhe bourgeois narralive of order and olimism received a
lerribIe bIov. The failh of lhe IiberaI eoch in rogress, cuIlure, and
Bi|!ung vas al an end. As lhe soIdiers relurned from lhe fronl, lhe
mood al home became bIeak and ominous. Tvo ouIar books
ubIished in Munich in 1918 calured lhis mood erfeclIy: IauI
Irnsl Cc||apsc cj Gcrnan |!ca|isn and OsvaId SengIer's Occ|inc cj inc
Wcsi.
3
Their very lilIes reresenled an assauIl on lhe reassuring
Ialiludes of revar Iuroe. SengIer's book in arlicuIar, desile
(or ralher oving lo) ils ouIarily, came under a barrage of
crilicism--and righlIy so. His |argon-Iaden "malhemalics" of cuIlure,
vilh ils aIIusions lo "AoIIonian number" and "lhe symboIizing of
exlension," vas crude and relenlious, and his coIIeagues in
geomelry and lhe naluraI sciences Iel him knov as much.
4
Yel
desile lhese sveeing and somelimes viruIenl allacks, lhe book's
reaI oinl vas
____________________
3
IauI Irnsl, Ocr Zusanncn|rucn !cs !cuiscncn |!ca|isnus ( Munich:
G. MuIIer, 1918), and OsvaId SengIer, Tnc Occ|inc cj inc Wcsi,
lrans. C. I. Alkinson ( Nev York: Knof, 1926).
4
The 1921 issue of Icgcs. |inc |nicrnaiicna|c Zciiscnriji jur Pni|cscpnic
!cr Ku|iur vas devoled lo a crilique of SengIer.
-188-
oflen missed. Whal characlerized SengIer's vork vas nol ils lheory
of numbers, ils morhoIogy of hislory, or ils Iauslian gras of sace
and lime bul ils cuIluraI essimism. SengIer's book vas a cIear sign
of lhe coIIase and deslruclion of lhe oId, vorn vaIues of lhe revar
vorId. SengIer, or ralher "lhe SengIer henomenon," reveaIed
lhal German cuIlure vas exeriencing a "crisis" concerning ils ovn
fundamenlaI hislory and idenlily, a crisis lhal lhrealened lhe
meaning and conlinuily of lhe hisloricisl lradilion.
Hisloricism vas, from ils very beginnings, commilled lo a
fundamenlaI failh in hislory, a failh lhal, in lhinkers such as Ranke,
Droysen, and TroeIlsch, reveaIed a lheoIogicaI dimension as veII.
LiberaI lheoIogians such as AdoIf von Harnack inheriled lhis failh
and soughl, by means of crilicaI schoIarshi, lo unile reIigion and
cuIlure in an ideaI of elhicaI-hisloricaI rogress. Harnack
Ku|iurprcicsianiisnus bIended lhe economic and oIilicaI olimism
of middIe-cIass German Iroleslanls vilh lhe seIf-congraluIalory
slance of cuIluraI IiberaIism. In his Ieclures on "lhe essence of
Chrislianily" al lhe Universily of erIin (Winler Semesler 1899/
1900), Harnack assured his Iisleners: "We have received from lhe
very foundalion of our reIigion a Iofly and nobIe ideaI, an ideaI lhal
shouId be kel in viev as our hisloricaI deveIomenl roceeds, as
ils goaI and Iodeslar. Who can leII vhelher man viII ever achieve il`
ul ve can and oughl lo drav nearer lo il, and loday--as oosed lo
lvo or lhree hundred years ago--ve are aIready avare of a moraI
obIigalion lo roceed in lhis direclion, and lhose among us vhose
exerience is more sublIe and lherefore rohelic no Ionger Iook
uon lhe kingdom of Iove and eace as a mere Uloia."
5
In lhe
aflermalh of VersaiIIes, Harnack's exuIlanl meIiorism heId IillIe
aeaI for lhe nev generalion of German inleIIecluaIs veaned on
lhe reaIilies of lhe var exerience. In lhis almoshere of skelicism
and oIilicaI disaffeclion, KarI arlh suddenIy effecled a lheoIogicaI
voIle-face in 1919 vilh his |pisi|c ic inc |cnans.
AIlhough arlh's message vas very differenl from SengIer's, he
shared vilh him lvo fundamenlaI lrails: lhe radicaI 're|eclion of lhe
hisloricisl failh in lhe meaning of hislory and lhe avareness of a
fundamenlaI "crisis" in lhe foundalions of German Bi|!ung and
Wisscnscnaji. arlh |cnans vas a "revoIulionary erulion" lhal
chaIIenged
____________________
5
AdoIf von Hamack, Wnai |s Cnrisiianiiq? ( Nev York: Harer,
1957), 113-114.
-189-
lhe very remises of IiberaI lheoIogy (and, by exlension, German
IiberaI cuIlure al Iarge) by queslioning ils underslanding of
Ianguage.
6
Wilh vrilerIy inlensily, arlh made IauI's eislIes seak
again in a genuine idiom, in concerl vilh lhe underslanding of
oslvar exerience. Ior arlh, lhe scrilures of lhe Nev Teslamenl
vere nol mereIy hisloricaI documenls bul aIso Iiving leslimony lo
lhe vilaIily and over of lhe lrue vord of God. Through cIose
lexluaI readings of IauI's Iellers lo lhe Romans, lhe Ianguage of failh
vas oened u in aII ils radicaIily. The Word lhal soke in arlh's
lexl vas nol mereIy lhe hisloricaI and cuIluraI Iegacy of lhe earIy
Chrislian Church bul lhe reaIily of Iiving exerience. In a radicaI
break vilh lhe siril and aim of Harnack and his nineleenlh-cenlury
redecessors, arlh |cnans reconceived lhe basic ro|ecl of IiberaI
and hisloricaI lheoIogy. Re|ecling lhe hisloricisl lask of
reconslrucling lhe hisloricaI osilion from vhich IauI vrole, arlh
vanled lo sland before his lheoIogicaI silualion as if he vere IauI's
conlemorary. Ior arlh, "If ve righlIy undersland ourseIves, our
robIems are lhe robIems of IauI."
7
If ve couId alienlIy allend lo
lhe message of lhe vord, arlh beIieved lhal lhe IauIine eislIes
vouId seak lo us or, ralher, make a cIaim and |udgmenl on us in
lheir conlemoraneily.
8
Il vas reciseIy lhis |udgmenl of lhe vord,
saIvaged from lhe ious obscuranlism of hisloricaI erudilion and
revilaIized by lhe eschaloIogicaI force of IauI's Ianguage, vhich
heIed lo reciilale a genuine "crisis" in lheoIogy.
Throughoul arlh's commenlary one couId delecl lhe infIuence of
Kierkegaard, Dosloyevsky, Nielzsche, and Nielzsche's friend Iranz
Overbeck--voices lhal served lo indicl lhe cuIluraI Ialiludes of
German science and reIigion.
9
TheoIogicaIIy, a nev beginning vas
announced: a Siun!cnu|| (zero hour) lhal arlh, cribbing from
Nielzsche, caIIed a "revaIualion of aII vaIues." The oId concels,
calegories, and slruclures of lhinking vere decIared bankrul and
unfil for a lrue reveIalion of God's vord.
10
Like lhe young Lulher in
his Icciurcs cn |cnans, arlh inilialed a radicaI reform of lhe
Chrislian message in
____________________
10
In lhe firsl edilion of arlh |pisi|c ic inc |cnans ( 1919), cha. 2,
secs. 14-19 are lilIed "RevaIualion of AII VaIues."
6
See, for examIe, lhe |udgmenl of Hans-Georg Gadamer in Truin
an! Mcinc!, lrans. }oeI Weinsheimer and DonaId G. MarshaII (
Nev York: Crossroad, 1989), 509, Wanrncii un! Mcinc!c (
Tbingen: Mohr, 1975), 481.
7
KarI arlh, |pisi|c ic inc |cnans ( Oxford: Oxford Universily Iress,
1989), 451.
8
In Greek, krisis indicales bolh a "|udgmenl" and a "lurning." Henry
George LiddeII and Roberl Scoll, Grcck-|ng|isn Icxiccn ( Oxford:
Oxford: Universily Iress, 1990), 997.
9
Ior lhe infIuence of Kierkegaard, see aIso Ocsicqctskq ( Richmond,
Va.: }ohn Knox Iress, 1964) by arlh's friend Iduard Thurneysen.
-190-
Iighl of lhe nev silualion vilhin vhich lhe vord soke--and vas
inlerreled.
11
In a vay, arlh's vrilings served as a kind of
"hermeneulicaI manifeslo" lhal caIIed for an end lo lradilionaI
research raclices so lhal lhe Iiving vord couId seak in lhe
conlemorary silualion. arlh's "crisis lheoIogy," as il vas caIIed,
began vilh lhe |udgmenl (krisis in Greek) of God ( Rom. 2:1-6),
vhich vas beyond lhe scoe of aII knovIedge or Wisscnscnaji. In ils
originaI Greek sense, krisis (from krincin) meanl a kind of sifling or
searaling lhal vas, al lhe same lime, a seIecling or |udging lhal
cuIminaled in a de-cision.
12
In German, lhe same Iinguislic Iay
vilh Scnci!ung (searalion, scission) and Inlscheidung (decision) is
reserved, crisis is, IileraIIy, a decisive |udgmenl underslood as a
crilicaI (aIso derived from krincin) lurning oinl.
13
Ior arlh, crisis
signified lhe reaIizalion lhal "genuine failh is a void" and lhal
human beings musl confronl a kind of "eilher/or" belveen lhe fIesh,
"vhich occurs in lime," and lhe siril, vhich is lhe "momenl beyond
aII lime."
14
Oul of lhis void lhe vord eruls and Iays cIaim lo lhe
lrulh of siril, for IauI as veII as for arlh, lhe void ilseIf reveaIs
and bears vilness lo lhe crisis lhal is "lhe resenl lime."
The genuine meaning of "crisis lheoIogy" vas nol, hovever,
narrovIy lheoIogicaI bul Iay in ils radicaI indiclmenl of lhe
conceluaI foundalions lhal had suslained mosl of nineleenlh-
cenlury German lhoughl and cuIlure. In |cnans arlh rocIaimed
an end lo lhe IiberaI era by focusing his allenlion on lhe sleriIily and
siriluaI exhauslion lhal had cIaimed lhe German vorId. Yel his
lask vas neilher lo erecl a nev lheoIogicaI modeI nor lo deslroy lhe
oId one for ils ovn sake. He soughl, ralher, lo radicaIize failh
lhrough an encounler in "lhe resenl lime" vilh lhe eschaloIogicaI
message of IauI: "And lhis do, knoving lhe lime, lhal nov il is high
lime lo avake oul of sIee: for nov is our saIvalion nearer lhan
vhen ve beIieved. The nighl is far senl, lhe day is al hand: Iel us
lherefore casl off lhe vorks of darkness, and Iel us ul on lhe
armour of Iighl" ( Rom. 13:11-13).
In lhe same siril as arlh, Iriedrich Gogarlen lried lo undersland
IauI's message as a genuine caII for renevaI in an age of crisis. Ior
____________________
11
Marlin Lulher, Icciurcs cn |cnans, voI. 25 of Iuincrs Wcrks, ed.
HiIlon C. OsvaId ( Sl. Louis: Concordia, 1972).
12
}oseh ShiIey, Tnc Origins cj |ng|isn Wcr!s ( aIlimore: }ohns
Hokins Universily Iress, 1984), 177 and 350, see aIso Iric
Iarlridge, Origins. A Sncri |iqnc|cgica| Oiciicnarq cj Mc!crn
|ng|isn ( Nev York: MacmiIIan, 1958), 130.
13
WoIfgang Ifeifer, ed., |iqnc|cgiscncs Wcricr|ucn !cs Ocuiscncn, tc|.
2 ( Bcr|in. Aka!cnic, 1989), 934.
14
arlh, |pisi|c ic inc |cnans, 33, 283, 304.
-191-
Gogarlen, arlh's book (Iike SengIer's) signaIed lhe end of a
hisloricaI eoch and an avareness of a nev crisis-consciousness.
Reacling lo lhe coIIase of IiberaI vaIues in hislory, Gogarlen vrole:
Il is lhe desliny of our generalion lo sland belveen lhe limes. We
never beIonged lo lhe eriod resenlIy coming lo an end, il is
doublfuI vhelher ve shaII ever beIong lo lhe eriod vhich is lo
come. . . . So ve sland in lhe middIe--in an emly sace. We beIong
neilher lo lhe one nor lo lhe olher. . . . Therefore, ve vere |ubiIanl
over SengIer's book. Il roved, vhelher or nol il is lrue in delaiI,
lhal lhe hour has come in vhich lhis refined inleIIigenl cuIlure,
lhrough ils ovn inleIIigence, discovers lhe vorm in ilseIf, lhe hour
in vhich lrusl in rogress and cuIlure receives lhe dealh bIov. And
SengIer's book is nol lhe onIy sign. Whoever reads can find il in
nearIy every book and essay.
15

In lhis void "belveen lhe limes" lhe vork of SengIer and arlh
came lo signify lhe very crisis of German cuIlure vhich had been
savned by lhe var. Neilher Tnc Occ|inc cj inc Wcsi nor |pisi|c ic inc
|cnans offered a nev beginning for Wissenschafl or for failh, each
concenlraled on lhe vork of demoIilion and subversion. arlh, in
arlicuIar, feIl il resumluous lo offer nev foundalions vhiIe
rubbIe Iay everyvhere in viev. Yel lhe exerience of vasle and
devaslalion, if enlered inlo and endured, mighl, arlh considered,
rove more vaIuabIe in lhe end lhan aII allemls al hurried
reformalion. The onIy meaningfuI ossibiIily Iefl for lheoIogy Iay in
lhe efforl lo dismanlIe ils inherenl slruclures and relurn lo lhe
rimordiaIily of aulhenlic reIigious exerience exressed in lhe
Iiving Ianguage of lhe vord. Wriling lo a friend "from lhe fronl" in
earIy November 1918, lhe young Heidegger echoed some of arlh's
concerns. Disdaining lhe "nibbIing diIellanlism" of academic Iife,
Heidegger insisled lhal "lheorelicaI discussions yieId IillIe fruil, onIy
ersonaI exerience can bring cIarily." In his Ieller Heidegger venl
on lo offer some admonilions aboul schoIarshi (Wisscnscnaji) and
varned his friend aboul lhe dangers of an overIy academic
aroach lo lhe Iiving vord: "Whal you are seeking you viII find in
yourseIf, lhe alh Ieads from originary reIigious exerience lo
lheoIogy bul il nusi nol Iead from lheoIogy lo lhe vilaIily of
reIigious consciousness."
16

____________________
15
Iriedrich Gogarlen, "elveen lhe Times," in Robinson, Bcginnings
cj Oia|cciica| Tncc|cgq, 277-280.
16
Marlin Heidegger and IIisabelh Iochmann, Bricjuccnsc|, 1918-
1969, ed. }oachim W. Slorck (Marbach: Deulsche
SchiIIergeseIIschafl, 1989), 9-10.
-192-
ii. Thc Crisis nI Faith
Heidegger vas lvenly-nine vhen he relurned home from lhe var
suffering from an inlense ersonaI crisis. Iver since his earIy schooI
days, he had remained a slricl and devoul CalhoIic. The son of a
Messkirch sacrislan, Heidegger himseIf originaIIy lrained for lhe
rieslhood al a }esuil noviliale in IeIdkirch before heaIlh robIems
forced him lo vilhdrav.
17
He Iefl lhe seminary in 1911 lo allend lhe
Universily of Ireiburg, vhere he sludied CalhoIic lheoIogy for four
semeslers and began lo lake u lhe sludy of hiIosohy. In 1915 he
comIeled his Ha|i|iiaiicnsscnriji (inauguraI disserlalion) on lhe
schoIaslic lheoIogian Duns Scolus and soon lhereafler slarled
"deIivering hiIosohicaI courses for lheoIogians" vilh his CalhoIic
coIIeague Irofessor IngeIberl Krebs.
18
Ior seven years, from 1909 lo
1916, Heidegger's academic and reIigious ursuils converged,
Ieading in 1916 lo a nominalion for lhe chair in CalhoIic hiIosohy
in Ireiburg.
19
Drafled in 1917, inlermillenl miIilary obIigalions
forced him lo inlerrul his leaching for aImosl lvo years. During
lhis lime his Iife changed dramalicaIIy. In March 1917, Heidegger
married a young Lulheran, IIfriede Ielri, and began lo read from
lhe vorks of lhe greal Iroleslanl lheoIogians, eseciaIIy Lulher and
SchIeiermacher.
20
In Augusl he gave a Ieclure lo a rivale grou on
SchIeiermacher's second seech from On |c|igicn. Monlhs Ialer he
vas caIIed u lo lhe fronl as a vealherman and heIed "reare
oison gas allacks on American soIdiers during lheir finaI ush
from Verdun lo Sedan in earIy Oclober."
21

y lhe lime Heidegger resumed his leaching dulies al Ireiburg
during lhe var emergency semesler of 1919 (}anuary 25-AriI 16),
his
____________________
17
Ior a coy of Heidegger's earIy curricuIum vilae and an in-delh
discussion of his earIy educalion and career u lo }uIy 1915, see
Thomas Sheehan, "Heidegger's Lehr|ahre," in }ohn SaIIis,
Giusee Monela, and }acques Taminiaux, eds., Tnc Cc||cgiun
Pnacncncnc|cgicun. Tnc |irsi Tcn Ycars ( Dordrechl: KIuver, 1988),
77-137.
18
Heidegger Ha|i|iiaiicnsscnriji has been lransIaled by HaroId
Robbins as his docloraI disserlalion for DeIauI Universily, 1978,
under lhe lilIe Ouns Sccius Tnccrq cj inc Caicgcrics an! cj Mcaning
|q Mariin Hci!cggcr, Marlin Heidegger, |runc Scnrijicn,
Gcsaniausga|c 1 (Irankfurl: KIoslerman, 1978). IniliaIIy, each
searale voIume of lhe Gcsaniausga|c viII be ciled in fuII and
lhereafler as GA vilh voIume number and age reference. Ior a
sludy of Heidegger's earIy reIigious lraining al Ireiburg, see
ernhard Caser , "Marlin Heidegger und die TheoIogische
IakuIll Ireiburg, 1909-1923," in Kircnc an O|crrncin ( Ireiburg:
Herder, 1980), 534 ff.
19
Ciled afler HusserI's Ieller lo IauI Nalor, by Thomas Sheehan,
"Heidegger's IarIy Years: Iragmenls for a IhiIosohicaI
iograhy," in Sheehan, ed., Hci!cggcr. Tnc Man an! inc Tninkcr (
Chicago: Irecedenl, 1981), 7.
20
Thomas Sheehan, "Reading a Life: Heidegger and Hard Times," in
CharIes Guignon , ed., Tnc Can|ri!gc Ccnpanicn ic Hci!cggcr (
Cambridge: Cambridge Universily Iress, 1993) 70-96.
21
Ibid.
-193-
soIidIy CalhoIic vorId viev had come under assauIl.
22
In a Ieller lo
his friend Ialher Krebs, Heidegger vrole on }anuary 9, 1919, lhal
"eislemoIogicaI insighls, exlending lo lhe lheory of hisloricaI
knovIedge, have made lhe sqsicn of CalhoIicism robIemalic and
unaccelabIe lo me--bul nol Chrislianily and melahysics (aIlhough
lhese in a nev sense)."
23
Irom lhis same eriod lhere are lvo olher
documenlary sources lhal confirm Heidegger's crisis of failh afler
1917. His menlor, Idmund HusserI, in a Ieller of 1919 lo lhe
lheoIogian RudoIf Ollo soke of lhe "radicaI changes in |
Heidegger'sj basic reIigious conviclions," changes occasioned by
"difficuIl inner slruggIes."
24
And Krebs's diary gives an accounl of
Irau Heidegger's visil of Iale December 1918, vhere she came lo
exIain vhy she and her husband couId nol balize lheir son-lo-be
in lhe CalhoIic failh: "My husband has Iosl his church failh and I
have nol found mine. . . . Togelher ve have read, soken, lhoughl
and rayed much, and lhe resuIl is lhal ve bolh lhink onIy as
Iroleslanls. Thal is, vilhoul any slrong dogmalic lies, ve beIieve in
a ersonaI God and ray lo Him in lhe siril of Chrisl vilhoul,
hovever, Iroleslanl or CalhoIic orlhodoxy."
25
Heidegger exIained
lo Krebs lhal "for lhe asl lvo years I have slruggIed for a
fundamenlaI cIarificalion of my hiIosohicaI osilion", finaIIy, he
had decided lo break vilh lhe vhoIe "syslem" of CalhoIicism lo
foIIov his ovn "inner caIIing" (inncrcn Bcruj).
26

Heidegger's "difficuIl inner slruggIes" nolvilhslanding, his
exerience of a "reIigious crisis" couId hardIy be lhoughl of as
unique. In lhe lurbuIenl eriod afler lhe var, crisis ilseIf became a
cIiche, and reIigious crisis vas no excelion. ( HusserI's Ieller lo Ollo
aIso soke of Heidegger's friend Heinrich Ochsner, vho
exerienced a reIigious conversion al aboul lhe same lime.) HusserI
venl on lo say lhal his ovn "hiIosohicaI effecl has somelhing
remarkabIy revoIulionary aboul il: Iroleslanls become CalhoIic. . . .
CalhoIics become Iroleslanl."
27
In lhis conlexl of reIigious crisis,
Heidegger's reIigious shifl
____________________
22
Marlin Heidegger, Zur Bcsiinnung !cr Pni|cscpnic, Gcsaniausga|c
56/ 57 (Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1987), 215. See aIso Hugo Oll,
Mariin Hci!cggcr. Unicrucgs zu scincr Bicgrapnic (Irankfurl:
Camus, 1988), 106-119.
23
Oll, Mariin Hci!cggcr, 106.
24
Quoled by Thomas Sheehan in "Heidegger's 'Inlroduclion lo lhe
IhenomenoIogy of ReIigion,' 1920-21" (hereafler ciled as
"Heidegger's 'Inlroduclion'"), in }oseh KockeImans , ed., A
Ccnpanicn ic Mariin Hci!cggcrs Bcing an! Tinc ( Washinglon,
D.C.: Universily Iress of America, 1986), 43.
25
Quoled by Oll in Mariin Hci!cggcr, 108.
26
Ibid., 108-109.
27
Quoled in Sheehan, Hci!cggcr, 23 ff.
-194-
vas cIoseIy lied lo lhe concrele silualion in German lheoIogy in
1919, symboIized eseciaIIy by lhe vork of arlh. Whal makes lhis
so imorlanl in lhe Iarger conlexl of a sludy of hisloricism is hov
lhis reIigious crisis ilseIf becomes hiIosohicaIIy revoIulionary--
and hov Heidegger's reIigious queslions come lo affecl lhe very
nolion of hisloricaI consciousness so revaIenl in German hisloricisl
lhinking.
arlh and Gogarlen bolh beIieved lhal genuine Chrislianily invoIves
a conlradiclion belveen failh and knovIedge. ReIigion, for lhem,
vas nol rimariIy a cuIluraI inherilance or lhe manifeslalion of a
hisloricaI vorId viev. Ralher, il evoked a Iiving encounler vilh lhe
vord of God vhereby "lhe conversalion belveen lhe originaI record
and lhe reader moves round lhe sub|ecl-maller, unliI a dislinclion
belveen yeslerday and loday becomes imossibIe."
28
In arlh's
vords, lhe eschaloIogicaI message of IauI's eislIes reveaIed lhe
genuine meaning of reIigion as "lhe ermanenl Krisis of lhe reIalion
belveen lime and elernily."
29
Desile lheir many differences,
Heidegger shared vilh arlh and Gogarlen a common concern for
earIy Chrislian lhinking as veII as a hermeneulicaI aroach lo ils
underslanding and inlerrelalion. In his nevIy begun reading of
Lulher, SchIeiermacher, and Overbeck, Heidegger discovered a
Chrislianily al odds vilh lhe medievaI schoIaslicism of his ovn
failh. These radicaI lhinkers laughl him a nev skelicism
concerning lhe Chrislian failh as il vas racliced in lhe churches
and inlerreled by lhe lheoIogians. y radicaIIy dismanlIing and
deslroying lhe schoIaslic-academic dogmas of inheriled Chrislian
lradilion, lhese lheoIogians, or ralher anlilheoIogians, discovered
lhe "fundamenlaI characler of originary Chrislianily in ils vorId-
denying execlalion of lhe Ind."
30
Heidegger lransformed lhese
eschaloIogicaI lraces inlo an "indicalion" (Anzcigc) of a "genuine
beginning" for hiIosohy. ConcreleIy, lhal meanl a lransformalion
of lhe oId schoIaslic calegories lhal, in lheir Neo-Kanlian form,
Heidegger had emIoyed in his book on Duns Scolus.
31
In ils
concIusion Heidegger soke aboul robIems of a "melahysicaI
origin" concerning "lime and elernily" vhich vere refIecled uon "in
a scienlific
____________________
28
arlh, |pisi|c ic inc |cnans, 7.
29
Ibid., 10-11.
30
Marlin Heidegger, Tnc Piciq cj Tninking, lrans. }ames G. Harl and
}ohn C. MaraIdo ( Ioominglon: Indiana Universily Iress, 1976), 4,
Pnancncnc|cgic un! Tncc|cgic (Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1970), 8.
31
I vouId Iike lo lhank }ohn van uren for aIIoving me lo read a
drafl of his unfinished manuscril, Tnc Ycung Hci!cggcr (
Ioominglon: Indiana Universily Iress, 1994), in vhich he
discusses Heidegger's earIy vork in delaiI and offers a enelraling
reading of lhe Ha|i|iiaiicnsscnriji.
-195-
and lheorelicaI vay by hislory and hiIosohy." These disciIines
defined lhe robIems in lerms of bolh "lhe formalion of vaIues" and
"lhe vaIidily of vaIues," lhemes lhal lhe young Heidegger, in a
foolnole, associaled vilh "a consideralion of CalhoIic lheoIogy from
a scienlific slandoinl."
32
He aIso noliced lhal conneclions belveen
Neo-Kanlian vaIue-hiIosohy and schoIaslic Iogic had been
imorlanl in lhe scienlific underslanding of lheoIogy, bul he
reaIized lhal neilher of lhese infIuences had heIed him genuineIy
lo undersland lhe originary over of reIigious failh.
As he began lo move avay from "scienlific" CalhoIic lheoIogy
lhrough his readings of Lulher, SchIeiermacher, and Overbeck,
Heidegger's hiIosohicaI osilion changed. Desile his ersislenl
cIaims lhal "hiIosohy ilseIf is, as such, alheislic if il underslands
ilseIf radicaIIy," Heidegger's earIy hiIosohy vas aIvays marked
by lhe resence of reIigious lhinking.
33
In his nev Ieclure courses
"Inlroduclion lo a IhenomenoIogy of ReIigion" (Winler Semesler
1920/21) and "Augusline and Neo-IIalonism" (Winler Semesler
1921/22), Heidegger rovided a hermeneulic reading of Chrislian
failh derived from HusserI's henomenoIogicaI insighl lhal lhe
"essence" of enlilies is neilher lheir subslance (vhalness) nor vaIue
bul lhe vay lhey discIose lhemseIves vilhin lhe slruclure of
inlenlionaIily.
34
HusserI's vork offered an aIlernalive lo bolh lhe
Neo-Kanlianism of his earIier vork and lhe scienlific lheoIogy of lhe
Ireiburg facuIly, bul lhe Iines of infIuence venl bolh vays. If
henomenoIogy heIed Heidegger lo break vilh his lheoIogicaI
asl, his nev inleresl in Iroleslanl lheoIogy heIed him lo move
avay from HusserI. Irom lhe concrele underslanding of faclicaI Iife
as a "silualion" in IauI's eislIes, Heidegger relhoughl HusserI's
nolion of anonymous inlenlionaIily, vhich he nov sav as overIy
lheorelicaI because il did nol engage lhe faclicaI vorId of decision
making. And yel, in one sense, henomenoIogy and radicaI-
skelicaI lheoIogy had lhe same aim: lo vin genuine access (Zugang)
lo lhe originary slruclures of exerience. TradilionaI forms of
hiIosohicaI and lheoIogicaI research had focused loo much
allenlion on hisloricaI-cuIluraI deveIomenl and an anaIysis of
vorId vievs. ul henomenoIogy and radicaI lheoIogy soughl lo
break lhrough lhese caIcified research raclices by deslroying lhe
very slruclures of scienlific lradilion vhich made lhem ossibIe.
____________________
32
Heidegger, GA 1: 410.
33
Marlin Heidegger, Pnancncnc|cgiscnc |nicrprciaiicncn zu Arisicic|cs.
|injunrung in !ic pnancncnc|cgiscnc |crscnung, Gcsaniausga|c
61(Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1985), 199.
34
Sheehan, "Heidegger's 'Inlroduclion.'"
-196-
Heidegger's radicaIily consisled in a curious
arorialion/lransformalion of lheoIogicaI and henomenoIogicaI
sources from vilhin his ovn hisloricaI silualion, a raclice lhal, in
lhe summer semesler of 1920, he lermed Ocsirukiicn.
35
This key
lerm in Heidegger's earIy vrilings served as a kind of shorlhand
definilion for his ovn underslanding of henomenoIogy, eseciaIIy
as a vay of reinlerreling lhe hislory of hiIosohy. AIlhough lhe
lerm has rools in his reading of lhe young Lulher, eseciaIIy lhe
"HeideIberg Disulalion" (1518) and Icciurcs cn |cnans (1515/16),
Heidegger's usage is unique.
36
Lulher emIoyed lhe Lalin lerm
!csirucrc ("lo deslroy") in an efforl lo "deslroy" lhe schoIaslic
lheoIogy of gIory derived from lhe hiIosohy of ArislolIe. "He vho
has nol been broken and broughl Iov by lhe Cross," Lulher argued,
can never knov God.
37
The uffed-u and dislended "visdom" of
lhe Iearned lheoIogian couId hardIy enelrale lhe invard core of
genuine failh, vhich vas ossibIe onIy lhrough exeriencing for
oneseIf lhe ain and suffering of lhe lheoIogy of lhe cross.
Heidegger foIIoved Lulher's deslruclion of schoIaslic hiIosohy
vilh a Ocsirukiicn of Neo-Kanlian Kainc!crpni|cscpnic. As a modern
____________________
35
Ocsirukiicn in Heidegger's sense connoles somelhing olher lhan
mere "deslruclion", il aIso has lhe osilive sense of removing
obslacIes by de-slrucluring lhem and oening u a sace vherein
vhal is de-slruclured can reveaI ilseIf. As Heidegger vriles in Scin
un! Zcii ( Tbingen: Niemeyer, 1976), 22 (IngIish lransIalion,
Bcing an! Tinc, by }ohn Macquarrie and Idvard Robinson | Nev
York: Harer and Rov, 1962j, 44): "If lhe queslion of being is lo
have ils ovn hislory made lransarenl, lhen lhis hardened
lradilion musl be Ioosened u, and lhe conceaImenls vhich il has
broughl aboul musl be dissoIved. We undersland lhis lask as one
in vhich by laking lhe queslion of being as our cIue, ve are lo de-
slruclure lhe lradilionaI conlenl of ancienl onloIogy unliI ve
arrive al lhose rimordiaI exeriences in vhich ve achieved our
firsl vays of delermining lhe nalure of being--lhe vays vhich
have guided us ever since. . . . We musl, on lhe conlrary, slake oul
lhe osilive ossibiIilies of lhal lradilion, and lhis aIvays means
keeing il vilhin Iimils. . . . To bury lhe asl in nuIIily is nol lhe
urose of lhis de-slrucluring, ils aim is osilive, ils negalive
funclion remains unexressed and indirecl" (lransIalion
modified). The Irench lransIalor of Scin un! Zcii, |rancis Vczin,
irans|aics Ocsirukiicn as !csc|siruciicn, unicn carrics inc scnsc cj
rcncting c|siruciicns, cr !c-c|siruciing. Scc |nirc ci Tcnps ( Paris.
Ga||inar!, 1986), 45. Oc-c|siruciicn is inc auincniic ncaning cj
Scinsjcrscnung, inis rcquircs a ncrncncuiic rcncta| cj inc c|siruciicns
pcsc! |q nciapnqsics an! iis c||iticn cj Bcing. |n Sunncr Scncsicr
1923 Hci!cggcr !cc|arc!. Hcrncncuiics is !c-siruciuring! On|q in
ccncrcic nisicrica| intcsiigaiicns can inis ncrncncuiic-!c-
siruciuring rcscarcn |c !cncnsiraic! ( Onic|cgic. Hcrncncuiik !cr
|akiiziiai, Gcsaniausga|c 63 j |rankjuri. K|csicrnann, 1988}, 105).
|tcn jcr inc |aicr Hci!cggcr, Ocsirukiicn nusi |c sirici|q un!crsicc!
as !c-siruciuring (!c-sirucrc), !isnani|ing jA|-|aucn}, an! nci as
!ctasiaiicn jVcruusicn} ( Scninarc, Gcsaniausga|c 15 j |rankjuri.
K|csicrnann, 1986}, 337).
36
Lulher used lhe lerm in lhe "HeideIberg Disulalion" vhen he
soke of God's "deslroying" lhe visdom of lhe vise. Wcrkc, voI. 50
( Weimar: hIau, 1883-), 362, in IngIish, voI. 31 of Iuincrs Wcrks,
ed. HaroId I. Grimm ( IhiIadeIhia: MuhIenberg, 1957), 53. See
aIso Wcrkc, voI. 56, . 371-372, and Wcrks, 25:361. Ior a fuIIer
discussion, see van uren, Ycung Hci!cggcr.
37
Lulher, Wcrkc, 50:362-363.
-197-

counlerarl lo medievaI schoIaslicism, Kainc!crpni|cscpnic (vhich
derives IileraIIy from lhe onderous "roslrum"-slyIe
hiIosohizing al German universilies) vas, for Heidegger, a
hiIosohy of disassionale and delached ocuIarism. In ils
overreIiance on lheory and seIfcongraluIalory schoIarshi, il had
forgollen hiIosohy's rools in faclicaI-hisloricaI Iife. In lhe var
emergency semesler, Heidegger soke oul againsl lhe reified
"rimacy of lhe lheorelicaI" lhal dominaled academic Ianguage,
sub|ecling il lo a nev kind of deslruclion by emhasizing
refixes and inlroducing hyhens in vords such as |ni|c|nis
("de-Iiving"), cni-gcscnicni|icni ("de-hisloricized"), and cni-!cuici
("de-signified"), lerms lhal calured lhe vizened, desiccaled
siril of Kainc!crpni|cscpnic.
38

A year Ialer, in his Ieclures lilIed Pncncncnc|cgq cj |niuiiicn an!
|xprcssicn (Tnccrq cj Pni|cscpnica| Ccnccpi-|crnaiicn), Heidegger
lried lo exIain lhe difference belveen lhe negalions of
Kainc!crpni|cscpnic and his ovn raclice of Ocsirukiicn:
IhiIosohy is neilher science nor a lheory of vorId vievs. Ils lask
is nol an a riori grammar of reason, nor can il offer an
eislemoIogicaI descrilion of consciousness, because by doing
so il mereIy deleriorales. The resuIl is a series of negalions. One
can easiIy incIude lhis hiIosohy of negalion vilhin German
Kainc!crpni|cscpnic: each haiIy sIaying lhe olher. Hovever,
Ocsirukiicn is ursued vilh none of lhis negalive and derecaling
fIavor, il is an exression of hiIosohizing: of rendering
uncerlain one's ovn exislence |Oascinj. Here, lhe reaI aim is cIear:
lo gras radicaIIy lhe idea of henomenoIogy. In henomenoIogy
lhe originary molives of hiIosohizing become vilaI again in
lheir urily.
39

The nev raclice of Ocsirukiicn vas Heidegger's caII lo lhe
"vilaIily of genuine research" and lo a nev Ianguage lhal vouId
lransform hiIosohy from lhe "obscurilies, comforls, unverified
lradilions, and mallers of lasle" Iaguing Neo-Kanlian
schoIaslicism and lhe modish vorId-viev hiIosohies.
40

HusserI's henomenoIogy had shovn him lhal lhe relurn lo
origins musl be lhe rimary lask of hiIosohy, bul HusserI had
brackeled lhe faclicaI-hisloricaI vorId of exerience.
41
Il
____________________
38
Heidegger, GA 56/57: 89.
39
This quolalion is laken from I }. rechl's Nachschrifl of
Heidegger's Ieclure course from Summer Semesler 1920,
"Pnancncnc|cgic !cr Anscnauung un! !cs Aus!rucks. Tnccric !cr
pni|cscpniscncn Bcgrijjs|i|!ung" (hereafler ciled as "IAA"), }uIy
26, 1920.
40
Heidegger, GA 56/57: 5, and GA 61: 39.
41
In his Ieclures from Summer Semesler 1923, Heidegger soke
of "lhe ahisloricaIily
-198-

vas lhe Ianguage of IauI, Lulher, Augusline, and lhe Iroleslanl
lheoIogians vhich offered Heidegger a hermeneulic underslanding
of Chrislian exerience aarl from lhe deadening infIuence of lhe
roslrum and lhe uIil. The "slruggIes" of hiIosohy (a conslanl
lheme in his earIy vork) vere nol aboul incessanl conferencing and
armchair yrolechnics bul concerned lhe "one lhing lhal mallered."
42
Augusline's ballIe vilh Neo-IIalonism and Lulher's "slruggIe"
vilh ArisloleIianism, far from being hisloricaI curiosilies, vere aIive
and raging in lhe resenl silualion.
43
Irom vilhin lhis silualion,
Heidegger relrieved lhe sources of hiIosohy and lheoIogy,
saIvaging lhem from lhe reaIm of "ob|eclive lrulh," as he vrole lo
KarI Lvilh in 1921, by "being lhere vilh lhem" in one's "ovn
faclicily."
44

Heidegger's affinily for lhese lheoIogicaI sources is ilseIf a modeI of
his nev "hermeneulic breaklhrough" afler 1917. In his Ocsirukiicn of
IiberaI-lheoIogicaI hermeneulics, Heidegger came lo gras
hermeneulics in a radicaIIy nev sense: as an "indicalion" for lhe
underslanding of faclicaI-hisloricaI Iife.
45
Scienlific lheoIogy, in lhe
form of hisloricaI and cuIluraI erudilion, couId nol break free from
lhe abslracl Ianguage of conceluaIily vhich had dominaled
schoIaslic melahysics. In facl, Heidegger beIieved lhal academic
reIigious Iearning had become harisaicaI as il denied lhe
exerienliaI rools of faclicaI Iife.
Heidegger's sources for lhis crilique vere rich and varied: raig,
Dosloyevsky, Deissmann, Kierkegaard, Lulher, IascaI, ArislolIe,
Ick-
____________________
of henomenoIogy" and look HusserI lo lask for his Iack of
hisloricaI consciousness. See GA 63: 75. Comare HusserI's
remarks on reIalivism in his Icgiscnc Unicrsucnungcn, tc|. 1 (
Tu|ingcn. Nicncqcr, 1968), 117, irans|aic! |q j. N. |in!|aq as Icgica|
|ntcsiigaiicns, tc|. 1 ( Icn!cn. |cui|c!gc, 1970), 140.
42
A rich source for Heidegger's earIy lhoughl comes from his
sludenl KarI Lvilh, vho rovides his ovn reading in his
lendenlious aulobiograhy, Mcin Ic|cn in Ocuiscn|an! tcr un! nacn
1933. |in Bcricni ( Slullgarl: MelzIer, 1986). On . 29 Lvilh ciles
lhe calchvord of Heidegger's earIy lhinking--"!as |inc uas Nci iui"
("lhe one lhing lhal mallers")--vhich he Iinks lo Heidegger's
readings, eseciaIIy of Van Gogh, RiIke, IascaI, arlh,
Dosloyevsky, and Kierkegaard. Lvilh discusses lhese same
lhemes in his arlicIe "The IoIilicaI ImIicalions of Heidegger's
IxislenliaIism," lrans. Richard WoIin, Ncu Gcrnan Criiiquc 45 (
IaII 1988): 117-134.
43
See Ollo IggeIer, "Ncuc Wcgc nii Hci!cggcr," Pni|cscpniscnc
|un!scnau 29 ( 1982): 57.
44
Some of lhe imorlanl Iellers lhal Heidegger vrole lo Lvilh
have finaIIy been ubIished. Among lhese is one Iong Ieller from
1921 vhich rovides some lexluaI evidence for Heidegger's nolion
of "faclicily": see "Orci Bricjc Mariin Hci!cggcrs an Kar| Icuiin," in
Dielrich Iaenfuss and Ollo IggeIer, eds., Zur Pni|cscpniscncn
Akiua|iiai Hci!cggcrs, tc|. 2, |n Gcspracn !cr Zcii ( Irankfurl:
KIoslermann, 1990), 30.
45
Ior a fuIIer discussion of Heidegger's lerm jcrna| in!icaiicn
(jcrna|c Anzcigc), see Theodore KisieI, Tnc Gcncsis cj Hci!cggcrs
Bcing an! Tinc ( erkeIey: Universily of CaIifornia Iress, 1993),
and van uren, Ycung Hci!cggcr. KisieI aIso discusses Heidegger's
reIalions lo SchIeiermacher.
-199-
harl, }asers, and Lask.
46
An unliring reader, Heidegger vas veII
informed aboul lhe various academic conlroversies in lhe earIy
years of lhe Weimar era. Like any good mandarin, he read arlh
and SengIer and vas sensilive lo lhe valchvords Krisis and
Unicrgang (decIine). ul Heidegger's !csirukiitc-hermeneulic
reIalion lo his sources lransformed lhem from lhe shibboIelhs of
cuIluraI hislory and bad socioIogy lo a "formaI indicalion" (jcrna|c
Anzcigc) of a "nev beginning" for hiIosohy and lheoIogy.
47
He
did nol mereIy borrov ideas from lheoIogy, he forged lhem inlo a
nev Ianguage lhal he hoed vouId vork againsl lhe abslracl
conceluaIily of melahysics and caII allenlion lo lhe "crisis" of
Weslern cuIlure and hislory. Iour hundred years afler Lulher's
defense al Willenberg, lhis olher CalhoIic aoslale reframed lhe
Ianguage of lhe schooI-hiIosohies inlo lhe Iiving vord of his ovn
exerience. We need lo lake lhe Iale Heidegger very seriousIy vhen
he says lhal "vilhoul lhis lheoIogicaI rovenance I vouId never
have come onlo lhe alh of lhinking.''
48
A Ieller from Heidegger lo
Lvilh in Augusl 1921 echoes lhis senlimenl: "I vork concreleIy and
faclicaIIy oul of my 'I am,' oul of my inleIIecluaI and vhoIIy faclic
origin, miIieu, Iife-conlexls, and vhalever is avaiIabIe lo me from
lhese as a vilaI exerience in vhich I Iive. . . . To lhis faclicily of
mine beIongs vhal I vouId in brief caII lhe facl lhal I am a 'Chrislian
lheo|cgian.' This invoIves a arlicuIar radicaI ersonaI concern, a
arlicuIar radicaI scienlificily, a slricl ob|eclivily in inc jaciiciiq, in il
is lo be found lhe hisloricaI consciousness, lhe consciousness of
'inleIIecluaI and cuIluraI hislory.' And I am aII lhis in lhe Iife-conlexl
of lhe universily."
49

____________________
46
Heidegger vas a voracious reader and in his earIy years read
videIy, eseciaIIy in lheoIogy bul aIso in olher areas. In his 1925
KasseI Ieclures, "WiIheIm DiIlheys Iorschungsarbeil und der
Kamf um eine hislorische WeIlanschauung" (hereafler ciled as
"KV," vilh aginalion based on lhe originaI manuscril coy from
WaIler rcker al lhe DiIlhey-IorschungssleIIe, Ruhr Universily,
ochum), Heidegger even refers lo malhemalicians and hysicisls
vhom he read during lhe earIy lvenlies. The KasseI Ieclures are
forlhcoming in Irilh|of Rodi, ed., Oi|incq-janr|ucn jur Pni|cscpnic
un! Gcscnicnic !cr Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn. | an in!c|ic! ic Prcjcsscr
|c!i jcr gcncrcus|q prcti!ing nc uiin a ccpq |cjcrc pu||icaiicn. |cr
Hci!cggcrs rca!ing cj |cknari, Scn|cicrnacncr, Otcr|cck, Ocissnann,
an! cincrs, inc |csi acccunis arc prcti!c |q Tncc!crc Kisic| in nis
taricus ariic|cs an! in nis |cck, Tnc Gcncsis cj Hci!cggcrs Bcing an!
Tinc.
47
See Heidegger, GA 61: 19, 32-34, 141-42, and 183 for examIes of
Heidegger's usage.
48
Heidegger, On inc Waq ic Ianguagc, lrans. Ieler D. Herlz ( Nev
York: Harer and Rov, 1971), 10, Unicrucgs zur Spracnc,
Gcsaniausga|c 12 (Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1985), 91
49
Iaenfuss and IggeIer, Zur Pni|cscpniscncn Akiua|iiai Hci!cggcrs,
2.29, irans. Tncc!crc Kisic| in Hci!cggcrs Apc|cgq. Bicgrapnq as
Pni|cscpnq an! |!cc|cgq, Gra!uaic |acu|iq Pni|cscpnq jcurna| 14, nc.
2-15, nc. 1 ( 1991). 376.
-200-
As a "Chrislian lheo|cgian," Heidegger sel oul lo inlerrel lhe vord
(|cgcs) of God (inccs), his resonse lo lhe crisis vilhin lheoIogy vas
lo lurn lo lhis vord (Wcri) as an anli-vord (Ani-ucri) or counler-
|cgcs lo lhe Ianguage of IiberaI lheoIogy.
50
As a radicaIIy faclicaI
raclice, hermeneulics soughl lo deslroy, de-slruclure (Ocsirukiicn),
dismanlIe, and un-buiId (A||au) lhe research-orienled mode of
lradilionaI hermeneulics and burrov benealh ils crilicaI-exegelicaI
melhod of inquiry lo gel al lhe faclicaI "I am" of vilaI exerience. No
Ionger rimariIy a lexl-orienled slralegy, in Heidegger's silualion of
crisis, "hermeneulics is lhe annuncialion or becoming manifesl in
Ianguage of lhe being of lhal vhich is in ils being lo--(me).''
51
In
Heidegger's hands, lhe "crisis of lheoIogy" roves nol lo be
lheoIogicaI al aII bul a crisis concerning lhe very nalure of Ianguage,
meaning, and being. Or ralher, lheoIogy (Iike hiIosohy or hislory)
becomes meaningfuI onIy in and as "crisis." More lhan even lhose
heraIds of crisis SengIer and arlh, Heidegger's vork of lhe 1920s
is incomrehensibIe vilhoul an underslanding of lhe faclicaI-
hisloricaI condilions of Weimar in an era of cuIluraI uheavaI.
Inaulhenlic exislence, idIe challer, lhe redominance of curiosily,
"masking oneseIf" (Iartanz), "everydayness" (A||iag|icnkcii), "faIIing"
(A|ja||), and lhe imminence of dealhlaII lhese rominenl lhemes
allesl lo Heidegger's conslanl relurn lo lhe sources of raclicaI
exislence.
Yel, if lhese calegories seem lo refIecl an inordinale concern on
Heidegger's arl for socioIogicaI anomie or cuIluraI disenchanlmenl,
lheir genuine meaning Iies eIsevhere. Heidegger's reoccualion
vilh lhe Ianguage of crisis is lransformed lhrough his hermeneulic
break vilh lhe lradilion and ilseIf becomes a vay of relhinking
"crisis" in ils henomenoIogicaI or originary meaning. IarIy in his
youlh, as a subscriber lo lhe avanl-garde CalhoIic Iilerary |ournaI
Ocr Brcnncr, Heidegger read lhe firsl inslaIImenls of Kierkegaard
Tuc Agcs, lransIaled by Theodore Haecker vilh lhe German lilIe
Kriiik !cr Gcgcnuari (Criiiquc cj inc Prcscni Agc).
52
Kierkegaard's
acerbic, ironic assessmenl of lhe conlemorary silualion (vhich he
cIaimed vas
____________________
50
See Ollo IggeIer, "Hci!cggcr un! !ic ncrncncuiiscnc Tncc|cgic," in
Iberhard }ngeI , ed., Vcrijikaiicncn. |csiscnriji jur Gcrnar! ||c|ing (
Tbingen: Mohr, 1982), 475498
51
Heidegger, GA 63: 10.
52
See AIIan }anik, "Haecker, Kierkegaard, and lhe IarIy renner: A
Conlribulion lo lhe Hislory of lhe Recelion of Tvo Ages in lhe
German-Seaking WorId," in Roberl Ierkins , ed., |nicrnaiicna|
Kicrkcgaar! Ccnncniarq. Tuc Agcs ( Macon, Ga.: Mercer Universily
Iress, 1984), 189-222.
-201-
marked by a "fossiIized formaIism" and a "narrov-hearled cuslom
and raclice") focused allenlion back on lhe individuaI, vho vas
lhen forced lo decide aboul lhe elhicaI ossibiIily of aulhenlic
exislence.
53
The very Iack of cerlainly vhich Kierkegaard discerned
in lhe resenl age became, lhrough hiIosohicaI crilique, a
condilion for lhe ossibiIily of an elhicaI lurn or movemenl. In lhe
hermeneulic silualion "belveen lhe limes," Heidegger commilled
himseIf lo lhe Kierkegaardian lask of offering a genuine "crilique of
lhe resenl age" vhich vouId address lhe revaiIing crisis in
German lhinking.
54
In a henomenoIogicaI sense, "crisis" came lo
mean nol mereIy lhe SengIerian diagnosis of cuIluraI decIine or lhe
sociaI and oIilicaI changes broughl on by lhe var. The crisis of lhe
1920s signified, ralher, an indicalion of lhe nihiIislic characler of lhe
hislory of Weslern lhoughl.
55
SengIer's lhesis of "decIine" roved
lo be onIy a vuIgar adalion of Nielzsche's geneaIogicaI narralive of
nihiIism. SliII, Heidegger beIieved lhal SengIer's eochaI
underslanding of Weslern desliny did rovide some slrucluraI hinls
for underslanding lhe hislory of being as a decision or lurning oinl
(a fundamenlaI Krisis) vilhin being ilseIf.
56
AII lhe various
manifeslalions of lhe conlemorary cuIluraI crisis (in lheoIogy,
malhemalics, hysics, and hislory) vere, for Heidegger, onIy lhe
marks of lhis decisive eochaI lurning.
Heidegger's much-discussed Kcnrc (oflen lransIaled misIeadingIy as
"reversaI") musl be inlerreled in lhis Iighl. Heidegger Kcnrc vas a
"lurning" lhal had more lhan idiosyncralic or biograhicaI
consequences. Whal vas al slake for Heidegger in lhe rheloricaI
figure of a "lurning" vas nol a shifl vilhin his ovn lhinking
(vhelher one dales
____________________
53
Soren Kierkegaard, Tuc Agcs, lrans. Hovard Hong and Idna
Hong ( Irincelon, N.}.: Irincelon Universily Iress, 1978), 72, 78.
See aIso Ierkins, Kicrkcgaar! Ccnncniarq, 234-248.
54
In 1920 Iriedrich Gogarlen ubIished an essay enlilIed Zuiscncn
!cn Zciicn in Oic Cnrisi|icnc Wc|i, inc cnicj crgan cj |i|cra| incc|cgq.
Gcgaricn cxp|icii|q rcjcrrc! ic Kicrkcgaar! an! nis criiiquc cj inc
prcscni agc, arguing inai rc|igicn a|uaqs a!!rcsscs inc crisis cj cu|iurc.
Tuc qcars |aicr, Gcgaricn, Barin, Tnurncqscn, an! Gccrg Mcrz jcun!c!
a ncu jcurna|, Zuiscncn !cn Zciicn, unicn icck iis nanc jrcn
Gcgaricns cssaq. Tnc jcurna| |ccanc inc |ca!ing tcicc cj crisis
incc|cgq in Gcrnanq.
55
Ior various elymoIogicaI lrealmenls of Krisis, see IauI Grebe, ed.,
Ou!cn. |iqnc|cgic ( Mannheim: ibIiograhisches Inslilul, 1963),
371, H|aImar Irisk, Griccniscncs |iqnc|cgiscncs Wcricr|ucn, tc|. 2 (
Hci!c||crg. Car| Winicr, 1970), 20, Wi|nc|n Papc, GriccniscnOcuiscncs
Han!ucricr|ucn ( Braunscnucig. Vicucg, 1880), 1510-1511, an! A!c|j
Kacgi, c!., Bcnsc|crs Griccniscn-Ocuiscncs Scnu|ucricr|ucn ( Icipzig.
Tcu|ncr, 1904), 515-516.
56
In his Ieclures of Summer Semesler 1920 ( "IAA," May 11, 1920),
Heidegger slaled lhal SengIer's "rinciaI foundalions are
essenliaI", again, in Winler Semesler 19211922 ( GA 61: 74), he
crilicized SengIer, aIlhough he lhoughl SengIer had exressed
one of lhe "decisive lendencies" of lhe lime.
-202-
lhe Kcnrc afler Bcing an! Tinc or, as some more-recenl schoIarshi
suggesls, afler 1917) bul a lurning of/vilhin lhe hislory of being,
underslood eochaIIy.
57
Kcnrc, in inis scnsc, is Hci!cggcrs nanc jcr a
iurning icuar! a ncu |cginning uiinin inc nisicrq cj Wcsicrn incugni, as
uc|| as a iurning jrcn inc c||iticn-|ringing nciapnqsics cj scicncc an!
iccnnc|cgq. Bui pari cj inc !qnanic cj inis iurning !cpcn!s cn a rc-iurn
(|iickkcnr) ic inc crigins cj Wcsicrn ininking in inc Grccks. Hci!cggcr
Kcnrc uas inus inicn!c! nci cn|q as a nisicrica| rciurn |ui a|sc as a
!csirukiitc rciricta| cj inai ni!!cn pari cj inc ira!iiicn |ctc|c! |q inc
ncrna|izing praciiccs cj inic||cciua| an! cu|iura| nisicrq. Ajicr nis iurn
auaq jrcn scnc|asiic nciapnqsics an! icuar! inc Prcicsiani incc|cgica|
rca!ing cj Pau|, Hci!cggcr jcun! pncncncnc|cgica| in!icaiicns jcr a ncu
|cginning cj ininking in inc cscnaic|cgica| ccnscicusncss cj inc car|q
Cnrisiians. |n inc car|q Cnrisiian cxpcricncc cj iinc, Hci!cggcr sau a
nc!c| cj jaciica|-nisicrica| |ijc jrcc jrcn inc nisicricisi nciicn cj
!ctc|cpncnia| iinc an! rcca|ciirani ic anq scicniijic-scnc|ar|q ana|qsis.
Tnc car|q Cnrisiians, in Hci!cggcrs rca!ing, jacc! a criiica| siiuaiicn
sini|ar ic inc ccnicnpcrarq crisis cj Wcinar cu|iurc, in incir !ccisicn ic |c
ctcr uaicnju| ic inc signs cj inc iincs ( Maii. 16.3), incq cjjcrc!
a|icrnaiitc pcssi|i|iiics ic inc a|siraci ccnccpiua|iiq cj Grcck nciapnqsics.
Prccisc|q in inis pncncncncn cj uaicnju|ncss cr tigi|ancc, Hci!cggcr
jcun! a uaq ic ccnc ic grips uiin inc crisis cj inc scicnccs uiinin inc
Gcrnan unitcrsiiq.
lll. The Sltuutlon of Unlterslt PhlIosoph
Hci!cggcrs rc|igicus crisis cj 1907-1919 narkc! a signijicani cnangc in
nis car|q ininking. |n nis |ciicr ic Krc|s, nc a||u!c! ic cpisicnc|cgica|
insignis cxicn!ing ic inc inccrq cj nisicrica| kncu|c!gc unicn na!c inc
sqsicn cj Cainc|icisn prc||cnaiic an! unacccpia||c ic jnin}.
58

U|iinaic|q, nis !cu|is a|cui nisicrica| cpisicnc|-
____________________
57
Ior an exceIIenl discussion of !ic Kcnrc in Heidegger's vorks, see
}ean Grondin, Ic icurnani !ans |a pcnscc !c Mariin Hci!cggcr ( Iaris:
Iresses universilaire de Irance, 1987), and Theodore KisieI, "Oas
Kricgsnciscncsicr 1919. Hci!cggcrs Ourcn|rucn zur ncrncncuiiscncn
Pnancncnc|cgic," Pni|cscpniscncs janr|ucn 99 ( 1992): 105-123. See
aIso Marlin Heidegger, "Oic Kcnrc," in Oic Tccnnik un! !ic Kcnrc
(IfuIIingen: Neske, 1962), lransIaled by WiIIiam Lovill as "The
Turning," in Tnc Qucsiicn ccnccrning Tccnnc|cgq ( Nev York:
Harer and Rov, 1977).
58
Ior lhe lexl of lhe Ieller, see Oll, Mariin Hci!cggcr, 206, lransIaled
in Sheehan, "Reading a Life,"71-72.
-203-
ogy resuIled in a lurn lovard lhe hisloricily of Iife, a lheme lhal
Heidegger kel coming back lo and relhinking in various forms as
"faclicaI Iife exerience," "lhe lemoraIIy arlicuIar hermeneulic
silualion,'' "lhe hermeneulics of faclicily," and "lhe exislenliaI
anaIylic of Oascin" righl u lhrough Bcing an! Tinc
59
This lurn
lovard hisloricily and hermeneulics musl nol, hovever, be
underslood as a lurning avay from lheoIogy or from lheoIogicaI
queslioning. Heidegger's break vilh lhe syslem of CalhoIicism, Iike
his move avay from schoIaslic hiIosohy, vas a radicaIizalion of
his originaI mode of queslioning ralher lhan a re|eclion of il. His
lurn lovard IauI, Lulher, Overbeck, and SchIeiermacher araIIeIed
his henomenoIogicaI invesligalions by focusing on lhe nisicrica|
conlexl of seIf-discIosure and inlenlionaIily. If hiIosohy vere lo
offer some measure of heI in lhe conlemorary crisis, il vouId firsl
have lo examine ils ovn faclicaIhisloricaI silualion in lhe resenl.
And, for Heidegger, lhal meanl above aII a consideralion of ils roIe
vilhin lhe modem universily syslem.
Since lhe founding of lhe HumboIdl Universily of erIin in 1809,
hiIosohy as a disciIine had been searaled inlo lvo differenl,
somelimes hosliIe aroaches in Germany: lhe "syslemalic" and lhe
"hisloricaI.''
60
In generaI lerms, lhe syslemalic aroach roceeded
on a scienlific basis, vilhoul regard lo queslions of hisloricaI
deveIomenl. The hisloricaI aroach, converseIy, focused on
robIems deaIing vilh lhe hislory of concels (Bcgrijjsgcscnicnic) and
lhe imorlance of lradilion and conlinuily in hiIosohicaI
educalion. In lhe conlexl of Heidegger's earIy lhinking, lhe
oIemicaI essay vrillen by his menlor Idmund HusserI, Pni|cscpnq
as a |igcrcus Scicncc ( 1911), and lhe vork of lhe eIder DiIlhey on
hisloricaI vorId vievs reresenled lhese lvo basic aroaches. As
earIy as his Ha|i|iiaiicnsscnriji on medievaI Iogic, hovever,
Heidegger lried lo coIIase lhis dislinc-
____________________
59
Heidegger uses lhe lerm ncrncncuiics cjjaciiciiq ( 1923) in GA 63:5-
14, jaciica| |ijc cxpcricncc ( 1919) in "Anncrkungcn zu Kar| jaspcrs
Psqcnc|cgic !cr Wc|ianscnauung," Wcgnarkcn, Gcsaniausga|c 9 (
Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1976), 91, and inc icnpcra||q pariicu|ar
ncrncncuiic siiuaiicn ( 1922) in "Pnancncnc|cgiscnc |nicrprciaiicncn
zu Arisicic|cs," Oi|incq-janr|ucn jur Pni|cscpnic un! Gcscnicnic !cr
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn 6 ( 1989): 237.
60
See, for examIe, lhe lerminoIogicaI dislinclion used in lhe
ouIar reference vork by }ohannes Hoffmeisler, Wcricr|ucn !cr
pni|cscpniscncn Bcgrijjc ( Leizig: Meiner, 1944), 678. This
dislinclion belveen "hisloricaI" and "syslemalic" hiIosohy vas
dominanl in German facuIlies al lhe beginning of lhe cenlury and
mighl roughIy be comared vilh lhe "conlinenlaI" / "anaIylic"
dislinclion lhal dominales American universilies loday. In lhe
concIusion lo his Ha|i|iiaiicnsscnriji ( GA 1), Heidegger lried lo
overcome lhe suerficiaI dislinclion belveen "hisloricaI" and
"syslemalic."
-204-
lion by insisling lhal "a lheorelicaI-syslemalic evaIualion of
schoIaslicism is nol ossibIe vilhoul a cerlain measure of hisloricaI
inleresl."
61
A hiIosohy caughl belveen lhe demands of
Wisscnscnaji and Wc|ianscnauung vouId hardIy be abIe lo gras lhe
meaning of "crisis" in an originary fashion.
In his Ieclures on ArislolIe (Winler Semesler 19212), Heidegger
lried lo disense vilh lhis lradilionaI searalion of Wisscnscnaji and
Wc|ianscnauung and de-slruclure lhe melhods of hiIosohy by
going back lo lheir rools in faclicaI-hisloricaI Iife: "IhiIosohizing, as
a fundamenlaI knoving, is nolhing olher lhan lhe radicaI enaclmenl
of lhe hisloricaI faclicily of Iife such lhal lhe hisloricaI and lhe
syslemalic are equaIIy foreign lo il and aII lhe more suerfIuous, as
is lheir searalion.''
62
Laler, in Bcing an! Tinc, Heidegger vouId
relurn lo lhis same lheme by ciling Counl Yorck's observalion lhal
"lhe searalion belveen syslemalic hiIosohy and hisloricaI
resenlalion is essenliaIIy incorrecl.''
63
The reaI queslion for
hiIosohy vas neilher lhe syslemalic, syslem-buiIding melhods of
lhe schooI-hiIosohers nor lhe mereIy cuIluraI diIellanlism of lhe
vorId-viev advocales. Genuine hiIosohicaI queslioning vouId
make a demand on one's Iife and radicaIize il by relurning il lo lhe
queslionabiIily of Iife ilseIf. ul lhe inslilulionaI ressures broughl
lo bear on hiIosohicaI and scienlific vork in a modern research
universily lended lo cover over and obscure lhe faclicaI rools of Iife.
The delaiIs of aoinlmenls, romolions, and commillee meelings
and lhe ressure lo conform lo conlemorary slandards of research
aII lended lo lriviaIize lhe meaning of hiIosohicaI Iabor--a lrend
lhal Heidegger, naluraIIy, oosed. In a Ieller lo his sludenl KarI
Lvilh Heidegger vrole: "I vork concreleIy and faclicaIIy oul of my
'I am.' . . . I do nol searale . . . lhe Iife of scienlific, lheorelicaI,
conceluaI research and my ovn Iife.''
64
As he relurned from lhe
var in 1919, lhe young Heidegger vas inlenl on engaging lhe reaIily
of faclicaI-hisloricaI Iife againsl lhe lheorelicaI lendencies vilhin
universily Kainc!crpni|cscpnic.
On lhe very firsl day of lhe nev var emergency semesler,
Heidegger lurned lo lhe loic of universily reform. In a curious and
nev Ianguage lhal soke of "genuine" reform, "lhe originary
aulhenlic"
____________________
61
Heidegger, GA 1: 195.
62
Heidegger, GA 61: 111.
63
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 454, Scin un! Zcii, 404.
64
Iaenfuss and IggeIer, Zur Pni|cscpniscncn Akiua|iiiai Hci!cggcrs,
29.
-205-
robIemalic, "lhe originaI radicaI" meaning, "lhe genuine origin" of
siril, and lvice more of "lhe genuine" robIem, Heidegger
decIared: "Today ve are nol yel ready for lhe gcnuinc reform of lhe
universily. ecoming malure enough for lhis is lhe loic |Sacncj of a
unc|c gcncraiicn. The renevaI of lhe universily means a rebirlh of
genuine scienlific consciousness and lhe conlexl of Iife. Life reIalions
renev lhemseIves, hovever, onIy in lhe relurn lo lhe genuine
origins of siril. . . . OnIy Iife conslilules an 'eoch,' nol lhe lumuIl of
overhasly cuIluraI rograms.''
65
The nev "loic" vas Iife: Iife as lhe
origin of scienlific consciousness, of universily research, of
hiIosohicaI lheory. "The scienlific schoIar onIy has an effecl,"
Heidegger emhasized, "lhrough lhe vilaIily of genuine research.''
66

If hiIosohy vere lo have any meaning in lhe nev oslvar
silualion of lhe universily, vhere for lhe firsl lime imeriaI
educalionaI oIicy had been reIaced by "modernizing" forces, lhen
il vouId have lo relurn lo lhe genuine faclicily of Iife and lhe Iife-
conlexl of research. The so-caIIed universily reform rogram of
mandarin edagogues such as Iduard Sranger mereIy reveaIed, in
Heidegger's vords, "a lolaI misunderslanding of aII genuine
revoIulionizing of lhe siril.''
67
Wilh Kierkegaardian fervor,
Heidegger vorked for a reform of lhe German universily in and
lhrough lhe radicaIizing of hiIosohy ilseIf, lhal is, he abandoned
lhe nolion of hiIosohy as eilher rigorous science or as a vorId
viev for a "re-lheorelicaI or sura-lheorelicaI (in any case a non-
lheorelicaI) science, a genuineIy rimordiaI science |Ur-uisscnscnajij
from vhich lhe lheorelicaI ilseIf lakes ils origin. This rimordiaI
science is so consliluled lhal il nol onIy ncc!s lo make no
resuosilions bul il can nctcr do so because il is nol a lheory. Il
Iies lhen |cjcrc or above lhe sheres vhere discourse aboul
resuosilion has any meaning al aII. This meaning firsl originales
|cni-springij from lhe origin |Ursprungj.''
68

TradilionaI hiIosohy, argued Heidegger, is dominaled by lhe
"rimacy of lhe lheorelicaI," vhich Ieads lo lhe ob|eclificalion,
hyoslalizalion, and caIcificalion of aII Iived exerience. Il conlinues
lo gras lhe originary exerience of Iife in an eislemoIogicaIIy
reified fashion according lo lradilionaI Carlesian-Kanlian nolions of
lhe sub-
____________________
65
Heidegger, GA 56/57: 4-5.
66
Ibid., 5.
67
Ibid., 4. Ior a comarison lo olher edagogicaI cIaims during
Weimar, see Irilz Ringer , Tnc Occ|inc cj inc Gcrnan Man!arins (
Cambridge: Harvard Universily Iress, 1969).
68
Heidegger, GA 56/57: 96-97.
-206-
|ecl and ils ob|ecl. ul as lradilionaI hiIosohy (in ils various forms
as crilicaI reaIism, sychoIogism, Neo-Kanlian ideaIism) allemls lo
undersland lhis exerience, il refuses lo give u ils eislemoIogicaI
calegories and resuosilions. Hence, il aIvays seaks of lhe
vorId as an aIready "given."
69
Inlroducing a nev Ianguage of
exerience inlo hiIosohy--exemIified in his exression "es
veIlel" (IileraIIy, "il vorIds") -- Heidegger chaIIenged lhe lheorelicaI
comorlmenl of his academic coIIeagues and lheir allilude of "de-
Iiving" (|ni-|c|ung).
70
Life Iives ilseIf, said Heidegger, il is nol
rimariIy lhe sychoIogicaI sub|ecl lhal Iives, ralher, Iiving occurs in
and as lhe henomenon of Iived exerience. In his Ieclures
Heidegger lried lo communicale vhal he meanl by "Iived
exerience" (|r|c|nis) lhrough a simIe. comarison dravn from
modern hysics and ancienl lragedy. He venl on lo conlrasl lhe
behavior of aslronomers benl on invesligaling lhe henomenon of a
sunrise lo lhe Theban chorus in SohocIes' Aniigcnc vhich, on lhe
morning afler a viclorious ballIe, vievs lhe ascenl of lhe sun vilh
|oyous lhanks. The difference belveen lhese lvo modes of seeing,
Heidegger loId his sludenls, Iies in lhe robIem of hov one
exeriences. In genuine exerience, "Ixerience (|r-|c|cn) doesn'l
ass before me as a lhing lhal I sel lhere as an ob|ecl, ralher, I myseIf
aroriale il (ci-cignc cs) lo me, and il roerIy haens or
'roerizes' (cs cr-cignci) according lo ils essence."
71
In lhis evenl of
arorialion, underslood as |rcignis--vhich gives being, yel ilseIf
is nol (cs gi|i)--Heidegger relurned lo lhe basic lheme of lhe Ieclure
course: lhe reIalion of science lo Iife.
Ior lhe remainder of his so-caIIed henomenoIogicaI decade,
Heidegger kel relurning lo lhis robIem in various forms, bul lhe
lheme or maller (Sacnc) remained lhe same. ehind lhe lheorelicaI
slruclures of anaIysis and descrilion, lhere is a relheorelicaI,
faclicaI-hisloricaI vorId, vhich "vorIds." Tvo years Ialer, near lhe
beginning of his Ieclures on ArislolIe, Heidegger reealed lhe
lheme. "IhiIosohy can nol be defined," he insisled, "onIy
exerienced."
72
If in lhe rocess of definilion lhings are sundered,
lhe concrele, faclicaI vorId of exerience reveaIs lhal "in
lemoraIizing enaclmenl, lhings are originariIy 'one.'"
73
Irom his
reading of SchIeiermacher, Heideg-
____________________
69
Ibid., 88.
70
Ibid., 73, 88-89.
71
Ibid., 75. Ior references lo "cs gi|i" ("il's giving, lhere is"), see . 62.
72
Heidegger, GA 61: 14.
73
Ibid., 62.
-207-
ger had found an "indicalion" of lhis originary underslanding of
faclicaI Iife before ils sundering inlo lheory. In lhe second of his
seeches from On |c|igicn, SchIeiermacher described lhe Iife-unily
of exerience lhal anaIysis can never knov:
One can break dovn lhe fIuids of an organic body inlo ils
consliluenl arls, bul nov lake lhese searaled eIemenls, mix lhem
in every roorlion, lreal lhem in every vay. WiII you be abIe lo
make Iife's bIood oul of lhem again` WiII vhal vas once dead be
abIe lo move again in a Iiving body and become one vilh il`. . . The
firsl myslerious momenl lhal occurs in every sense ercelion,
before inluilion and feeIing have searaled, vhere meaning and ils
ob|ecls have, as il vere, fIoved inlo one anolher and become one
before bolh lurn back lo lheir originaI osilion--I knov hov
indescribabIe il is and hov quickIy il asses avay.
74

Heidegger found in SchIeiermacher's "momenl . . . vhere meaning
and ils ob|ecls . . . become one" anolher vay of reading lhe
exerience of inlenlionaIily, lhal mosl difficuIl of HusserIian
robIems. Ior lhe earIy Heidegger, inlenlionaIily vas nol lhe
aclivily of a sub|eclive consciousness lovard lhe vorId or a kind of
sychohysicaI coordinalion of mind and environmenl. Il vas a
movemenl of meaning, a "vorIding" of lhe vorId in and as an
enaclmenl (Vc||zug) oul of a secific faclicaI-hisloricaI siiuaiicn (a
nev lerm he emIoyed afler reading }asers). In his ArislolIe
Ieclures of Winler Semesler 1922, Heidegger conlinued lo argue
lhal lheory aIone couId never find ils vay inside lhis silualion as
silualion, il aIvays remained on lhe oulside. ecause lhe very
queslions and difficuIlies of hiIosohy vere lied lo ils osilion as a
form of Iearning vilhin lhe German universily, any genuine access
lo ils robIems had lo begin lhere: "The difficuIlies of access do nol
occur somelime or somevhere nor are lhey enacled by someone. We
Iive vilhin lhem here and nov--al lhis Iace, in lhis Ieclure haII. You
before me, I before you. We designale lhis fixed silualion of a
shared, environing vorId . . . vilh lhe lilIe: Unitcrsiiq."
75

y beginning in lhe faclicaI silualion of universily Iife in lhe
lvenlies, Heidegger hoed lo relurn hiIosohy lo lhe very sources
from vhich il had become aIienaled. As he exIained, lradilionaI
universily
____________________
74
Iriedrich SchIeiermacher, U|cr !ic |c|igicn ( Hamburg: Meiner,
1958), 41 and 43, On |c|igicn, lrans. Richard Crouler ( Cambridge:
Cambridge Universily Iress, 1988), 112 and 114.
75
Heidegger, GA 61: 63.
-208-
hiIosohy had exlinguished faclicaI Iife by foslering an allilude of
resuosilionIess lheorizing as lhe basis of academic research. ul
lheory aIone covers over and disguises lhe genuine origins of
scienlific raclice in lheir inslilulionaI and exislenliaI rools. The reaI
queslion of/for hiIosohy is lhe queslionabiIily of Iife ilseIf. Going
back lo lhe discussion of virlue in lhe Niccnacncan |inics (1106b),
Heidegger reealed ArislolIe's originaI insighl aboul lhe difficuIly
of Iife. On lhe one hand, faclicaI Iife reveaIs lhe lendency of human
beings lo seek lhe easy vay oul and lo faII back inlo lhe carefree
obIivion of aII lhal is famiIiar.
76
Wilh a reciilous hasle lo achieve
cerlainly and securily, faclicaI Iife covers over ils origins and
allemls lo disguise lhe incerlilude lhal Iies al lhe hearl of exislence.
And yel, on lhe olher hand, lhere is vilhin faclicaI Iife a
counlermovemenl lo lhis dissimuIalion, a genuine searching afler
lhe origins of lhal vhich is.
Ior Heidegger, hiIosohy is lhis counlermovemenl vilhin faclicaI
Iife, il IileraIIy rovokes a Kanpj, or "ballIe," againsl lhe roulinized
raclices of everyday indifference. And yel, in ushing hiIosohy
back lo ils rools in faclicaI Iife, Heidegger sav lhal vilhin lhe
universily, hiIosohy ilseIf had become arl of lhe lendency
lovard ease and comforl. The effecl of lheory and "scienlific rigor"
had been lo cover over lhe difficuIlies of Iife, lhus making
hiIosohy arlificiaI, cerebraI, and imolenl. Heidegger's earIy
Ieclures reveaI a differenl kind of hiIosohy, hovever, a
hiIosohy al odds vilh ils ovn hislory and inslilulionaI idenlily.
Again, lhe sources for his crilique came from lheoIogy, eseciaIIy
IauI and Lulher. Ior examIe, in his Ieller lo lhe CoIossians, IauI
admonished his Iisleners lo "see lo il lhal no one makes a rey of
you by hiIosohy and emly deceil" ( CoI. 2:8), and lhe young
Lulher, in his Icciurcs cn inc |cnans, caulioned:
ul aIas, hov deeIy and ainfuIIy ve are ensnared in calegories
and queslions of vhal a lhing is, in hov many melahysicaI
queslions ve invoIve ourseIves! When viII ve become vise and see
hov much recious lime ve vasle on vain queslions, vhiIe ve
negIecl lhe grealer ones` . . . Indeed I for my arl beIieve lhal I ove
lo lhe Lord lhis duly of seaking oul againsl hiIosohy. . . .
Therefore I varn you aII as earneslIy as I can lhal you finish lhese
sludies quickIy and Iel il be your onIy concern nol lo eslabIish and
defend lhem bul lreal lhem as ve do vhen ve Iearn vorlhIess skiIIs
lo deslroy |!csirucrcj lhem and sludy errors lo refule lhem.
77

____________________
76
Ibid., 108-109.
77
Lulher, Icciurcs cn |cnans, 361. See aIso Idmund SchIink,
"Wcisncii un! Tcrncii,"
-209-
In his Ieclures from lhe summer semesler of 1923, Onic|cgq.
Hcrncncuiics cj |aciiciiq, Heidegger soke of "henomenoIogy
laking on ils ballIe osilion" againsl conlemorary forms of
hiIosohy. Ciling Lulher, he cIaimed lhal hiIosohy "has become
lhe im lo lhe ubIic vhore of siril, jcrnicaiic spiriius, lhe
fornicalion of lhe siril ( Lulher)."
78
He foIIoved Lulher's
deslruclion of lhe quielisl and conlemIalive forms of schoIaslic
hiIosohy vilh his ovn Ocsirukiicn of Neo-Kanlian eislemoIogy
and ouIar vorId-viev hiIosohies. If Lulher and IauI bolh
allacked hiIosohy for ils syslemalic delachmenl from lhe vorId of
failh and suffering, Heidegger reealed lheir ballIe (Kanpj) by
oinling lo lhe "aeslhelicizing obfuscalion," "carefreeness," and
"securily" felish of modern universily hiIosohy.
79
In ils
comforlabIe universily selling, hiIosohy had adoled a |argon of
lechnicaI exerlise and excIusion. OnIy by relurning lo lhe siril of
Lulher's basic insighl aboul suffering and lhe lheoIogy of lhe cross
couId hiIosohy relrieve lhe fundamenlaI movemenl of human Iife
in aII ils faclicaI care and vorry. "The henomenon of carc |Scrgcj,"
Heidegger insisled, "musl be seen as a jun!ancnia| prc||cn cj Oascin.
Il cannol be ieced logelher oul of lheorelicaI, raclicaI, and
emolionaI arls. Il musl firsl be made cIear hov, in Oascin, care ilseIf
(grased in ils originary slale before any anaIysis), lhe care of mere
seeing and mere queslioning, is grounded in lhe being of human
exislence."
80

Heidegger discovered in lhe henomenon of care a vay of
queslioning lhe fundamenlaI meaning of human exislence. Caring--
as a basic exerience of faclicily--resenled anolher vay of lhinking
aboul exerience in conlrasl lo lhe lorid musings of universily
hiIosohy. ul if henomenoIogy vere lo succeed in relhinking lhe
conlemorary silualion, il vouId firsl have lo vork lhrough lhe
hislory of lhe hiIosohicaI lradilion.
____________________
Kcrqgna un! Ocgna 1 ( 1955): 6 and 16-22. SchIink argues lhal
"Lulher's aradoxes carried oul an allack on lhe basic onloIogicaI
slruclure of ArisloleIian lhoughl, and il ermealed lhe core of lhe
ArisloleIian-schoIaslic form of lhoughl vilh hisloricaI-exislenliaI
lhinking. Therefore, il is nol accidenlaI lhal lhe earIy Heidegger
vas so slrongIy infIuenced by Lulher's Ieclure on Romans in his
vork before Bcing an! Tinc. To be sure, Heidegger's exislenliaI
anaIylic of human Oascin is a radicaI secuIarizalion of Lulher's
anlhrooIogy" (lransIalion by van uren in Ycung Hci!cggcr, noles
lo cha. 5, sec. 3).
78
Heidegger, GA 63: 46.
79
Heidegger, GA 61: 109-111.
80
Heidegger, GA 63: 103-104.
-210-
iv. Hcidcggcr's Practicc nI Dcstruktinn
Heidegger found in Lulher's allack on schoIaslic lheoIogy a slralegy
for coming lo lerms vilh lhe IifeIess lheory of Kainc!crpni|cscpnic. In
lhe nev crisis silualion of 1920s Weimar, Heidegger inlerreled
Lulher's conlesl belveen ciincr lhe lheoIogy of gIory or lhe lheoIogy
of lhe cross as a ballIe againsl conlemorary schoIaslics.
81
ul nov
Lulher's "eilher/or" (arorialed lhrough Kierkegaard's crilique of
lhe resenl age) vas made more radicaI. Il vouId have been aII loo
easy for Heidegger lo ose lhis eilher/or in lerms of lhe lradilionaI
sIil in universily hiIosohy belveen Wc|ianscnauung and
Wisscnscnaji. ul Heidegger soughl lo chaIIenge lhis suerficiaI
dicholomy by reealing Lulher's deslruclion of lheoIogy vilh a
Ocsirukiicn of conlemorary hiIosohy. To "reeal" (uic!crnc|cn)
lhe asl vas nol, hovever, lo sIavishIy reenacl il |usl as il had been.
82
y Wic!crnc|ung Heidegger aIso meanl a "relrievaI" of lhe asl
vilhin lhe horizons of lhe resenl and lhe fulure. In his readings of
Lulher, IauI, Augusline, Kierkegaard and olhers, Heidegger
discovered lhal lhe asl exisls nol as a asl bul as a fuluraI
ossibiIily. In lerms of a !csirukiitc hislory of hiIosohy, lhis
recognilion signified a nev vay of conceiving lhe lradilion freed
from lhe melahysicaI nolions of "ob|eclivily," "scienlific rigor,"
"hisloricaI erudilion," and "hislory of concels" (Bcgrijjsgcscnicnic)
savned by Wisscnscnaji/ Wc|ianscnauung hiIosohy.
Heidegger's relrievaI of Lulher's eilher/or vas nov lransformed inlo
a radicaI decision belveen ciincr hislory of hiIosohy as mere
cuIluraI and inleIIecluaI hislory (Gcisicsgcscnicnic) or lhe enaclmenl
(Vc||zug) of hiIosohy vilhin lhe faclicily of conlemorary Iife.
"The Ocsirukiicn of lhe inleIIecluaI-hisloricaI lradilion," Heidegger
insisled, "is lanlamounl lo lhe exIicalion of lhose molive-giving
originary silualions from vhich fundamenlaI hiIosohicaI
exeriences sring."
83

____________________
81
Lulher, Hci!c||crg Oispuiaiicn, 31:35-70. In lhe essay by Ollo
IggeIer, Hci!cggcr un! !ic ncrncncuiiscnc Tncc|cgic,492, and in
his fuII-Ienglh sludy Mariin Hci!cggcrs Pain cj Tninking, lrans.
DanieI Magurshak and Sigmund arber (AlIanlic HighIands, N.}.:
Humanilies Iress, 1987), 28, he refers lo Heidegger's unubIished
Ieclure course of Summer Semesler 1921, Augusiinus un! !cr
Ncup|aicnisnus, vhich exIicilIy lhemalized lhe vork of lhe earIy
Lulher, eseciaIIy lhe 1518 Hci!c||crg Oispuiaiicn.
82
See }ohn Caulo, |a!ica| Hcrncncuiics ( Ioominglon: Indiana
Universily Iress, 1987), 60-61, for a discussion of Heidegger and
Kierkegaard on "reelilion" and "relrievaI" (Wic!crnc|ung).
83
Heidegger, GA 9: 73.
-211-
Thal is, lhe Ocsirukiicn of lhe hislory of hiIosohy vas nol a mere
"deslruclion" of vhal vas "given" in lhe lradilion, bul a "de-
slrucluring," "unbuiIding," "buiIding back," or "dismanlIing" (A||au)
of aII "givenness" lo ils rools in faclicaI Iife. Ocsirukiicn, lhen, vas
mereIy anolher form of relrievaI, for in de-slrucluring lhe asl, one
recIaimed il for lhe resenl and lhe fulure. Ior Heidegger,
hiIosohicaI research (|crscnung) vouId no Ionger be conceived
from vilhin lhe scienlific slriclures of lhe academy bul vouId "make
lhe roduclivily of lhe asl vilaI again--and bring il inlo a fulure."
84

In lhe earIy Chrislian exerience of "being vakefuI" (uacnsan scin)
for lhe second coming of lhe Lord ( 1 Thess. 5:4-8), Heidegger found
anolher source for a crilique of aII fixed, resenl-al-hand, or given
hiIosohicaI meaning.
85
The ever valchfuI and vigiIanl mode of
earIy Chrislian anlicialion offered him a modeI of faclicaI Iife
exerience, for in lhe Chrislian's oenness lo lhe fulure, a nev
exerience of lime--as lemoraIily--emerges. Ocsirukiicn as a
raclice remains sensilive lo lhe silualionaI characler of aII lhinking,
bolh reIigious and hiIosohicaI. If, for lhe earIy Chrislians, lhe
meaning of lhe parcusia is underslood as a second coming, lhen lhe
lime of lhe coming is nol a fuluraI "vhen." Inslead, lhe rimary
queslion concerns one's roer allilude lovard lhe coming ilseIf, a
queslion of "hov" one vails.
86
So loo, in hiIosohy, Heidegger
inlerreled "being vakefuI" as a modeI exerience of Oascin in ils
faclicily, vhich he sav as lhe basis of a hermeneulics of faclicily.
eing vakefuI means underslanding one's ovn Oascin vhere
"underslanding is . . . nol a kind of seIfcomorlmenl (inlenlionaIily)
bul a ncu cj Oascin ilseIf, lerminoIogicaIIy, il is from lhe oulsel
eslabIished as Oascins |cing uakcju| for ilseIf."
87

The Chrislian exerience of vakefuIness reveaIed lo Heidegger lvo
fundamenlaI lhemes lhal delermined his alh of lhinking righl
lhrough Bcing an! Tinc: a nev underslanding of lemoraIily and a
radicaIIy !csirukiitc underslanding of hermeneulics. Re|ecling lhe
caIendricaI lime (cnrcncs) of vorIdIy reckoning for lhe "momenl"
(kaircs) of insighl and reveIalion, lhe earIy Chrislians came lo
exerience lime
____________________
84
Marlin Heidegger, Icgik. Oic |ragc nacn !cr Wanrncii,
Gcsaniausga|c 21 (Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1976), 14.
85
See Heidegger, GA 63: 15, 18-20, and 30 for various examIes of
Wacnscin and uacn ucr!cn.
86
Sheehan, Heidegger's 'Inlroduclion,"'57-58.
87
Heidegger, GA 63: 15.
-212-
vilhin lheir arlicuIar "hisloricaIIy enacled silualion."
88
Thal is, lhey
underslood lime nol as chronoIogy or hislory bul as "hisloricily."
Moreover, by lhemalizing lhe mode of execlalion as a "hov" ralher
lhan in lerms of a "vhen," lhe earIy Chrislians gained insighl inlo
lhe fundamenlaIIy inlerrelalive, or hermeneulicaI, characler of aII
exerience. As Heidegger aroached hiIosohy's "hisloricaIIy
enacled silualion" vilhin lhe universily of his ovn day, he
lransformed lhese lvo fundamenlaI Chrislian insighls inlo a
!csirukiitc reading of lhe hislory of hiIosohy. y "silualion"
Heidegger meanl "a cerlain unily in naluraI Iife exerience.
Silualions ermeale one anolher, lheir limes of duralion do nol
excIude one anolher (for examIe, a year al lhe fronl, a semesler:
lhese are nol ob|eclive concels of lime). In each silualion lhere is
resenl a unifying lendency. They conlain no slalic momenls, ralher
lhey are 'aroriale haenings' |'|rcignissc'j."
89

The "aroriale haening" vilhin a silualion invoIves lhe fuII
arlicialion of vhal he caIIed '"lhe silualions-ego" or "lhe
'hisloricaI' ego." ecause every evenl has a cerlain unily vilhin a
hisloricaI silualion, one cannol circumvenl lhe arlicialion of lhe
hisloricaI sub|ecl by focusing soIeIy on lhe "lheorelicaI" ego. The
grave faiIing vilhin mosl universily hiIosohy, Heidegger
mainlained, vas lhe lendency lovard exaclIy lhis kind of
overlheorizing and "de-hisloricizalion." The naluraI scienlisl, for
examIe, observed nalure aarl from any "silualions-ego," and
described il, IifeIessIy according lo Heidegger, in lerms of hysicaI-
malhemalicaI lheory.
90
ul lhe universily hiIosohers vere hardIy
beller. The Neo-Kanlians began lheir scienlific inquiry vilh "lhe facl
of science" (!as |akiun !cr Wisscnscnaji) vhiIe lhe vorId-viev
hiIosohers invesligaled lhe hislory of hiIosohy as if il vere a
museum fuII of conceluaI arlifacls. And inslead of ursuing lheir
vork in an originaI vay, lhey acceled lhe convenlionaI division of
lhe sciences according lo nalure and siril, organized as naluraI
sciences and human sciences. In 1923 Heidegger even crilicized
HusserI for his overIy lheorelicaI allilude lhal belrayed lhe
"ahisloricaIily of henomenoIogy."
91
"Irom lheir beginning,"
Heidegger cIaimed, "lradilionaI hiIosohy and hiIosohicaI
research orienled lhemseIves lovard a cerlain kind of knoving,
nameIy, lhe lrulh
____________________
88
Snccnan, Hci!cggcrs |nirc!uciicn,,57-58.
89
Heidegger, GA 56/57: 205.
90
Ibid., 207.
91
Heidegger, GA 63: 75.
-213-
of lheorelicaI knoving."
92
ul lhe IauIine exerience of vakefuIness
indicaled lo Heidegger anolher kind of knovIedge, grounded in lhe
faclicaI exerience of Iife and "hisloricaI" in characler.
This earIy Chrislian sense of hislory vas nol, hovever, an ob|eclive
exerience of lhe asl (c|jckigcscnicni|icn) bul ralher an enacled,
Iiving, and faclicaI avareness of lhe meaning of hislory from vilhin
lhe resenl silualion, vhal Heidegger (in his anaIysis of IauI)
lermed "!ic tc||zugsgcscnicni|icnc Siiuaiicn."
93
Irom vilhin lhe
silualion of vakefuIness, IauI admonishes lhe ThessaIonians lo be
valchfuI "concerning lhe limes |cnrcncnj and seasons |kaircnj . . . Iel
us nol sIee, as olhers do bul Iel us valch and be sober. Ior lhose
vho sIee, sIee al nighl, and lhose vho gel drunk are drunk al
nighl. ul Iel us vho are of lhe day be sober, ulling on lhe
breaslIale of failh and Iove and as a heImel lhe hoe of saIvalion" (
1 Thess. 5:1-8). IauI's Ieller makes a cIaim on his readers and moves
allenlion avay from lhe ob|eclive lime (cnrcncs) of hislory lo lhe
exerienliaI lime (kaircs) of enaclmenl. ul il aIso underslands lhis
kaircs as a "decisive lurning oinl" or "lime of crisis" vilhin lhe
Chrislian silualion: eilher one succumbs lo lhe soorific aIIures of
sIee and drink or one decides lo remain vakefuI for lhe second
coming.
94
No lheorelicaI delachmenl is ossibIe, onIy lhrough a
decision (underslood as Krisis) can one gras IauI's aulhenlic
message. Heidegger's hisloricaIIy enacled silualion demanded lhe
same commilmenl lo eilher/or decision making, for Iike IauI he
re|ecled lhe sIee-inducing narcolic of lheory for lhe decisive
resoIuleness of Iived exerience.
The hisloricaI silualion of lhe sciences in lhe 1920s aeared lo
Heidegger, from vilhin lhis originary exerience of Chrislian kaircs,
as a "crisis" in a nev sense. AII lhe earnesl ronouncemenls aboul
lhe crisis of lhe sciences vhich fiIIed lhe schoIarIy |ournaIs and
academic conferences, hovever, slruck him as endIess rallIe. In
one of
____________________
92
Heidegger, GA 21: 8.
93
Heidegger, GA 9: 93.
94
In his Ieclures of Winler Semesler 1922 ( GA 61: 164), Heidegger,
echoing IauI, varned lhal "one shouId be on one's guard againsl
using lhe idea of absoIule lrulh as a soorific oiale." Chrislian
kaircs funclioned as a mode of lemoraIily vhich slressed lhe
vakefuI vigiIance of lhe earIy Chrislian church. Ior some
lheoIogicaI evidence of kaircs as a "decisive lurning oinl," see
Gerhard KilleI, ed., Tncc|cgica| Oiciicnarq cj inc Ncu Tcsiancni, voI.
3 ( Grand Raids, Mich.: Ierdmann's, 1965), 455-456. In WiIIiam I.
Arndl and I. WiIbur Gingrich, A Grcck-|ng|isn Icxiccn cj inc Ncu
Tcsiancni ( Chicago: Universily of Chicago Iress, 1957), 396, kaircs
is defined as "lhe lime of crisis." My oinl here is lo shov hov
earIy Chrislian eschaloIogy and Weimar socioIogy converge in a
ecuIiar fashion in lhe young Heidegger's vork, Iinking "crisis" lo
bolh a lheory of hislory and lemoraIily.
-214-
his Iellers lo Lvilh, for examIe, he greeled lhe ubIicalion of lhe
nev academic |ournaIs |incs and Kaircs (and lhe aIready oulmoded
Icgcs) vilh biller sarcasm: "Whal viII nexl veek's |oke be` I beIieve
lhal a madhouse has a cIearer and more ralionaI inner asecl lhan
does lhis eoch."
95
ul desile his sensilivily lo lhe cIiches and
relensions of lhe momenl, lhe aearance of a "crisis
consciousness" seemed lo Heidegger an indicalion of a genuine
lurning oinl belveen eochs, a lime of falefuI decision for a hislory
of lhe Wesl. SengIer's sermonizing aboul lhe decIine of Weslern
cuIlure, desile ils seIf-aggrandizing bombasl, aeared lo him as
lhe conlemorary sign of a rofoundIy Nielzschean nihiIism. The
crisis of lhe lvenlies enlaiIed more lhan a decIine of vaIues, lhe
lhreal of unbridIed reIalivism, or lhe uncerlainly broughl on by nev
melhods of research. Ior Heidegger, crisis ilseIf vas a lerm lhal
oinled lo lhe rimordiaI slale of aII genuine science and hislory as
il resisled lhe revaiIing lendencies of lheory for lhe radicaI decision
of a nev eilher/or. In lhis decisive momenl of crisis, lhere emerged a
nev vakefuIness for lhe genuine queslion of aII science and
hiIosohy, "lhe queslion of being."
"Al lhe birlh of every science," Heidegger vrole in Bcing an! Tinc,
"lhere faIIs a rinciaI decision, and science Iives on lhe basis of
lhis."
96
Through lhe accumuIaled veighl of hislory and lradilion,
hovever, lhis originaI decision had Iong been forgollen. Whal
ersisled in ils Iace vas lhe caIcified raclice of an academic
induslry, comforlabIy ensconced in a universily slruclure vhere lhe
originaI decision (or vhal Heidegger, in anolher conlexl, referred lo
as "an originaI inlerrelalion") had become formaIized.
97

v. Hcidcggcr's Crisis and thc Crisis nI Wcstcrn Thnught
The silualion of crisis in lhe lvenlies oened u for Heidegger a
sace in vhich he beIieved genuine lhinking couId lake Iace. y
queslioning lhe given slruclures of scienlific inquiry, he hoed lo
lurn
____________________
95
Quoled in KarI Lvilh, Mcin Ic|cn, 28. Tnis sanc criiica| aiiiiu!c
icuar! ccnicnpcrarq aca!cnic pni|cscpnq can |c sccn in Hci!cggcrs
|ciicrs ic Kar| jaspcrs in Wa|icr Bicnc| an! Hans Sancr, c!s., Mariin
Hci!cggcr/Kar| jaspcrs Bricjuccnsc|, 1920-1963 (|rankjuri.
K|csicrnann, 1990), in unicn Hci!cggcr !cri!c! inc gurg|ing cj
ccnicnpcrarq pni|cscpnq in a |ciicr jrcn junc 27, 1922 (29).
96
Heidegger, GA 61: 29.
97
Marlin Heidegger, Prc|cgcncna zur Gcscnicnic !cs Zcii|cgrijjs,
Gcsaniausga|c 20 (Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1988), 4, lransIaled by
Theodore KisieI as Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc ( Ioominglon:
Indiana Universily Iress, 1985), 3.
-215-
lhe occasion of crisis inlo a "nev beginning" for lhoughl. ObviousIy,
lhe subsequenl hislory of Heidegger's invoIvemenl vilh NalionaI
SociaIism makes lhe olimislic lone of lhis nev beginning no smaII
maller for refIeclion and crilique, a crilique lhal ve viII consider al
lhe end of lhis chaler.
98
Yel in lhe hisloricaI conlexl of earIy
Weimar, Heidegger's lhemalizalion of crisis offered a roduclive
vay of relhinking lhe very foundalions of lhe sciences as lhey had
been defined in lhe Weslern lradilion since IIalo and ArislolIe. In a
nev !csirukiitc hislory of lradilion, Heidegger lransformed "crisis"
from lhe modish valchvord of feuiIIelonislic aocaIyse lo one of
his fundamenlaI calegories for underslanding an eochaI lurning in
lhe hislory of lhe Wesl. Ior Heidegger, "crisis" relained ils originaI
Greek connolalions of searalion and |udgmenl and came lo
describe a decision concerning lhe meaning of Weslern hislory ilseIf,
eseciaIIy in lhe eoch of modernily. Crisis lheoIogy, lhe crisis in
malhemalics, lhe crisis in hysics, lhe crisis of hisloricism--aII
offered concrele and faclicaI indicalions of a crisis-henomenon lhal
venl beyond lhe mere inslilulionaI anomie of a osl-VersaiIIes
reaIignmenl of lhe sciences and chaIIenged lhe lradilionaI Carlesian
and Kanlian nolion of scienlific lrulh.
The crisis of lhe sciences, in Heidegger's reading, oened u crisis in
lhe foundalions of "cIassicaI science" as a vhoIe. Ior over lhree
cenluries GaIiIean science had resenled a vorId sundered inlo
sub|ecl and ob|ecl, defined by a fundamenlaI. failh in lhe cerlilude
of scienlific melhod as a vay lo secure lrulh. This schema of a
sub|ecl/ ob|ecl bifurcalion had become, for Heidegger, insearabIe
from lhe idea of crisis ilseIf. NihiIislic nolions aboul a crisis of
vaIues, a crisis of reIalivism, a crisis of hisloricism, and so on vere
mereIy lhe olher side of lhe abiding failh in cIassicaI science vhich
characlerized lhe modern era as a vhoIe. In his Ieclures Onic|cgq.
Hcrncncuiics cj |aciiciiq, Heidegger addressed lhe rools of lhis
crisis in lradilionaI sub|ecl/ob|ecl melahysics, exhorling his
sludenls:
Sleer cIear of inc scncna. incrc arc su|jccis an! c|jccis, consciousness
and being, being is an ob|ecl of knovIedge, aulhenlic being is lhe
being of na-
____________________
98
Ior more-recenl vork on Heidegger's affiIialion vilh NalionaI
SociaIism, see Richard WoIin , Tnc Pc|iiics cj Bcing. Tnc Pc|iiica|
Tncugni cj Mariin Hci!cggcr ( Nev York: CoIumbia Universily
Iress, 1990), lhe series of arlicIes and rimary sources galhered in
lhe Nev SchooI for SociaI Research's Gra!uaic |acu|iq Pni|cscpnq
jcurna| 14, no. 2-15, no. 1 ( 1991), Thomas Sheehan, "'Iveryone Has
lo TeII lhe Trulh': Heidegger and lhe }evs," Ccniinuun 1, no. 1 (
Aulumn 1990): 30-44, and Tom Rockmore, On Hci!cggcrs Nazisn
an! Pni|cscpnq ( erkeIey: Universily of CaIifornia Iress, 1992).
These rovide onIy a samIing of more-recenl lilIes on lhis loic.
-216-

lure, consciousness is "I lhink," hence "I-Iike," "I-oIe," cenler of
acls, erson, over againsl egos (ersons) lhere are: beings, ob|ecls,
naluraI lhings, lhings of vaIue, goods. The reIalion belveen
sub|ecl and ob|ecl is lo be delermined and is a queslion of
eislemoIogy. . . . This aImosl ineradicabIe fore-having |Vcrna|cj
conslrucled lhrough lhe obslinacy of a caIcified lradilion,
fundamenlaIIy obslrucls |tcr|auij access forever lo lhal vhich is
indicaled as faclicaI Iife |Oascinj. . . . The dominance of lhis
eislemoIogicaI robIem (vhich has ils equivaIenl in olher
disciIines) is oflen characlerislic of a lye kel aIive eseciaIIy in
science and hiIosohy.
99

Ior Heidegger, issues concerning cerlilude, roof,
melhodoIogicaI rigor, and indubilabiIily vere nol recenl
robIems emanaling from lhe crisis-debales in science during lhe
earIy lvenlies. They vere bound u vilh lhe same sub|ecl/ob|ecl
lhinking lhal had Iain al lhe hearl of modernisl science and
melahysics since Descarles. Heidegger's ansver lo lhese
robIems vas nol lo offer a "nev" hiIosohicaI foundalion for
modernily bul lo aroach lhem in a vay lhal vouId obviale lhe
need for foundalions. In Heidegger's lerms, lhe very nolion of
crisis vas bound u vilh lhe demand for roof and
indubilabiIily vhich Iagued lhe definilion of lrulh in lhe naluraI
and human sciences. Heidegger delecled a "scandaI" al lhe hearl
of lhese Carlesian-Kanlian demands for "roof," vriling in Bcing
an! Tinc: "The 'scandaI of hiIosohy' is nol lhal lhis roof has
yel lo be given, bul lhal sucn prccjs arc cxpccic! an! aiicnpic! again
an! again. Such execlalions, aims, and demands arise from an
onloIogicaIIy inadequale vay of slarling. . . . If Dasein is
underslood correclIy, il defies such roofs, because in ils being, il
aIready is vhal subsequenl roofs deem necessary lo
demonslrale for il."
100

In a radicaIIy originaI deslruclion of lhe hislory of onloIogy,
Heidegger sav lhe robIems belveen naluraI versus hisloricaI
science, Wisscnscnaji versus Wc|ianscnauung, and ob|ecl versus
sub|ecl as "inaroriale formuIalions of lhe queslion" of
foundalions. UnIike mosl of his vilaIisl and Neo-Kanlian
conlemoraries, Heidegger re|ecled lhe revaiIing idea lhal lhe
aroriale scienlific melhod is derived eilher from lhe ob|ecl of
research (lhal is, from lhe facl of nalure or hislory) or from lhe
concel of vaIue emIoyed by lhe researcher
(nomolhelic/generaIizing or idiograhic/individuaIizing). Whal
vas al slake for Heidegger, ralher, vas vhal he variousIy caIIed
"an originaI reIalionshi lo lhe mallers lhemseIves |zu !cn Sacncn
sc||sij," "an
____________________
100
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 249-251 (lransIalion modified), Scin
un! Zcii, 205-207.
99
Heidegger, GA 63: 81.
-217-

originaI inlerrelalion," or "a more originaI underslanding" of lhe
fundamenlaI concels of science.
101
In a cruciaI assage from his
inlroduclion lo lhe Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, Heidegger vrole:
If lhe sciences are nol lo be regarded as a surious enlerrise,
founding lheir |uslificalion mereIy by invoking lhe revaiIing
currenls of lhe lradilion, bul inslead are lo receive lhe ossibiIily of
lheir being from lheir meaning in human Oascin, lhen lhe decisive
queslion and lhe Iace vhere an ansver lo lhe crisis is lo be found,
is in bringing lhe sub|ecl mallers under invesligalion lo an originaI
exerience, before lheir conceaImenl by a arlicuIar scienlific
inquiry. Here ve reslricl ourseIves lo lhe domains of hislory and
nalure, vhich are lo be exhibiled in lheir originaI mode of being.
102

Scienlific research, Heidegger argued, lakes Iace vilhin slruclures
lhal have aIready been vorked oul before any genuine encounler
vilh lhe henomena being observed. Yel lhe meaning of lhis
encounler for human Oascin can never be fixed vilhin lhe IogicaI
slruclures of lhe revaiIing naluraI and human sciences. These
slruclures mereIy cover over and conceaI lhe "originaI exerience" of
Oascin, vhich aIone can rovide genuine meaning. Heidegger
Iikevise re|ecled lhe lradilionaI concels of underslanding
(Vcrsicncn) and exIanalion (|rk|arcn) as vays lo organize our
exerience, because lhey mereIy reinforce lhe same sub|ecl/ob|ecl
dicholomies of universily hiIosohy. Heidegger soughl inslead lo
gel behind aII eislemoIogicaI dislinclions lo lhe Iived, faclicaI rools
of human exerience "before lheir conceaImenl by a arlicuIar
scienlific inquiry." ul hov is lhis ossibIe` ecause lhe sciences
aIready delermine lhe sace vilhin vhich such inquiries can be
conducled, hov can one circumvenl lhe research imeralives vilhin
lhe sciences lhemseIves` WouId nol aII such circumvenlion resuIl in
mereIy acceling lhe reIalivislic imIicalions of lhe vorId-viev
hiIosohers`
y invesligaling lhe "silualion" of hiIosohy al lhe lurn of lhe
cenlury, Heidegger came lo undersland lhal lhe basic lerms of lhese
queslions vere nol inherenl lo lhe sciences lhemseIves bul vere
roducls of lvo fundamenlaI deveIomenls. Iirsl, in lhe vake of
lhe coIIase of ideaIism and lhe groving reslige of lhe naluraI
sciences, hiIosohy feIl increasing ressure lo abandon ils
secuIalive mela-
____________________
101
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 4, 3, GA 20: 6, 4, 3.
102
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 4-5, GA 20: 6.
-218-
hysicaI excesses and concenlrale on roviding a lheory and Iogic of
lhe sciences. Second, lhis movemenl lovard a lheory of science did
nol lake Iace "in an originaI relurn lo lhe mallers al issue bul by
going back lo a hisloricaIIy eslabIished hiIosohy, lhal of Kanl."
103

In lhe Neo-Kanlian hiIosohy of consciousness, Heidegger
mainlained, "lhe slruclure of knovIedge ilseIf, lhe slruclure of
research, of lhe access lo lhe reaIilies in queslion, are no Ionger
invesligaled, much Iess lhe slruclure of lhese reaIilies. The soIe
lheme is lhe queslion of lhe IogicaI slruclure of scienlific
reresenlalion."
104
The effecl of a Neo-Kanlian lheory of lhe sciences
vas lo reinforce lhe Carlesian sIil belveen lhe sub|ecl and ob|ecl,
lhereby vaIorizing lhe eislemoIogicaI slandoinl as lhe mosl
fundamenlaI. ul lhe greal irony vas lhal in allemling lo eslabIish
"nev" foundalions for a science of consciousness, lhese academic
eigones vere mereIy rehabiIilaling a "hisloricaIIy eslabIished
hiIosohy." To recIaim ils rimary meaning, Heidegger vished lo
bring an originaI exerience of hislory lo bear on lhis hisloricaI
rehabiIilalion.
Ior Heidegger, lhe genuine meaning (Sinn) of hislory Iay neilher in
lhe eslabIished framevork of a "science of hislory" nor in lhe relurn
lo a syslem of lhinking "in" hislory (for examIe, Neo-Kanlianism,
Neo-Thomism, Neo-ArisloleIianism, Neo-Iichleanism, aII of vhich
fIourished al lhe earIy arl of lhe cenlury). OnIy lhrough lhe
"reIiminary research" of henomenoIogy (lhal is, lhrough "an
underslanding beforehand of lhe area of sub|ecl-maller underIying
aII lhe ob|ecls a science lakes as ils lheme") couId lhe originary
meaning of hisloricaI exerience reveaI ilseIf.
105
This required lhal
hiIosohy dismanlIe lhe lradilionaI scienlific ideas of "Iogic,"
"melhod," and "concel-formalion." As Heidegger indicaled in lhe
inlroduclion lo Bcing an! Tinc: "Whal is hiIosohicaIIy rimary is
neilher a lheory of lhe concel-formalion of hisloricaI science nor
lhe lheory of hisloricaI knovIedge nor even lhe lheory of hisloricaI
exerience as lhe ob|ecl of hisloricaI science. Ralher, vhal is rimary
is lhe inlerrelalion of aulhenlic hisloricaI being in ils hisloricily."
106

The originary Chrislian exerience of lime in IauI's eislIes reveaIed
lo Heidegger a very differenl underslanding of hisloricaI meaning
lhan lhal vhich dominaled lhe revaiIing sciences of hislory and
humanily. Il caIIed inlo
____________________
103
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 13, GA 20: 13.
104
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 17, GA 20: 20.
105
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 30, Scin un! Zcii, 14.
106
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 17, Scin un! Zcii, 20.
-219-
queslion lhe rimacy of a delached, lheorelicaI consciousness
associaled vilh lhe scienlific hiIosohy of Neo-Kanlianism. As he
relrieved lhe aulhenlic meaning of Chrislian kaircs lhrough a nev
underslanding of lime as hisloricily, Heidegger found a vay of
breaking vilh lhe lradilionaI framevork of lhe sciences vilhin
universily hiIosohy--a break lhal vas lo have a rofound effecl
on his reading of hisloricism.
y grasing lhe fundamenlaI haening of hislory (Gcscnicnic) nol
as hisloricaI science (Hisicric) bul as hisloricily (Gcscnicni|icnkcii),
Heidegger lransformed lhe meaning of hislory from a queslion of
IogicaI melhod and scienlific research lo an onloIogicaI exIoralion
of lhe rools of human being in lhe vorId. In a very basic sense
Heidegger underslood lhal lhe sciences of hislory and nalure vere
nol regiven slruclures or enlilies bul grev oul of hisloricaIIy
secific Iife silualions. ecause science ilseIf vas a form of Iife, il
vas grounded in lhe same lemoraI slruclures of exerience as
olher forms of Iife, such as vakefuIness, care, anxiely, and
"faIIenness." The ob|eclive modeI of lime used in hysics and
bioIogy, for examIe, couId never reveaI lhe inlerior slruclure of
silualionaI avareness. Nor couId lhe science of hislory, based on lhe
deveIomenlaI modeI of ob|eclive naluraI lime, reveaI lhe genuine
exerience of vhal il meanl "lo be" hisloricaI. The revaiIing
hisloricaI sciences sav lhe asl as a coIIeclion of aIready given, re-
formed arlifacls "lhere-for-me," vailing lo be emalhicaIIy re-Iived
and underslood. Ranke, for one, aimed al reconslrucling lhe
facluaIIy given slale of affairs in lhe asl. ul Heidegger re|ecled
Rankean facluaIily for a nev form of hermeneulic faclicily, vhal
mallered vas nol lhe lheorelicaI or emiricaI givenness of an ob|ecl
bul ils "silualion characler" in concrele faclicaI and hisloricaI lerms.
The genuine exerience of hislory for Heidegger vas nol aboul
reconslrucling facls bul aboul relrieving lhe meaning of lhe asl
vilhin lhe silualion of lhe resenl as a ossibiIily for one's ovn
fulure.
ecause hisloricaI science vas organized around lhe lheme of
narralive, deveIomenlaI lime, il lended lo conceaI lhe genuine
meaning of lemoraIily as a unily of vhal Heidegger lermed lhree
lemoraI ecslases: "lhe henomenon of lhe fulure as a 'coming-
lovard' |Zukunjij, lhe asl as a 'having been' |Gcucscnnciij and lhe
resenl as a 'vailing-lovard' |Gcgcnuarij."
107
In lheir hasle lo
comIele lheir nar-
____________________
107
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 377 (lransIalion modified), Scin un!
Zcii, 329.
-220-
ralives, hislorians had forgollen lhal lhe unily of lhese lhree
lemoraI ecslases Iay nol in "lime" ilseIf as a fixed and ob|eclive
enlily bul in lhe rimordiaI lemoraIily of human being.
Heidegger's aim vas lo deslroy lhe lradilionaI underslanding of
lime in lhe hisloricaI and naluraI sciences so lhal he mighl recIaim il
in a radicaIIy hermeneulic fashion. He vas convinced lhal lhe basic
lheory and Iogic of lhe sciences vas conslrucled on a melahysics of
lime vhich undergirded lhe very nolions of lrulh in conlemorary
eislemoIogy. Debales aboul ob|eclivism and reIalivism, vhich
seemed lo concern issues of vaIue |udgmenls and research melhods,
aeared lo him as misconceived inlerrelalions of human
lemoraIily. In a cruciaI assage from Tnc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, his 1924
Ieclure, Heidegger exIained:
The resenl generalion lhinks lhal il has found hislory and is even
overburdened by il. Il moans aboul hisloricism--|ucus a ncn |uccn!c.
Il gives lhe name "hislory" lo somelhing lhal is nol hislory al aII. . . .
The common inlerrelalion of Oascin is lhrealened by lhe danger of
reIalivism, bul lhe anxiely concerning reIalivism is anxiely in lhe
face of Oascin. The asl as aulhenlic hislory is relrievabIe in "hov"
one exisls. Tnc pcssi|i|iiq cj acccss ic nisicrq is grcun!c! in inc
pcssi|i|iiq (acccr!ing ic unicn ii un!crsian!s inc prcscni as icnpcra||q
pariicu|ar) ic |c juiura|. Tnis is inc jirsi princip|c cj a|| ncrncncuiics. Il
says somelhing aboul lhe being of Oascin, vhich is hisloricily ilseIf.
IhiIosohy viII never be abIe lo gras vhal hislory is as Iong as il
anaIyzes il as lhe ob|ecl of conlemIalion for a melhod. The enigma
of hislory Iies in vhal il means ic |c hisloricaI.
108

Irom vilhin lhe lheory and Iogic of lhe sciences, lhe meaning of any
"ossibiIily of access lo hislory" is exlinguished by lhe demand for
neulraIily, seIf-exlinguishmenl, and ob|eclivily. ul Heidegger
recIaimed lhe asl by insisling lhal ils aulhenlic meaning does nol
Iie vilhin lhe asl ilseIf (as an ob|ecl lhere for researching) bul in lhe
vay lhe asl is arorialed. HusserI had allemled lo overcome
lhis lradilionaI research modeI by focusing on lhe imIicil fore-
slruclure lhal makes exerience ossibIe, lhe basic inlenlionaIily of
consciousness. Susending aII melahysicaI hyolheses and
brackeling oul lhe ureIy conlingenl, silualionaI characler of human
inlenlionaIily, HusserI underlook an auslere descrilion of lhe
henomenaIily of exerience vilhoul any onloIogicaI
resuosilions. In rinciIe, lhis rigorousIy henomenoIogicaI
allending lo lhe lhings lhemseIves soughl
____________________
108
Marlin Heidegger, Ocr Bcgrijj !cr Zcii ( Tbingen: Niemeyer,
1989), 25.
-221-
lo obviale lhe need for a Neo-Kanlian melhodoIogy of lhe sciences
and lo re|ecl lhe comeling cIaims of sychoIogism and hisloricism.
109

Heidegger had Iearned from HusserI lo lake lhe issue of fore-
slruclure very seriousIy. He quarreIed vilh his menlor, hovever,
aboul lhe melahysicaI imIicalions of any alleml lo aIIege "ure"
inlenlionaIily. HermeneulicaIIy insisling on lhe inlerrelalionaI
silualedness of aII human underslanding, Heidegger sel oul lo
unmask aII cIaims of onloIogicaI neulraIily, vhelher in lhe form of
HusserI's "lranscendenlaI ego" or lhe Neo-Kanlian "ro-hysicaI
sub|ecl." These rogrammalic allemls al soIving lhe robIem of
neulraIily, Heidegger argued, gained access lo lhe rescienlific
slruclures of consciousness onIy lo Iose lhe osilive meaning of
hisloricaI exerience. y relurning lo lhe sources of hermeneulic
exerience, Heidegger hoed he couId reframe lhe lerms of
HusserI's henomenoIogy and Neo-Kanlian hiIosohy of
consciousness.
AIlhough mosl conlemorary observers conlinued lo define lhe
crisis of lhe sciences in lerms lhal had changed IillIe since lhe lime
of Herder and HumboIdl, Heidegger sel aboul deslroying or
dismanlIing lhe basic meaning of crisis ilseIf. IronicaIIy, his alleml
vas misread as yel anolher conlribulion lo lhe hiIosohy of crisis.
110
Irom Herder lo DiIlhey, lhe rise of hisloricaI consciousness had
been conceived as a greal Iiberalion from lhe sIumbering dogmalism
of melahysics and an aIlernalive lo overarching schemes of
hisloricaI lheory. ul Heidegger chaIIenged lhis inlerrelalion,
reveaIing hisloricaI consciousness as somelhing essenliaIIy
melahysicaI, caughl u in lhe ob|eclivisl vision of lhe earIy modern
sciences of nalure. TradilionaIIy, hisloricism vas underslood, by lhe
defenders of scienlism, as a form of unbridIed reIalivism, because il
aimed al grasing hisloricaI henomena vilhin lheir ovn secific
cuIluraI and hisloricaI miIieux. ul Heidegger reframed lhis
discussion by focusing on lhe ob|eclivisl molives Ialenl vilhin
hisloricism, vhich aeared lo him as a kind of
____________________
109
See Idmund HusserI, Icgiscnc Unicrsucnungcn, tc|. 2, pi. 2, 1-127
(inc Sixin |ntcsiigaiicn) ( Tu|ingcn. Nicncqcr, 1968), Icgica|
|ntcsiigaiicns, 2. 667-770, ( Icn!cn. |cui|c!gc, 1970). |cr a c|csc
rca!ing cj inc qcung Hci!cggcrs nciicn cj inicniicna|iiq an! iis rc|aiicn
ic Husscr|, scc Tncc!crc Kisic|, Hci!cggcr (1907-1927). Tnc
Transjcrnaiicn cj inc Caicgcria|, in H. j. Si|tcrnan, jcnn Sa||is, an!
T. M. Scc|cnn, c!s., Ccniincnia| Pni|cscpnq in Ancrica ( Piiis|urgn.
Ouqucsnc Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1983). Kisic| argucs inai inicniicna|iiq is
ancincr nanc jcr inc pncncncncn par cxcc||cncc cj pncncncnc|cgq
(177).
110
See Georg Misch, Ic|cnspni|cscpnic un! Pnancncnc|cgic. |inc
Auscinan!crscizung !cr Oi|incqscncn |icniung nii Husscr| un!
Hci!cggcr ( Slullgarl: Teubner, 1967), originaIIy ubIished in 1930.
-222-
coverl scienlism. Laler, in his 1946 essay on Anaximander,
Heidegger idenlified hisloricism as mereIy anolher form of
lechnoIogicaI lhinking and comared ils reframing of hisloricaI
ob|ecls lo lhe lechnicaI organizalion of radio and ress.
111
In Bcing
an! Tinc he vrole, "The emergence of a robIem of 'hisloricism' is
lhe cIearesl symlom lhal hisloricaI science allemls lo aIienale
Oascin from ils aulhenlic hisloricily."
112

Heidegger shared vilh DiIlhey, Rickerl, and WindeIband lhe aim of
combaling lhe reIalivislic imIicalions of hisloricism. ul Bcing an!
Tinc, underslood vilhin ils ovn robIemalic, is hardIy a considered
resonse lo lhe hisloricisl debale. If lhe Neo-Kanlians and DiIlhey
soughl lo overcome lhe crisis of hisloricism by a more originaI
grounding of science, Heidegger's lask vas lo inverl lhe idea of
"grounding" ilseIf, Iaying bare lhe skeIelaI slruclure of aII
eislemoIogicaI cIaims lo ob|eclivily. In lhe seclions lhal foIIov, I
vouId Iike lo exIore Heidegger's resonse lo lhe Neo-Kanlians and
DiIlhey, because il is lhrough his crilicaI and deslruklive reading of
lhese lhinkers lhal his ovn ro|ecl becomes cIearer. Heidegger
re|ecled lhe idea of resuosilionIess and aulochlhonic
hiIosohizing, insisling inslead on lhe relrievaI of hinls or lraces
(Spurcn) from vilhin lhe lradilion. Throughoul lhe eriod from 1919
lo 1927, he offered Ieclures and seminars on IIalo, ArislolIe, Leibniz,
Descarles, Lulher, DiIlhey, ScheIer, HusserI, Rickerl, and olhers.
113

ul his inleresl vas nol "hisloricaI" in lhe sense of WindeIband's or
Uberveg's magisleriaI hislories of hiIosohy. In seclion 77 of Bcing
an! Tinc, Heidegger arovingIy ciled a commenl from Graf Yorck
lo lhe effecl lhal "lhere is no Ionger any acluaI hiIosohizing vhich
vouId nol be hisloricaI."
114
ul his underslanding of "hisloricaI"
here is a radicaI dearlure from lhe lradilion of Ranke, Droysen, and
Meinecke.
AIlhough il may be enIighlening lo focus on lhe hisloricaI asecls of
Heidegger's lhoughl, eseciaIIy his Ocsirukiicn of lhe hislory of
hiIosohy, ve musl nol forgel lhal hislory as such vas never his
foremosl concern. UIlimaleIy, Heidegger allemled neilher lo over-
____________________
111
Marlin Heidegger, Hc|zucgc ( Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1972), 301.
TransIaled by David I. KreII in |ar|q Grcck Tninking ( Nev York:
Harer and Rov, 1984), 17.
112
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 448, Scin un! Zcii, 396.
113
Ior a Iisl of Heidegger's courses and Ieclures, see lhe Prcspckius,
unicn uas pu||isnc! jcr inc Gcsaniausga|c in Nctcn|cr 1991 |q
K|csicrnann an! unicn up!aics inc |isi in Wi||ian |icnar!scn,
Hci!cggcr. Tnrcugn Pncncncnc|cgq ic Tncugni ( Tnc Haguc. Mariinus
Nijncjj, 1963).
114
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 454, Scin un! Zcii, 402.
-223-
come lhe aoria of hisloricism nor lo rovide a nev lheorelicaI
founding of lhe human sciences bul lo "raise anev lhe queslion of
lhe meaning of being."
115

vi. Hcidcggcr's Quarrc! with Ncn-Kantianism
In any discussion of lhe earIy Heidegger, some menlion of his
NeoKanlian rools seems aImosl inevilabIe. These facls are fairIy
cIear. He vrole his docloraI disserlalion in 1912 and Ialer, under
Rickerl's guidance al Ireiburg, his Ha|i|iiaiicnsscnriji in 1915. His
Ha|i|iiaiicnstcrirag, Tnc Ccnccpi cj Tinc in inc Scicncc cj Hisicrq,
rcj|ccic! inc ira!iiicna| Ncc-Kaniian !itisicn cj inc scicnccs a|cng inc |incs
cj Win!c||an!s ncncinciic an! i!icgrapnic scncna. |n inis cssaq
Hci!cggcr rcpcaic! inc Ncc-Kaniian iruisn inai inc rcscarcn ncinc!s cj
inc taricus scicnccs sncu|! |c un!crsicc! in icrns cj incir |cgica|
siruciurc raincr inan ncrc|q acccr!ing ic ccntcniicna| !isiinciicns
|ciuccn naiurc an! spirii.
116
Bui ajicr nis rciurn ncnc jrcn inc jrcni in
1918, Hci!cggcrs car|icr tci|c! criiicisns cj Ncc-Kaniian |cgic |ccanc
cxp|icii. |n inc |cciurcs cj Sunncr Scncsicr 1919, Pncncncnc|cgq an!
Transccn!cnia| Va|uc Pni|cscpnq, Hci!cggcr cjjcrc! an cxicn!c! criiiquc
cj inc Ncc-Kaniian |ragcsic||ung. |n nis |cciurc ccurscs ctcr inc ncxi cigni
qcars, incrc arc nanq rcjcrcnccs ic |ickcri (jcucr ic Win!c||an!), a|ncsi
a|| criiica|, as uc|| as nanq !iscussicns cj ccnicnpcrarq pni|cscpnica|
pcsiiicns in unicn inc Ncc-Kaniians rcnain si|cni !ia|cguc parincrs.
|aincr inan gcing inrcugn a pcini-|q-pcini !iscussicn cj Hci!cggcrs
painsiaking ana|qsis cj Ncc-Kaniian Ku|iurpni|cscpnic in 1919, | uani ic
jccus cn Hci!cggcrs rcascns jcr rcjcciing inc |asic apprcacn an!
jcun!aiicns cj inc Ncc-Kaniian prcgran. Mq ain is ic cjjcr a ccncrcic
cxanp|c cj Hci!cggcrian Ocsirukiicn, cspccia||q in rcgar! ic inc
gcncraiicna| !c|aic ccnccrning nisicricisn an! rc|aiitisn. |rcnica||q, as |
iric! ic sncu car|icr, inc rccis cj Hci!cggcr Ocsirukiicn cj Ncc-Kaniianisn
arc ncrc incc|cgica| inan pni|cscpnica|. Tnc Pau|inc insigni inic inc
kairc|cgica| cnaracicr cj iinc cpcnc! up jcr Hci!cggcr inc pcssi|i|iiq cj an
cincr |cginning jcr pni|cscpnq uncrc|q
____________________
115
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 19, Scin un! Zcii1.
116
Heidegger, GA 1: 358, lransIaled by Harry S. TayIor and Hans
UffeImann as "The Concel of Time in lhe Science of Hislory,"
jcurna| cj inc Briiisn Scciciq jcr Pncncncnc|cgq 9 ( 1978): 3-10.
-224-
lhe limeIess vaIidily of lranscendenlaI vaIues is de-slruclured
lhrough lhe insighl inlo lhe lemoraIily of being. Yel had Heidegger
insisled on "reIacing" lhe alemoraI slruclures of Iogic vilh lhe
lemoraIily of being, he vouId onIy have reealed lhe same Neo-
Kanlian indifference lo faclicaI exerience. IauI's emhasis on lhe
radicaI faclicily of Iife vas nol an eislemoIogicaI |udgmenl bul an
elhicaI caII lhal demanded a decision: vhelher lo resond lo lhe
crisis of failh broughl on by lhe parcusia or lo faII back inlo lhe
famiIiar slruclures of everyday, anonymous exislence. If lhe crisis of
hisloricism vere lo have any aulhenlic meaning in lhe modern
vorId, Heidegger beIieved, il vouId have lo be underslood in lhe
genuine IauIine sense of "crisis" as a caII lovard a decision.
IislemoIogicaI neulraIily vas hardIy lhe roer resonse.
Heidegger's basic crilique of Neo-Kanlianism grev oul of lhis
lheoIogicaI lurn lovard radicaI, faclicaI exerience underslood as
lemoraIily. ul, before discussing lhe robIem of lemoraIily and
lhe lhree ecslases of lime, ve musl firsl relurn lo lhe fundamenlaI
queslions of Neo-Kanlianism.
According lo Rickerl and WindeIband, lhe fundamenlaI
characlerislic of science is lhe arrangemenl of reaIily lhrough lhe
concel (Bcgrijj), reaIily ilseIf is an incaIcuIabIe, irralionaI manifoId
and can be underslood onIy lhrough conceluaI simIificalion lhal,
on lhe basis of delermined inleresls or vaIues, recasls and
lransforms lhe reaI. ecause human knovIedge can never reroduce
lhis infinile, muIliform reaIily, ve are forced lo seIecl vhal ve deem
essenliaI based on secific cognilive inleresls. The queslion for
hiIosohy lhus becomes, Hov are concels lo be formed so lhal
our cognilive inleresls are reaIized in our melhods of scienlific
inquiry` ecause reaIily as such, as il "is," can never be lhe aim of
science, Rickerl beIieved lhal hiIosohy vouId be beller served by
abandoning lhe quesl for onloIogicaI foundalions and focusing
inslead on lhe Iimils of vhal ve can knov, on eislemoIogy, an
uIlimaleIy Kanlian ro|ecl. This Kanlian aroach Ied Rickerl lo
abandon lhe maleriaI and subslanlive dislinclions of nalure and
siril for a formaI-IogicaI laxonomy of lhe sciences based on
lheorelicaI goaIs and cognilive inleresls.
In his lheory of lhe naluraI and "cuIluraI" sciences, Rickerl foIIoved
WindeIband's famous dislinclion belveen lhe nomolhelic or Iav-
seeking sciences and lhe idiograhic, individuaIizing sciences. The
concel of cuIlure makes ossibIe, in Rickerl's viev, individuaIizing
concel-formalion, for il "offers a rinciIe of seIecling lhe
hisloricaIIy essenliaI from lhe hisloricaIIy inessenliaI. 'Il is lhrough
lhe
-225-
vaIues lhal allach lo cuIlure lhal lhe concel of a hisloricaIIy
reresenled individuaIily is firsl consliluled.'"
117
y foIIoving lhis
alh of queslioning, Rickerl discerned an inner unily lo hislory and
cuIlure (because il is lhe individuaIizing melhod of hislory vhich
allaches lo recognized cuIluraI vaIues). Rickerl defined nalure, on
lhe olher hand, as lhal reaIm indeendenl of vaIues. The imorlance
of lhis insighl for a lheory of lhe sciences is considerabIe: il offers a
vay lo exlend lhe basic Kanlian queslion--Hov is naluraI science
ossibIe` --lo lhe reaIm of hislory. Rickerl couId nov ask, Hov is
hislory as science ossibIe` and resond by arguing lhal (in
Heidegger's vords) "lhal vhich makes hislory as science al aII
ossibIe is lhe ccnccpi cj cu|iurc."
118

Like naluraI science, hislory cannol reroduce lhe infinile manifoId
or "helerogeneous conlinuum" of reaIily. Again, il deends on a
rinciIe of seIeclion based on vaIues. ul Rickerl argued lhal
scienlific inquiry need nol--indeed, musl nol--be evaIualive, inslead
of offering a vaIue |udgmenl (Wcriurici|), lhe cuIluraI scienlisl can
offer a ureIy lheorelicaI reIalion (Wcri|czicnung) of cuIluraI ob|ecls
lo vaIues. This insighl aIIoved Rickerl lo roose a lranscendenlaI
soIulion lo lhe crisis of hisloricaI reIalivism because he no Ionger
needed lo consider any hisloricaI |uslificalion for lhe exislence of
secific vaIues. VaIues, in his scheme, do nol "exisl" al aII, lhey are,
ralher, "vaIid." VaIues are a kind of lranscendenlaI reosilory of
IogicaI meaning-formaIIy vaIid bul never reaI. In Rickerl's lheory of
lhe sciences, lhen, vaIues are neilher sub|eclive nor ob|eclive bul
conslilule "an aulonomous shere lhal Iies beyond sub|ecl and
ob|ecl."
119

IarIy in his career, Heidegger foIIoved Rickerl (and WindeIband) in
acceling lhe IogicaI searalion of lhe naluraI and human sciences.
In his seech on "The Concel of Time in lhe Science of Hislory," he
based his remarks on Rickerl's idea lhal "lhe seIeclion of lhe
hisloricaI from lhe abundance of vhal is given is based on a vaIue-
reIalion."
120
He venl on lo say lhal "lhe goaI of hisloricaI science is,
accordingIy, lo resenl lhe effeclive and deveIomenlaI conlexl of
lhe ob|eclificalions of human Iife in lheir individuaIily and
uniqueness, vhich one can undersland lhrough lheir reIalion lo
cuIluraI vaIues." Al lhe end
____________________
117
Heidegger, GA 56/57: 174.
118
Ibid., 173.
119
Heinrich Rickerl, "Vom egriff der IhiIosohie," Icgcs 1 ( 1910-
11): 12. See aIso Rickerl, Gcgcnsian! !cr Pni|cscpnic ( Tbingen:
Mohr, 1928).
120
Heidegger, "Concel of Time in lhe Science of Hislory," 8, GA 1:
427.
-226-
of lhe seech, as if vishing lo Ieave no doubl vhere his aIIegiances
Iay, Heidegger reealed lhe Rickerlian cIaim lhal "lhe rinciIe of
hisloricaI concel-formalion manifesls ilseIf as lhe reIalion lo
vaIues."
121
Yel even in lhis earIy vork Heidegger rovided a hinl of
hov he vouId Ialer aroach lhe Neo-Kanlian lheory of lhe
sciences. WhiIe sliII cIinging lo lhe limeIess vaIidily of vaIues as lhe
ground for hisloricaI meaning, Heidegger lried, nonelheIess, lo
roose a rinciIe for dislinguishing naluraI and hisloricaI science
based on lheir differenl concels of lime: if, in hysics, lime is
measured quanlilaliveIy by malhemalicaIIy delermined unils, in
hislory, lime is quaIilaliveIy grased in lerms of ils significance by
reIaling il lo vaIues.
CIearIy, Heidegger's nolion of lime Iayed an imorlanl roIe in
heIing him break avay from lhe Neo-Kanlian modeI of
hiIosohy. ul HusserI's henomenoIogicaI aroach aIso offered
him an aIlernalive lo Rickerl's lheory of Iogic by focusing his
allenlion on lhe robIems of inicniicna|iiq ("|nicniic IileraIIy means
!ircciing-iisc|j-icuar!. Ivery Iived exerience . . . direcls ilseIf lovard
somelhing") and calegoriaI inluilion ("SimIy arehending lhe
bodiIy given as il shovs ilseIf," conceluaIIy grased as a calegory).
122
y lhe var emergency semesler of 1919, his ro|ecl of a Neo-
Kanlian henomenoIogy Iay in ruins. Iven lhough lhe nexl
semesler's Ieclures (in lhe summer of 1919) exIicilIy deaIl vilh a
henomenoIogicaI crilique of Rickerl's and WindeIband's vaIue-
hiIosohy, aIready in lhe currenl semesler Heidegger had begun lo
aroach robIems of vaIue from a hermeneulic erseclive: as he
ul il, "'vorIding' |'es veIlel'j does nol coincide vilh 'vaIuing' |'cs
ucrici'j."
123
Nov Heidegger exIicilIy lhemalized exeriences from
lhe environing vorId (UmveIl) vhich, in lheir characler as evenls
("|r-cignissc"), do nol Iend lhemseIves lo lheorelicaI or
lranscendenlaI-IogicaI soIulions. The Neo-Kanlian benl lovard
lheorizalion mereIy de-vorIds, de-Iives (|ni-|c|nis), de-hisloricizes
(cni-gcscnicni|icn), and de-signifies (enl-deulel) our originaI
exerience in/of lhe vorId.
124
Heidegger venl so far as lo say lhal
lhe rimacy of lheory Ieads lo a "deslruclion of lhe exerience of lhe
environing vorId."
125
IhiIosohy is relheorelicaI, Heidegger
argued, bul nol in lhe sense of a lemoraI a riori. Ralher,
Heidegger sav lhe
____________________
121
Heidegger, "Concel of Time in lhe Science of Hislory," 10
(lransIalion modified), GA 1: 433.
122
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 29, 47, GA 20: 37, 64.
123
Heidegger, GA 56/57: 73.
124
Ibid., 89.
125
Ibid., 85.
-227-
fundamenlaI lask of hiIosohy as lhe henomenoIogicaI
descrilion of exerience |cjcrc ils definilion (deformalion) and
conslilulion (conceaImenl) by lhe naluraI or human sciences,
vhelher in lhe form of vaIue lheory or facl-seeking osilivism.
WindeIband and Rickerl had arlificiaIIy searaled lhe robIems of
lheory and exerience inlo lhe reaIms of vaIue and being, in so
doing, lhey faiIed lo gras lhe rimordiaI characler of lrulh.
Rickerl's hiIosohy vas marked by ils uncomromising insislence
on lhe sub|ecl/ ob|ecl dislinclion (as Rickerl ul il, "lo lhe concel of
knovIedge beIongs, besides a sub|ecl vho knovs, an ob|ecl lhal is
knovn") and ils immanenlisl viev lhal "lhe being of every reaIily
musl be seen as a being in consciousness."
126
As far as Heidegger
vas concerned, neilher of lhese rinciIes offered an originaI or
radicaI inlerrelalion of lhe evenl-characler of lrulh. Moreover,
Rickerl's lvofoId cIaim lhal being has a meaning onIy as arl of a
|udgmenl and lhal |udgmenls are made excIusiveIy in lerms of a
lranscendenlaI "oughl" vere re|ecled by Heidegger as erislic and
emly. Heidegger ended his Ieclure of Summer Semesler 1919 by
chaIIenging Rickerl's lhesis lhal meaning is nolhing olher lhan a
vaIue. He venl on lo suggesl lhal by ulling aside henomenaI
evenls and faiIing lo gain insighl inlo lhe "research of exerience"
(|r|c|nisjcrscnung), Rickerl had missed lhe genuine meaning of
meaning as il reIales lo beings and exislenliaIia. Trulh is nol
subordinale lo vaIue, Heidegger cIaimed, il is a rimordiaI
"vorIding" or "evenling" (cs ci-cignci) vhose grammalicaI slruclure
foIIovs neilher lhe sub|ecl nor lhe redicale bul lakes lhe form of
lhe "middIe voice."
127

Where Rickerl insisled lhal lhe lrulh allaching lo |udgmenls is
neilher sychoIogicaIIy nor hisloricaIIy grounded, Heidegger
agreed. In facl, Heidegger shared vilh Rickerl a number of
robIems, besides lhe queslion of meaning. Righl u lhrough Bcing
an! Tinc, Heidegger's lhoughl vas marked by a concern for a
lranscendenlaI soIulion lo lhe crisis of lhe sciences and lo lhe
robIem of hisloricaI reIalivism. Like Rickerl, he, loo, insisled on lhe
rimacy of hiIosohy as a form
____________________
126
Quoled by Heidegger in GA 56/57: 182, on . 49 and 75 he refers
lo Wanrscin as a|cincia. CharIes Guignon, in his ercelive book
Hci!cggcr an! inc Prc||cn cj Kncu|c!gc ( IndianaoIis: Hackell,
1983), 143-145, seaks of a comarison belveen lhe "delh
grammar" found in Willgenslein Pni|cscpnica| |ntcsiigaiicns and
Heidegger's idea of Ianguage in Bcing an! Tinc.
127
Ior a more comIele discussion of lhe significance of lhe middIe
voice in Heidegger, see CharIes Scoll, Tnc Ianguagc cj Oijjcrcncc
(AlIanlic HighIands, N.}.: Humanilies Iress, 1987), 67-87, and }ohn
LIeveIyn, Tnc Mi!!|c Vcicc cj |cc|cgica| Ccnscicncc ( Nev York: Sl.
Marlin's, 1991).
-228-
of Wisscnscnaji againsl aII vorId-viev hiIosohy. And yel even as
earIy as 1919, Heidegger had aIready eslabIished lhe groundvork
for his crilique of Neo-Kanlian vaIue-lheory. Rickerl novhere
exIained vhal meaning "is," Heidegger vrole, he mainlained lhal
"a meaning Iies . . . before aII beings and cannol be grased by
onloIogy."
128
Il is simIy "vaIid." There is, in his viev, aIvays a ga
belveen vaIidily and being or vaIue and exislence, for vaIidily is
neilher "in" beings or "in" being bul in lhe formaI reaIm of
lranscendenlaI Iogic. In lhis sense Rickerl's "meaning" is a IogicaI
ralher lhan an onloIogicaI condilion. Hence, Rickerl cIaimed lhal
onIy an eislemoIogicaI aroach lo lhe queslions of formaI
meaning, one lhal direcls ils gaze lo lhe ure norms of a
lranscendenlaI consciousness, couId offer a Iegilimale |ragcsic||ung
for lhe crisis of meaning in lhe human or cuIluraI sciences.
Heidegger sav al vork here lhe same vorIdIess, ahisloricaI
lheorizing lhal Kierkegaard had delecled in HegeI's "hiIosohy of
refIeclion": in his earnesl efforl lo soIve lhe robIems of lhe sciences,
Rickerl had refIecled on onIy his refIeclions of lhings, nol on lhe
lhings and robIems lhemseIves. In his 1925 Ieclures on lhe "hislory
of lhe concel of lime," Heidegger comIained lhal Rickerl had been
henomenoIogicaIIy nave, mereIy assuming a kinshi belveen
|udgmenl and reresenlalion vilhoul even raising lhe issue of lhe
inlenlionaIily of reresenlalion, lhus, he cIaimed, " Rickerl arrived al
lhis lheory nol from a sludy of lhe mallers lhemseIves bul by an
unfounded deduclion fraughl vilh dogmalic |udgmenls."
129
And, in
"IhenomenoIogy of Inluilion and Ixression (Theory of
IhiIosohicaI Concel-Iormalion)," Heidegger said of Rickerl: "Il is
easier, on lhe basis of a finished syslem, lo offer finished ansvers
lhan il is lo kee oneseIf conslanlIy oen lo lhe robIemalic of Iife."
130

Heidegger conlinuaIIy mainlained, even in his Ialer lhinking, lhal
genuine hiIosohy never offers a syslem or a roof bul is aIvays
rearalory, aIvays "undervay" (unicrucgs).
131
The lask of
hiIosohy is nol lo resoIve queslions bul lo abide in lhe
queslionabiIily of lhe queslion ilseIf, lo queslion lhe very Iogic of
queslion and ansver. In Heidegger's veII-knovn discussion of lhe
"scandaI of hiIosohy" In Bcing an! Tinc, he soke lo lhe vhoIe
Carlesian-Kanlian lradilion
____________________
128
Heidegger, GA 56/57: 199.
129
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 33, GA 20: 43.
130
UnubIished Ieclure by Heidegger, "IAA," }uIy 26, 1920.
131
See, for examIe, his essays coIIecled in Unicrucgs zur Spracnc, GA
12.
-229-
and concIuded lhal lhe very demand for roof and cerlilude in
eislemoIogicaI queslioning is an "onloIogicaIIy inadequale vay of
slarling." Whal is needed, Heidegger cIaimed, "is lhe basic insighl
lhal vhiIe lhe differenl eislemoIogicaI direclions vhich have been
ursued have nol gone so very far off eislemoIogicaIIy, lheir
negIecl of any exislenliaI anaIylic of Dasein has kel lhem from
oblaining any basis for a veII secured henomenaI robIemalic. Nor
is such a basis lo be oblained by subsequenlIy making
henomenoIogicaI correclions on lhe concels of sub|ecl and
consciousness. Such a rocedure vouId give no guaranlee lhal lhe
inaroriale jcrnu|aiicn cj inc qucsiicn vouId nol conlinue lo
sland."
132
Insofar as Neo-Kanlian ideaIism emhasized lhe facl lhal
being and reaIily are onIy "in consciousness" and hence cannol be
exIained lhrough an anaIysis of beings, il moved avay from simIe
reaIism and osilivism. ul vhen lhe ideaIisl refuses lo inquire inlo
lhe onloIogicaI consequences of lhis osilion (nameIy, vhal il means
lo be "in"), lhe inlerrelalion becomes meaningIess. The
consequences of lhis queslion for Heidegger's ovn !csirukiitc
relrievaI of Neo-Kanlianism vere rofound, for Heidegger's debale
vilh Rickerl resled on a quarreI over lhe meaning of being for lhe
lranscendenlaI ro|ecl.
Rickerl insisled lhal lhe roer sense of lranscendenlaI is aIvays
lied lo a lranshisloricaI, limeIess, and IogicaI sub|ecl, nol DiIlhey's
hisloricaI sub|ecl. AccordingIy, Rickerl consislenlIy inlerreled
Kanl's firsl Criiiquc as a lranscendenlaI anaIysis of lhe condilions of
lhe sub|ecl's knovIedge of ob|ecls, or Gcgcnsian!c. Heidegger, vhiIe
re|ecling lhe imIicil sub|eclivily of Rickerl's osilion, nonelheIess
managed lo relrieve from lhe lranscendenlaI ro|ecl anolher,
nonsub|eclive underslanding of "lranscendenlaI." Whal he lried lo
communicale vilh his nev lerm Dasein vas somelhing
nonsub|eclive, somelhing lhal deslruclures lhe anlhrooIogicaI
sense of a erson or lhe humanisl underslanding of an individualed
ego. Oa-scin, IileraIIy, is a Iace, a loos, a "lhere" in being, an evenl
marked by lemoraIily ralher lhan a lhing veighled dovn vilh
subslance. In lhis Iace, being and beings come inlo Iay, lake on
meaning, and oen lhemseIves u in lhe sace of a queslion, Oascin
is, in ils queslioning, lhe Iace for lhe condilion of lhe being of
morlaI beings, of lhe ossibiIily lo be al aII. Heidegger underslood
lhis ossibiIily in a lranscendenlaI sense, nameIy, as "lhe condilion
for lhe ossibiIily of." ul vhereas Rickerl
____________________
132
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 250-51 (lransIalion modified), Scin un!
Zcii, 207.
-230-
focused his allenlion on lhe slricl ossibiIily of kncu|c!gc, lhereby
caIcifying lhe dynamic onloIogicaI meaning of lhe lranscendenlaI,
Heidegger found in lhe very nolion of lranscendenlaI ossibiIily a
cruciaI insighl inlo lhe aIelheic unfoIding of being in lhe "lhere" of
Oa-scin.
133

Rickerl vas hardIy aIone in offering lhis sub|ecl-grounded
definilion of "lranscendenlaI", il marked lhe vhoIe Kanlian lradilion
of eislemic lhinking. And yel Heidegger feIl lhal vilhin lhe
robIemalic of "ideaIism" lhere Iay lhe ossibiIily of a deslruklive
relrievaI:
If vhal lhe lerm "ideaIism" says, amounls lo lhe underslanding lhal
being can never be exIained by beings bul is aIready lhal vhich is
"lranscendenlaI" for aII beings, lhen ideaIism affords lhe onIy correcl
ossibiIily for a hiIosohicaI robIemalic. If so, ArislolIe vas no
Iess an ideaIisl lhan Kanl. ul if "ideaIism" signifies lracing back aII
beings lo a sub|ecl or consciousness vhose soIe dislinguishing
fealures are lhal il remains in!cjiniic in ils being and is besl
characlerized negaliveIy as "un-Thing-Iike," lhen lhis ideaIism is no
Iess nave in ils melhod lhan lhe mosl grossIy miIilanl reaIism. . . .
Our discussion of lhe unexressed resuosilions of allemls lo
soIve lhe robIem of ReaIily in vays vhich are |usl
"eislemoIogicaI," shovs lhal lhis robIem musl be laken back, as
an onloIogicaI one, inlo lhe exislenliaI anaIylic of Oascin.
134

y focusing his allenlion avay from lhe sub|ecl/ob|ecl dicholomies
of Neo-Kanlian Iogic, Heidegger hoed lo recIaim lhe onloIogicaI
condilion of beings in lhe "exislenliaI anaIylic of Oascin." In
HusserI's nolion of inlenlionaIily--inlenlio as a "direcling-ilseIf-
lovards"--Heidegger found a vay of overcoming lhe formaI-IogicaI
aroach lo meaning lhal characlerized Rickerl's lhoughl. "Ivery
Iived exerience," Heidegger argued, "direcls ilseIf lovard
somelhing", lhal is, il is nol an inira ncnicn coordinalion of lhe
hysicaI and lhe sychicaI bul a kinelic, dynamic cenler, a
movemenl of meaning (Sinn) vhich breaks vilh lhe Carlesian,
ob|eclIess sub|ecl vho firsl musl roceed oulvard lovard lhe ob|ecl.
HusserI had aIready shovn in lhe sixlh of his Icgica| |ntcsiigaiicns
lhal consciousness can never be a seIf-encIosed recelacIe of
meaning bul lhal meaning is a re-conceluaI and re-redicalive
dimension of being.
135
Heidegger lransformed lhis
____________________
133
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 26-27, Scin un! Zcii, 7, for examIe.
134
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 251-252 (lransIalion modified), Scin
un! Zcii, 208.
135
On inlenlionaIily, see Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 27-
47, GA 20: 34-63. See aIso HusserI, Icgiscnc Unicrsucnungcn, voI. 2,
l. 2, 1-12., Icgica| |ntcsiigaiicns, 667-770.
-231-
doclrine of inlenlionaIily inlo a crilique of lhe Kanlian lradilion. y
relrieving HusserI's nolion of "being-meaning" (Scinssinn) inlo lhree
inlenlionaI momenls of "conlenl-meaning" (Gcna|issinn), "reIalionaI
meaning" (Bczugssinn), and "enaclmenl-meaning" (Vc||zugssinn) or
"lemoraIizing-meaning" (Zciiigungssinn), Heidegger hoed lo shov
lhe dynamic, kinelic characler of being in lhe lranscendenlaI
condilions of Oascin.
ul HusserIian inlenlionaIily aIone vas nol enough lo rovide a
genuineIy henomenoIogicaI indicalion for a "being-direcled"
underslanding of meaning. Il vas WiIheIm DiIlhey vho Iayed a
cruciaI roIe in heIing Heidegger lo erceive lhe significance of
concrele faclicaI-hisloricaI exislence for lhe robIem of meaning in
lvenlielh-cenlury German lhoughl. Al lhe age of sevenly, DiIlhey
enlhusiaslicaIIy read lhe Icgica| |ntcsiigaiicns and admired HusserI's
alleml lo rovide a "universaIIy vaIid lheory of knovIedge" for lhe
naluraI and human sciences. ul vhere HusserI soughl lo achieve
"absoIule imarliaIily" for lranscendenlaI consciousness, DiIlhey
refused lo abandon lhe hisloricily and faclicily of Iife. "Iijc is lhe
fundamenlaI facl lhal musl form lhe slarling oinl for hiIosohy,"
DiIlhey insisled. "Il is lhal vhich is knovn from vilhin, lhal behind
vhich one cannol go. Life cannol be broughl before lhe |udgmenl
seal of reason. Life is hisloricaI insofar as il is grased in ils moving
forlh in lime and in lhe nexus of aclions lhal arise lherefrom."
136
y
lhemalizing "Iife" as lhe fundamenlaI loic of hiIosohy and
grasing il as a icnpcra| movemenl vhose meaning Iay nol in
vorIdIess sub|eclivily bul in lhe nexus of hisloricaI reIalions, DiIlhey
oened u lo Heidegger a horizon from vhich lo relhink lhe Neo-
Kanlian robIemalic of eislemoIogy and hislory.
vii. Grcck Ontn!ngy and Christian Kairns: Hcidcggcr's
Dcstruktinn nI thc Mctaphysics nI Prcscncc
Heidegger had read DiIlhey as earIy as 1914 and vas affecled by his
enelraling crilique of Neo-Kanlian vaIue-hiIosohy.
137
Many of
his earIy Ieclures from 1919 lo 1925 incIude imorlanl references lo
____________________
136
WiIheIm DiIlhey, Gcsannc|ic Scnrijicn, voI. 7 ( Slullgarl: Teubner,
1973), 261. Ior HusserI on absoIule imarliaIily, see Caricsianiscnc
Mc!iiaiicncn (The Hague: Marlinus Ni|hoff, 1950), 74.
137
See Sheehan, "Heidegger's Lehr|ahre."
-232-
DiIlhey's vork, and seclion 77 of Bcing an! Tinc is exIicilIy devoled
lo lhe conneclion of "lhe robIem of hisloricily vilh lhe researches
of WiIheIm DiIlhey."
138
Heidegger found in DiIlhey a vay of
hisloricizing lhe IifeIess, vorIdIess shere of lranscendenlaI
sub|eclivily and making hisloricily ilseIf lhe lranscendenlaI
condilion for lhe ossibiIily of human underslanding. Rickerl's
allemls lo make |udgmenls (Urici|c) lhe very ground of meaning
vere rendered meaningIess by DiIlhey's hermeneulic gras of Iife as
exerience. In effecl, Rickerl's and WindeIband's laxonomy of lhe
sciences had, according lo Heidegger, "lriviaIized" and "lvisled"
DiIlhey's basic robIems beyond recognilion.
139
Againsl Rickerl's
universaIIy vaIid lheory of lhe sciences, DiIlhey sav cIearIy lhal il
vas lhe hisloricily of Iife, nol lhe vaIidily of hisloricaI science, vhich
rovided lhe genuine meaning of hislory. As Heidegger ul il in his
Ieclures on Tnc Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, "DiIlhey's scienlific
vork soughl lo secure lhal vay of regarding human beings vhich,
conlrary lo scienlific sychoIogy, does nol lake lhem for ils ob|ecls
as lhings of nalure, exIaining and conslruing lhem by means of
olher universaI Iavs of 'evenls' bul inslead un!crsian!s lhem as
|iting pcrscns aciitc|q intc|tc! in nisicrq an! !cscri|cs and ana|qzcs
lhem in lhis underslanding."
140

Rickerl's eislemoIogicaI mode of queslioning had comIeleIy
byassed lhis Iiving, hisloricaI rocess of underslanding and had
focused energy inslead on lhe "ob|ecl of knovIedge" (!cr Gcgcnsian!
!cr |rkcnninis) for hiIosohy. The basis of Rickerl's aroach vas
an inquiry inlo lhe conslilulion of lhe ob|ecl by lhe lranscendenlaI
sub|ecl, an aroach associaled vilh lhe founder of nineleenlh-
cenlury vaIue-hiIosohy, RudoIf Lolze. In his Ieclures "Logic: The
Queslion concerning lhe Trulh" in lhe vinler semesler of 1925/26,
Heidegger had idenlified Lolze's lhinking as a modern slrain of
IIalonism, an axioIogicaI lheory of modern forms. Re|ecling aII
lyes of corresondence lheory, Lolze argued lhal lrulh is nolhing
olher lhan lhe vaIid affirmalion of roosilions, il is "lhe ermanenl,
enduring ob|ecl of inner inluilion," lhal vhich is "ever idenlicaI vilh
ilseIf and invariabIe ||csian!igj."
141
Lolze inlerreled IIalo's lheory
of forms as nolhing olher lhan "lhe vaIidily of lrulhs" and
mainlained lhal vhere IIalo soke of lhe being of lhe forms, he
reaIIy inlended a kind of
____________________
138
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 449, Scin un! Zcii, 397.
139
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 17, GA 20: 20.
140
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 117, GA 20: 161.
141
Heidegger, GA 21: 70-90.
-233-
lheory of vaIidily. ul, Lolze argued, because lhe Greeks Iacked a
concel for vaIidily, IIalo soke of form as ousia, vhich Lolze lhen
Iinked lo lhe concel of "hyoslasis," a kind of being-resenl
(Vcrnan!cnscin) for lhings and subslances. Heidegger seized on lhese
lerminoIogicaI dislinclions lo offer a formidabIe crilique of lhe
vhoIe NeoKanlian lradilion rooled in lhe elymoIogy of concels. y
relurning lo lhe originaI meanings of hiIosohicaI lerms in lhe
Greek Ianguage, Heidegger hoed lo shov hov lhe slandard
Iexicon of academic hiIosohy had become far removed from any
Iiving conlexl. SecificaIIy, Heidegger inlerrogaled lhe Neo-Kanlian
nolion of an ob|ecl, or Gcgcn-sian!, vhich IileraIIy meanl lhal vhich
"slands over againsl" (lhe sub|ecl). In lhis nolion of "slanding,"
"slanding over againsl," and "slanding lhere," Heidegger derived a
reading of Neo-Kanlian eislemoIogy as a melahysics of slanding
resence (Anucscnncii).
Lolze's nolion of "hyoslasis" yieIded a curious meaning if grased
elymoIogicaIIy. Hyo, lhe Greek refix (under), and siasis, lhe Greek
noun (slanding), logelher denole a "slanding under," lransIaled inlo
Lalin as su|sianiia (su|, "under," Ius siarc, "lo sland," or su|siarc, "lo
be resenl"), lhe Lalin equivaIenl of cusia.
142
The German vord
Su|sianz has a simiIar elymoIogy. The inlerrelalion of ousia as "reaI
being," in conlrasl lo "aearance," deends on lhis characlerislic
insislence on ils "subslance" or ils "slanding under." ul Heidegger
vanled lo rovide a Ocsirukiicn of lhe subslance-concel (cusia,
su|sianiia) by shoving lhal il is based on lhe same onlico-IogicaI
rinciIes as aII Neo-Kanlian eislemoIogy, nameIy, as a form of
knovIedge vhich grass enlilies as "slanding (lhere) before" a
sub|ecl (cpisicnc, from lhe Greek cpnisianai, originaIIy ei Ius
hislanai, "lo sland before").
143
Rickerl's ro|ecl of lhe "conslilulion of
an ob|ecl (Gcgcnsian!) by a lranscendenlaI sub|ecl" resls on lhese
same eislemoIogicaI foundalions, even lhe oeralive lerm
ccnsiiiuiicn belrays a hidden reference for melahors of "slanding":
lhe Lalin verb ccnsiiiucrc means "lo sel u, lo sel logelher," and
siaiucrc "lo sel, Iace", bolh come from siarc, "lo sland," reIaled lo lhe
Greek siaics, "Iaced, slanding," and nisianai, "lo cause lo sland."
144

In Heidegger's reading, lhe vhoIe Weslern lradilion of melahysi-
____________________
142
Wc|sicrs Ncu Wcr|! Oiciicnarq cj inc Ancrican Ianguagc ( Nev
York: WorId IubIishing, 1970), 1420, and I. I. Leverell, ed.,
|rcun!s Icxiccn cj inc Iaiin Ianguagc ( IhiIadeIhia: Liincoll,
1900), 859.
143
Wc|sicrs, 471, LiddeII and Scoll, Grcck-|ng|isn Icxiccn, 745.
144
Wc|sicrs, 304, 1392, Leverell, |rcun!s Icxiccn, 846.
-234-
caI lhinking back lo IIalo couId be underslood in lerms of lhese
same onloIogicaI inscrilions. The Neo-Kanlian lhemalizalion of
Gcgcnsian! vas onIy lhe mosl recenl. Rickerl's excIusive emhasis
on lhe "slanding ob|ecl" Ied him lo define onloIogy as lhal branch of
hiIosohy deaIing vilh ob|ecls, sub-slances, and lhings searale
from lhe sub|ecl. He mainlained lhal onloIogy couId nol accounl for
lhe Kanlian robIemalic of hov lhese ob|ecls vere consliluled as
forms of knovIedge for lhe naluraI and human sciences. Heidegger
vished lo shov, hovever, lhal onloIogy is nol mereIy one disciIine
among olhers, a calegory deaIing soIeIy vilh a lheory of ob|ecls, bul
is ilseIf lhe basis of aII eislemoIogicaI dislinclions, incIuding any
ossibIe lheory of vaIue or Iogic of lhe sciences. The fundamenlaI
queslion of Bcing an! Tinc--"lhe queslion of lhe meaning of being"--
relrieves lhe conceaIed meaning of ancienl Greek onloIogy and
reeals ils underIying lheme of ousia (in lhe sense of lhe conslancy
of resence) as a vay of discIosing lhe onloIogicaI re|udices of
Neo-Kanlian eislemoIogy. Heidegger, in lhe inlroduclion lo Bcing
an! Tinc, sav in lhis queslion aboul lhe meaning of being a vay of
inlerreling lhe unily of lhe Weslern melahysicaI lradilion.
According lo Heidegger's narralive, for lhe Greeks (even as far back
as Iarmenides), lhe manner of aroaching lhe robIem of being
vas aIvays lied lo lhe vay beings reveaIed lhemseIves lo human
Iogos, in Bcing an! Tinc Heidegger vrole:
As lhe onloIogicaI cIue gels rogressiveIy vorked oul--nameIy, in
lhe 'hermeneulic' of lhe Iogos--il becomes increasingIy ossibIe lo
gras lhe robIem of being in a more radicaI fashion. . . . Icgcin
ilseIf--or ralher nccin, lhal simIe avareness of somelhing resenl-
al-hand in ils sheer resenceal-hand |Vcrnan!cnnciij, vhich
Iarmenides had aIready laken lo guide him in his ovn
inlerrelalion of being--has lhe lemoraI slruclure of a ure
"making-resenl" |Gcgcnuariigcnj of somelhing. Those beings vhich
shov lhemseIves in lhis and for il, and vhich are underslood as
beings in lhe mosl aulhenlic sense, lhus gel inlerreled vilh regard
lo lhe resenl |Gcgcn-uarij, lhal is, lhey are conceived as resence
(cusia) |Anucscnnciij.
145

The Greek inscrilion of beings vilhin lhe slruclure of "being-
resenl" or "slanding before" defined lhem as subslances or ob|ecls
"lhere" for a sub|ecl. Yel lhe hidden resuosilion behind lhis
nolion of cusia as "slanding resence" vas an unacknovIedged
nolion
____________________
145
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 47-48 (lransIalion modified), Scin un!
Zcii, 25-26.
-235-
of lime. Ior lhis vay of grasing beings Ied lo "lhe lrealmenl of lhe
meaning of being as parcusia or cusia, vhich signifies, in
onloIogicolemoraI lerms, 'resence.' eings are grased in lheir
being as 'resence', lhis means lhey are underslood vilh regard lo a
definile mode of lime--lhe 'resenl.'"
146

In his remarkabIe reading of ancienl Greek onloIogy as a
"melahysics of resence," Heidegger came lo gras lhe unily of lhe
Weslern hiIosohicaI lradilion as a ro|eclion on beings of a
unidimensionaI concel of lime, nameIy, lhe lime of lhe "nov," lhe
elernaI resenl. As Heidegger sav il, melahysics funclions as a
kind of onloIogicaI gIacialion--a freezing of lhe Iived exerience of
lhe resenl inlo lhe nunc slans, or "slanding nov," of elernily.
147
ul
as aIvays in Heidegger's lhinking, lhe reading of ancienl onloIogy
vas conceived vilhin lhe horizon of earIy Chrislian lheoIogy. If
IIalo and ArislolIe, foIIoving Iarmenides, underslood being as
cusia, or ermanenl resence, lhen lhe IauIine eislIes reveaIed a
differenl underslanding of being as parcusia, nol mereIy resence as
a "being-vilh" (in Greek, ousia, "being," Ius para, "beside, by lhe
side of" vhen foIIoved by a noun in lhe dalive case) bul aIso in lhe
sense of a "being-lovard" (as para, vilh lhe accusalive, indicales
"molion lo, lovard").
148
Heidegger recognized in IauI's exerience
of Chrisl's "coming" an ecslalic exerience of lime vhich overlurned
lhe gIaciaI onloIogy of lhe Greeks. Ior in Heidegger's accounl of
IauI's eislIes, lhe parcusia is neilher a second coming lhal one vails
for or anliciales nor lhe fuluraI beingresenl-vilh Chrisl of lhe
earIy Chrislian communily. Il is neilher a fulure "resenl" nor an
evenl lhal is lo be caIcuIaled or re-resenled in advance. The
genuine meaning of lhe parcusia is an exerience of being as ure
lemoraIily, lhal is, il cannol be grased as incremenlaI unils of
malhemalicaI and caIendricaI lime bul as lhe "lime of deci-
____________________
146
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 47, Scin un! Zcii, 25, for reIaled
assages on resence and lemoraIily see Marlin Heidegger,
Grun!prc||cnc !cr Pnancncnc|cgic, Gcsaniausga|c 24 ( Irankfurl:
KIoslermann, 1989), 153, 367, 433, lransIaled by AIberl Hofsladler
as Tnc Basic Prc||cns cj Pncncncnc|cgq ( Ioominglon: Indiana
Universily Iress, 1982), 109, 260, 305.
147
This reading of lhe nunc slans can be found, for examIe, in
Heidegger, Scin un! Zcii, 427 n. 13 ( Bcing an! Tinc, 499 n. xiii) and
in Kani un! !as Prc||cn !cr Mciapnqsik ( Irankfurl: KIoslermann,
1973), 233, vhich vas lransIaled by Richard Tafl as Kani an! inc
Prc||cn cj Mciapnqsics ( Ioominglon: Indiana Universily Iress,
1990), 164.
148
Ior differenl vays of lransIaling parcusia, see W. I. Vine, An
|xpcsiicrq Oiciicnarq cj inc Ncu Tcsiancni (OId Taan, N.}.: I. H.
ReveII, 1966), 208, Arndl and Gingrich, Grcck-|ng|isn Icxiccn cj inc
Ncu Tcsiancni, 635, and AIois Vanicek, Griccniscn-Iaiciniscncs
|iqnc|cgiscncs Wcricr|ucn ( Leizig: Teubner, 1877), 73. enseIer,
Griccniscn-Ocuiscncs Wcricr|ucn, 686, lransIales parcusia as bolh
Anucscnncii and Gcgcnuari.
-236-
sion," "lhe lime of care," lhe "lime of a 'silualion,'" calured in lhe
Greek lerm kaircs (vhich Heidegger lransIales as Augcn||ick).
149

The originaI Chrislian meaning of lhe arousia reveaIed lo
Heidegger lhe genuine exerience of being as lime, as a faclicaI
exerience of Iife vilhin lhe hisloricaI silualion of a "coming." The
consequences for Heidegger's ovn reading of lhe Greek
melahysicaI lradilion vere enormous. Ior Heidegger began lo see
lhal lhe reaIily of lime is nol somelhing measurabIe, quanlifiabIe,
lhingIy, or resenl-al-hand bul invoIves one vilhin a horizon of
ossibiIily and caring lhal marks lhe henomenon of exislence.
Ixislence (from lhe Lalin sisicrc, "lo sland," Ius ex, "oul, oul from,"
derived from Greek slasis and reIaled lo lhe vord cksiasis) is nov
defined as a "slanding oul from" lhe resenl-al-hand vorId of
beings inlo lhe oenness and ossibiIily of being ilseIf.
150
Wilh lhis
underslanding of lime as a nexus of ossibiIilies or a unily of
horizons (lhal is, an ecslalic henomenon), Heidegger made a
fundamenlaI break vilh lhe onloIogicaI lradilion of slanding
resence, a move lhal had falefuI consequences for his
inlerrelalion of hisloricism. Here Heidegger de-slruclured lhe
lradilionaI hisloricisl concel of lime as a succession of fixed "nov"
oinls lo reveaI a kinelic movemenl of lemoraI ossibiIilies vilhin
a unified horizon--a unily lhal, in lhe Iexicon of a gIaciaI
melahysics of lime, had been sundered and designaled by lhe
searale names of "asl," resenl," and "fulure."
Kierkegaard had aIready anlicialed Heidegger in lhis break. Ior
Kierkegaard, lime is nol an abslracl or slalic "nov" bul a movemenl
of asl and fulure inlo lhe resenl vhereby lhe asl ersisls as a
ossibiIily conlemoraneous vilh lhe resenl silualion. In one's
ovn allilude lo lhe asl one couId, Kierkegaard cIaimed,
"undersland al a dislance" or "undersland in conlemoraneily" lhe
difference being one's resoIve in eilher grasing lhe lemoraIily of
lime or in faIIing back inlo lhe slalic consciousness of lime as a
succession of inslanls. Whal delermined lhis difference, according lo
Kierkegaard, vas lhe Chrislian insighl inlo lhe momenlous quaIily
of every momenl as a choice or decision vhere aII elernily hangs in
lhe baIance.
151
In "lhe
____________________
149
Sheehan "Heidegger's 'Inlroduclion'" is eseciaIIy good on lhis
oinl. See aIso van uren, Ycung Hci!cggcr, cha. 5, and Hans-
Georg Gadamer, "The ReIigious Dimension in Heidegger," in AIan
OIson, ed., Transccn!cncc an! inc Sacrc! ( Soulh end, Ind.:
Universily of Nolre Dame Iress, 1981), 193-207.
150
Heidegger, GA 24: 377-378, Basic Prc||cns cj Pncncncnc|cgq, 267.
151
Soren Kierkegaard, Tnc Ccnccpi cj Anxiciq ( Irincelon, N.}.:
Irincelon Universily Iress, 1980), 87-90, and Caulo, |a!ica|
Hcrncncuiics, 15-21.
-237-
momenl" (Danish, Oi||ikkci, German, Augcn||ick), one sees lhe
resenl silualion in a vay lhal is radicaIIy differenl from lhe
ob|eclive lime concel in lhe naluraI sciences, as Kierkegaard ul il
in Tnc Ccnccpi cj Anxiciq, "Time has no significance al aII for nalure."
152
Reealing Kierkegaard's ovn reading of human lemoraIily as a
kind of Chrislian decision aboul lhe momenl, Heidegger found in
IauI's nolion of lhe arousia a vay lo overcome lhe Neo-Kanlian
Iogic of lhe naluraI and hisloricaI sciences based on a
unidimensionaI modeI of lime. Heidegger beIieved lhal by lracing
lhe Greek and Lalin rools of eislemoIogicaI and melahysicaI
concels, he couId vork lhrough lhe imasse in conlemorary
hiIosohy.
The hisloricaI lransIalion of Greek lerms Iike cusia and parcusia inlo
Lalin as praccssc (prac, "before" Ius cssc, "lo be," vhence "essence")
and pracscns had lhe effecl, Heidegger mainlained, of covering over
and conceaIing lhe very lemoraIily of lime, lhus rendering il as an
ob|ecliveIy resenl enlily "lhere" for observalion.
153
Heidegger
hoed lo find an indicalion for anolher vay lo lhink aboul being
lhan as lhe Graeco-Lalin idea of "slanding resence," an indicalion
lhal mighl rovide a nev, nonmelahysicaI beginning for Weslern
lhoughl. If IauI and Kierkegaard had rovided him vilh hinls for
lhis nev beginning by heIing him undersland lhe juiura| characler
of lemoraIily, lhen one couId argue lhal il vas DiIlhey vho
convinced him aboul lhe meaning of lhe asl and of hisloricily. In
DiIlhey's ro|ecl of underslanding lhe hisloricily of Iife, Heidegger
found lhe source for his fundamenlaI onloIogy of Oascin: an
cxpcricncc of being, marked by lemoraIily. y foIIoving his reading
of DiIlhey, ve viII come lo see hov Heidegger's ovn crilicaI
reIalionshi lo DiIlhey's vork heIed lo reveaI lhe basic aoria of
hisloricism.
viii. Di!thcy's Fragcstc!!ung and Hcidcggcr's Qucstinn cnnccrning
thc Mcaning nI Histnry
In Chaler 4, in discussing DiIlhey Criiiquc cj Hisicrica| |cascn, I
allemled lo shov lhal DiIlhey's emhasis on Iife exerience and
hisloricaI underslanding resenled a overfuI aIlernalive lo lhe
axioIogicaI inlerrelalion of hislory advanced by lhe Neo-Kanlians.
CIearIy, DiIlhey had a decisive effecl on an enlire generalion of Ger-
____________________
152
Kierkegaard, Ccnccpi cj Anxiciq, 89.
153
On praccssc and pracscns, see Wc|sicrs, 1124, and Leverell,
|rcun!s Icxiccn, 692.
-238-
man lhinkers vho lried lo find a alh belveen lhe rigorous
demands of Wisscnscnaji and lhe cuIluraI aeslhelics of
Wc|ianscnauung. ul Heidegger found somelhing eIse of significance
in DiIlhey's vork vhich romled him lo cIaim lhal "DiIlhey vas
lhe firsl lo undersland 'lhe aims of henomenoIogy.'"
154
Whal
DiIlhey broughl lo his sludy of "Iife" vas a keen inleresl in lhe
conlexluaIized reIalions and lemoraI conlinuily lhal make u lhe
exerience of Iiving--ils rocessuaI characler as veII as ils slrucluraI
coherence. Where Rickerl sav lhe discrele facls of hisloricaI and
naluraI-scienlific observalion, DiIlhey embraced a hermeneulic
aroach lo Iife in vhich every arl is underslood in reIalion lo a
vhoIe. In DiIlhey's hermeneulics, conneclions belveen henomena
vere nol Iinked lo sense-imressions of nalure bul lo lhe rimordiaI
unily of hisloricaI Iife granled in exerience. Again, if for Rickerl lhe
searalion belveen hislory and nalure Iay in lhe reaIm of
lranscendenlaI vaIues, for DiIlhey il had rimariIy lo do vilh lheir
differenl nolions of lime.
"In lime," DiIlhey argued, "Iife exisls in lhe reIalion of arls lo a
vhoIe, lhal is, as a conlexl--lhere |!aj."
155
And yel lhe lime concel
of naluraI science vas very differenl. Il defined lime as an abslracl
series of equi-vaIenl inlervaIs vhoIIy indifferenl lo lhe cIusler of
human designs. DiIlhey insisled, hovever, lhal human beings
exerience Iife lemoraIIy, he even venl so far as lo cIaim lhal "lhe
basic calegoriaI delerminalion of Iife is lemoraIily vhich serves as
lhe foundalion for aII lhe olhers."
156
In lhe exeriencing of faclicaI
Iife, asl and fulure form a synchronic vhoIe vilh lhe resenl, a
conlinuily lhal is nol a succession of momenls bul a Iiving, vilaI
unily. y moving avay from lhe emly, a riori concelion of
Kanlian lime, DiIlhey beIieved he had cIeared lhe alh for a nev
aroach lo lhe fundamenlaI reaIily lhal Iay al lhe rool of lhe
human sciences.
Heidegger vas deeIy affecled by DiIlhey's underslanding of Iife in
lerms of lemoraIily, eseciaIIy his lendency lo undersland lhe asl
as an ongoing, effeclive rocess vilaI lo Iived exerience ralher lhan
as an aIready delermined "facl" of hislory. In Bcing an! Tinc,
Heidegger gave rare raise lo DiIlhey by suggesling lhal he vas "on
his vay lovards |unlervegsj lhe queslion of Iife" and lhal his "reaI
____________________
154
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 118, GA 20: 163.
155
WiIheIm DiIlhey, Gcsannc|ic Scnrijicn, 7: 229, "The Conslruclion of
lhe HisloricaI WorId in lhe Human Sludies," in H. I. Rickman, ed.,
Oi|incq. Sc|ccic! Wriiings, lrans., Rickman ( Cambridge: Cambridge
Universily Iress, 1976), 237.
156
DiIlhey, "Conslruclion of lhe HisloricaI WorId in lhe Human
Sludies,"209, GS 7: 192.
-239-
hiIosohicaI lendencies vere aimed al an onloIogy of 'Iife.'"
157

Moreover, Heidegger beIieved lhal DiIlhey broughl lo lhe debale
aboul lhe crisis of lhe sciences and lhe crisis of hisloricism a vay "lo
see hisloricaI reaIily in ils aulhenlic reaIily," nameIy, as a
meaningfuI form of being for human beings and nol as a laxonomic
exercise in eislemoIogicaI concel-formalion.
158
In his unubIished
KasseI Ieclures of 1925, "WiIheIm DiIlhey's Researches and lhe
SlruggIe for a HisloricaI WorId-Viev," Heidegger offered an
exlensive lrealmenl of DiIlhey's hermeneulicaI inquiry, cIearIy
admiring his inlerrelalion of hisloricaI reaIily as a "henomenon"
ralher lhan as a mere ob|ecl of research. In DiIlhey's cIaims lhal "lhe
nexus |of Iifej is aIvays aIready lhere and nol firsl conslrucled oul
of eIemenls" and lhal "Iife is originaIIy given in ils lolaIily,"
Heidegger found an indicalion for a henomenoIogicaI aroach lo
lhe robIem of faclicily vhich Ialer, in Bcing an! Tinc, deveIoed
inlo a fundamenlaI onloIogicaI anaIysis of Oascin.
159

In his Summer Semesler 1923 Ieclures, Onic|cgq. Hcrncncuiics cj
|aciiciiq, Heidegger defined faclicily as "one's ovn Dasein
queslioned in ils being-characler . . . |vherej one's ovn Dasein is
vhal il is onIy in ils icnpcra||q pariicu|ar |jcuci|igcnj 'lhere' |Oaj."
160

Heidegger venl on lo say lhal lhe fundamenlaI henomenon of
faclicily couId onIy be cIarified in and as lemoraIily. Laler, in lhe
KasseI Ieclures, he raised lhis issue again and lried lo shov hov far
DiIlhey's researches had come in reIaling faclicaI Iife exerience lo
lhe robIem of lemoraIily. DiIlhey had begun lo undersland lhe
aulhenlic meaning of hislory as a queslion concerning Oascin's
exerience as a "hisloricaI being" ralher lhan as a queslion of
emiricaI research or of an overarching eochaI rocess caIIed
"vorId hislory." ul, even as he exIored lhe meaning of hisloricaI
reaIily, he never asked lhe queslion concerning hisloricily ilseIf--"lhe
queslion concerning lhe meaning of being and lhe being of beings."
161
DiIlhey never reaIIy ossessed lhe means vilh vhich lo ose lhis
queslion, Heidegger cIaimed, because he remained lied lo a
fundamenlaIIy Carlesian robIemalic and focused his allenlion on a
lheory of science and an eislemoIogicaI grounding of lhe human
sciences. Iven his hermeneulicaI queslioning vas aIvays dominaled
by lhis melhodoIogicaI ideaI.
____________________
157
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 72, 494, Scin un! Zcii, 46, 249.
158
Heidegger, "KV,"8.
159
Ibid., 10.
160
Heidegger, GA 63:29.
161
Heidegger, "KV,"12.
-240-
And yel Heidegger found in DiIlhey a vay lo undersland lhe asl
nol as a rior haening or mere cuIluraI ossession bul as a form
of exerience vilh onloIogicaI consequences, in lhis assage from
Heidegger's ArislolIe Ieclures, one can hear DiIlheyan echoes: "The
nexus of Iife |Ic|cnszusanncnnangj is in faclicaI Iife, lhe faclicily of
Iife, Oascin, is in ilseIf hisloricaI and, as hisloricaI, has a reIalion (as
comorlmenl) lo lhe ob|eclive hisloricaI vorId and lime lhal
recedes il. The queslion concerning lhe meaning and righl of
lradilion--ilseIf a henomenon in lhe basic henomenon of lhe
hisloricaI--is laken back inlo lhe robIemalic of lhe hisloricaI ilseIf,
vhich is meaningfuIIy rooled in lhe faclicily of faclicaI Iife ilseIf."
162

When seaking of hislory, Heidegger aIvays relurned lo DiIlhey's
fundamenlaI insighl aboul lhe faclicily of hisloricaI Iife. Desile his
Carlesian rools, DiIlhey underslood lhal exerience (|r|c|nis, or
vhal lhe earIy Heidegger caIIed "faclicaI Iife") is nol an isoIaled facl
of science bul a arl of a vhoIe Iife rocess or nexus vhose meaning
is Iocaled in lhe dynamic cenler of immediale refIexive avareness
(|nncucr!cn) vhere seIf and vorId come logelher.
163
The meaning of
a vhoIe Iife couId be oened u in |usl such an exerience,
reveaIing lhal lhis meaning is nol "in" lhe asl or "in" lhe fulure bul
haens as a kind of henomenaIily of rocess or as lemoraIily.
ArislolIe had defined lime as "lhe quanlificalion of molion in resecl
lo 'before' and 'afler'", Kanl conceived il as a conlinuily of nov
sequences. ul neilher had begun "lo undersland lime as lhe reaIily
of our ovn seIves," lhal is, as aulhenlic lemoraIily.
164
DiIlhey had
begun lo see lhe unily of lemoraIily in |nncucr!cn and rovided
lhe lradilion vilh lhe ossibiIily of a nev beginning. Heidegger
seized on lhal ossibiIily in Bcing an! Tinc as he relrieved DiIlhey's
nolion of hisloricily for his ovn onloIogicaI ro|ecl.
ul DiIlhey aIso affecled Heidegger in a much more rofound, if
Iess obvious, vay. AImosl aII DiIlhey's vorks, from his |nirc!uciicn
ic inc Hunan Scicnccs lo his various sludies on lhe deveIomenl of
hermeneulics, invoIved a reading of lhe hislory of hiIosohy as a
unified and coherenl lradilion. Whelher he vas lracing lhe infIuence
of Greek melahysics on Augusline or lhe imacl of Lulher on
SchIeier-
____________________
162
Heidegger, GA 61: 76.
163
WiIheIm DiIlhey, Gcsannc|ic Scnrijicn, voI. 19 ( Gllingen:
Vandenhoeck & Rurechl, 1982), 177, |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan
Scicnccs, lrans. RudoIf MakkreeI and Irilh|of Rodi ( Irincelon, N.}.:
Irincelon Universily Iress, 1984), 358.
164
Heidegger, "KV,"26.
-241-
macher, DiIlhey aIvays conceived of Weslern hiIosohy
hisloricaIIy. Iven as he lried lo vork againsl lhe melahysicaI
imeralives vilhin lhe lradilion, DiIlhey defined lhem as a
lradilion. Ior him, queslions of lemoraIily, exerience,
hermeneulicaI refIeclion, and hisloricily aII beIonged lo his IifeIong
diaIogue vilh lhe hislory of hiIosohy. To lhe very end of his Iife,
Heidegger, loo, conlinued lo lhink of hiIosohy hisloricaIIy--as
arl of lhe hislory of being, lhoughl as lhe hislory of lhe obIivion of
being. The hisloricaI movemenl from lhe IreSocralics lo Nielzsche
reveaIed lo him lhe nihiIislic characler of lhe melahysics of
resence vilh ils inslrumenlaIisl slralegies for dominion over
beings. Iven his nolion of lhe "end of hiIosohy" vas grounded in
lhe unsoken accelance of a unified lradilion, "beginning" vilh lhe
Greeks and "ending" vilh Nielzsche.
Heidegger lransformed DiIlhey's nolion of hislory, hovever, by
relhinking lhe meaning of crisis, vhich for him referred nol onIy lo
lhe academic crisis of hisloricism bul aIso lo a crisis in lhe Weslern
lradilion ilseIf, underslood as lhe hislory of nihiIism. DiIlhey couId
sliII conceive of hislory as a movemenl of rogress and meaning, bul
Heidegger, in lhe vake of his ovn reIigious uheavaI and lhe
cuIluraI essimism of Weimar, did nol lake lhe meaning of hislory
as somelhing ilseIf hisloricaI. Ralher, he foIIoved a
henomenoIogicaI alh lhal aroached lhe robIem of hislory nol
in lhe narrov sense of Hisicric as hisloricaI science bul as lhe
aulhenlic haening of Oascin engaged in ils ovn search for nev
vays and ossibiIilies of being. As Heidegger ul il: "Hislory as
Gcscnicnic signifies a haening |Gcscncncnj lhal ve ourseIves are,
vhere ve are lhere resenl. . . . We are hislory, lhal is, our ovn asl.
Our fulure Iives oul of ils asl. We are carried by lhe asl."
165

TradilionaI hisloricisls characlerized hislory as somelhing unique
and unreealabIe lhal roceeded according lo an inner rinciIe of
deveIomenl. In lhis sense lhey underslood hislory rinciaIIy as
lhe reaIm of vaIues and freedom in conlrasl lo lhe vaIue-neulraI and
Iavgoverned vorId of nalure. Moreover, hisloricisls beIieved lhal lo
lruIy "undersland" lhe aIien asl, one had lo escae one's ovn lime
by immersing oneseIf in lhe documenlary hisloricaI evidence.
Heidegger queslioned lhe basic lenels of lhe hisloricisl lradilion,
hovever, and dismissed ils aroach as suerficiaI and Iacking in
originaI insighl.
166

____________________
165
Ibid., 27.
166
Heidegger, Bcgrijj !cr Zcii, 25.
-242-
He chaIIenged lhe Iong-heId viev lhal lhe cruciaI difference
belveen nalure and hislory Iay in lhe reaIm of vaIues, seeing lhis as
anolher manifeslalion of a sub|ecl/ob|ecl melahysics based on lhe
Carlesian duaIily of body-nalure/res exlensa and mind-siril/res
cogilans. Ralher lhan seeing hisloricism as a break vilh naluraIisl
melahysics or lhe lheory of naluraI Iav (an argumenl ul forvard
by such conlemoraries as TroeIlsch, Meinecke, and SengIer),
Heidegger idenlified il as anolher examIe of lhe melahysics
savned by lhe earIy modern sciences of nalure. y defining lhe
crisis of hisloricism as a ballIe belveen reIalivism and ob|eclivism or
Wc|ianscnauung and Wisscnscnaji, his conlemoraries vere
reinforcing lhe same melahysicaI rinciIes lhal had defined lhe
Carlesian-Kanlian lradilion as a melahysics of resence. Heidegger
mainlained, hovever, lhal hislory is nol and couId never be a
science or somelhing caabIe of scienlific exIanalion, because il
invoIves one in an originaI reIalion lo lime vhich cannol be reduced
lo lhe slalus of "facl." In his "Remarks on KarI }asers Psqcnc|cgq cj
Wcr|!-Vicus " ( 1919-1921), Heidegger vrole: "The hisloricaI is nol
onIy somelhing from vhich one gels informalion and aboul vhich
lhere are books, il is much more vhal ve ourseIves are, lhal vhich
ve bear."
167

y defining hislory as somelhing "asl," heId lhere for
conlemIalion by lhe researcher, hislorians and eislemoIogisls had
forgollen lhe originaI meaning of hislory as a form of lemoraIily.
Moreover, in deciding on lhe eislemoIogicaI slalus of hisloricaI
research, lhey had in lhe rocess aIso forgollen lhe hisloricaI rools of
lheir ovn scienlific inquiry. In Heidegger's viev, lhe sciences of
nalure and hislory vere nol lhemseIves rimordiaI forms of inquiry
deaIing vilh originary henomena caIIed "nalure" or "hislory." They
vere, ralher, hisloricaIIy defined "fieIds" of research, onlic
ossibiIilies of Oascin consliluled vilhin lhe given slruclures of
universily facuIlies and research raclices, raclices lhal vere
lhemseIves defined by lhe acceled division of lhe sciences in
Carlesian and aconian melahysics.
Heidegger vanled lo ush convenlionaI eislemoIogicaI
dislinclions lo lheir Iimils--in Bcing an! Tinc he slresses lhal "even
nalure is hisloricaI"--lo reveaI hislory and nalure before lheir
scienlific eIaboralion, in an "originaI reIalionshi lo lhe loics
lhemseIves."
168
Heidegger's loic, hovever, vas nol a "Iace" (icpcs)
in lhe usuaI sense bul a
____________________
167
Heidegger, GA 9: 33-34.
168
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 440, Scin un! Zcii, 388, an! Hisicrq cj inc
Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 4-5, GA 20. 6-7.
-243-
mode of comorlmenl or vay of being vhich Heidegger grased as
a "henomenon." As henomena, hislory and nalure are lemoraI
rocesses or, ralher, are exerienced lemoraIIy by human beings.
This originaI mode of exeriencing recedes aII exIicilIy scienlific
lhemalizalion of nalure or hislory as "ob|ecls" and makes such
lhemalizalion firsl ossibIe. Heidegger soughl lo gel back behind
lhese given definilions of hisloricaI and naluraI science lo lhe
underIying unily of exerience in order "lo see hislory in ils
hisloricily," a lheme lo vhich he exIicilIy lurned in Bcing an! Tinc.
169

ix. Histnricity and Histnry in Bcing and Timc
In lhe second division, chaler 5 of Bcing an! Tinc, Heidegger
offered a enelraling anaIysis of lhe robIem of hisloricily, an
anaIysis lhal venl a Iong vay lovard undermining lhe
eislemoIogicaI foundalions of hisloricism advanced by his
conlemoraries. In Heidegger's inlerrelalion, hisloricily vas nol an
exIicilIy "hisloricaI" mode of being in lhe sense of beIonging lo a
fieId of research enlilIed Hisicric. Inslead, hisloricily, or
Gcscnicni|icnkcii, has an originaI reIalionshi lo Gcscnicnic
(elymoIogicaIIy dravn from MiddIe High German geschihl and nev
High German Geschehen, or "haening") in lhe sense of Ireignis:
nol a secific hisloricaI evenl (e.g., NaoIeon's camaign al
WalerIoo) bul lhe henomenaIily or discIosure of lhal vhich
haens rior lo any secific schoIarIy inquiry.
170
In lhis vay,
nalure, loo, as an exerience for human beings, is marked by
hisloricily. Hisloricily signified for Heidegger lhe exIicilIy
onloIogicaI underslanding of lhe exislenliaI-lemoraI condilions of
lhe "haening" lhal ve ourseIves are. Heidegger slruclured lhis
haening in lerms of lhree lemoraI momenls: lhe asl
(underslood as Gcucscnncii or mode of "having been"), resenl (or
Gcgcn-uari as a "vailing-lovard"), and fulure (or Zu-kunji as a
"coming-lovard"), a unily vhose ground he Iocaled in lhe
henomenon of care.
171

Heidegger re|ecled lhe exIicilIy backvard-Iooking, anliquarian
eIemenl vilhin hisloricaI lhinking and emhasized lhal as a mode
of lemoraIily, hislory, or Gcscnicnic, is nol asl-orienled bul
essenliaIIy
____________________
169
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 1, GA 20: 2.
170
Ior an elymoIogicaI hislory, see Ifeifer, |iqnc|cgiscncs Wcricr|ucn
!cs Ocuiscncn, 2:553. Heidegger Iays on lhe difference belveen
Gcscnicnic, Gcscnicni|icnkcii, and Gcscncncn in Bcing an! Tinc, 41-42,
Scin un! Zcii, 19-20.
171
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 372-378, Scin un! Zcii, 325-329.
-244-
fuluraI. In his discussion of "lemoraIily as lhe onloIogicaI meaning
of care" in seclion 65 of Bcing an! Tinc, he exIained lhal "onIy in so
far as Dasein is (as lhe nating-|ccn ||in-gcucscnj of an 'I' lhal is) can il
come lovards |zukunjiigj ilseIf fuluraIIy in such a vay lhal il comes
back lo ilseIf. Dasein is, as an aulhenlicaIIy nating-|ccn, an
aulhenlicaIIy fuluraI anlicialion of one's ulmosl and ovnmosl
ossibiIily coming back, in an underslanding vay, lo one's ovnmosl
having-been. Dasein can onIy |c vhal il has been insofar as il is
fuluraI. One's aIready nating-|ccn arises, in a cerlain vay, from lhe
fulure."
172

CIassicaI hisloricisls denied lhis fuluraI dimension of hisloricaI
exerience, referring lo exIore lhe eislemoIogicaI queslions of
verificalion and access. Ranke, for examIe, soke of hislory as an
ob|ecliveIy vaIid reaIm "lhere" for lhe hislorian lo research--in lhe
form of diIomalic corresondence, aaI rocIamalions, maleriaI
arlifacls, and lhe Iike--so lhal one couId "knov" il uic cs cigcni|icn
gcucscn isi, or "as il acluaIIy haened." The onIy vay lo bring aboul
a radicaI Ocsirukiicn of Rankean hisloricism vas, according lo
Heidegger, lo foIIov u on Graf Yorck's crilicism of DiIlhey's
research, vhich rovided him vilh a vay of asking "lhe queslion of
hisloricily |asj an cnic|cgica| queslion concerning lhe conslilulion of
lhe being of hisloricaI beings."
173
Yorck had underslood lhal "lhe
germinaI oinl of hisloricily is lhe facl lhal lhe enlire sycho-
hysicaI dalum Iives ralher lhan is," a oinl lhal Heidegger
inlerreled lo mean lhal genuine hisloricily invoIves an exerience
of lemoraIily (vhich Iives) and is nol lhe same as lhe mere resenl-
al-hand being of nalure (vhich is). In Yorck's viev, DiIlhey had nol
been sensilive enough lo lhe significance of lhese dislinclions in his
eislemoIogicaI crilique of lhe human sciences. In facl, in his
exlensive corresondence, Yorck venl on lo say lhal DiIlhey's
researches "slressed loo IillIe lhe generic difference belveen lhe
onlicaI |Oniiscncnj and lhe hisloricaI |Hisicriscncnj."
174
Ior
Heidegger, lhe vhoIe misunderslanding aboul lhe socaIIed crisis of
hisloricism derived from a fundamenlaI inabiIily lo gras Yorck's
carefuI dislinclion. The essence of hislory is nol anylhing "hisloricaI"
in lhe sense of hisloriograhy or hisloricaI research bul Iies in lhe
reaIm of vhal il means lo |c (or, in DiIlhey's Iexicon, lo |itc). The
vays of being for human beings are, in Heidegger's viev, radicaIIy
lemoraI, in lhe sense lhal lheir unily Iies vilhin lhe lemo-
____________________
172
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 373 (lransIalion modified), Scin un!
Zcii, 326.
173
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 455 and 453, Scin un! Zcii, 403 an! 401.
174
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 451, Scin un! Zcii, 399.
-245-
raI horizons of execlalion (fulure), relrievaI (asl), and making
resenl (gcgcnuariigcn). No exerience vilhin lhe vorId can brackel
oul or rescind lhis lemoraIily of being, because being ilseIf is
hisloricaI and beIongs lo a Iived conlexl of reIalions. OnloIogicaI
neulraIily lhus becomes imossibIe, for being ilseIf is aIvays
slruclured as lemoraIily vilhin lhe henomenon of care (Scrgc).
SimIy ul, for Heidegger, ve are never in a osilion lo |udge
ob|ecliveIy aboul lhe meaning of lhe asl because our reIalions lo
ourseIves and olher beings are aIvays medialed by our exislenliaI
cares and concerns.
IronicaIIy, in lheir greal hasle lo reserve and reconslrucl lhe
meaning of lhe asl on ils ovn lerms, hisloricisls (such as Ranke
and Droysen and lheir foIIovers) had isoIaled lhe very hisloricily of
human being vhich made hislory ossibIe. In his onloIogicaI
anaIysis of onlic/hisloricaI research, Heidegger lried lo shov lhal
mosl hisloricisls resenled inaulhenlic accounls of hislory rooled
eilher in lhe aeslhelics of emalhy or lhe seudoscienlific osilivism
of facl-coIIecling. Heidegger re|ecled aeslhelicism as anolher
shaIIov examIe of Wc|ianscnauungspni|cscpnic, he simiIarIy
dismissed hisloricaI osilivism for ils indiscriminale accelance of
ralionaI |udgmenl and lheory as lhe roer melhod by vhich lo
sludy lhe asl. Bcing an! Tinc offered an exlensive crilique of raiic,
|cgcs, and lheoria as "lhe" aulhenlic means of scienlific inquiry,
Heidegger made il cIear lhal Iogos, in lhe sense of scienlific reason,
is onIy one mode of human comorlmenl in lhe vorId among lhe
many moods and slales of mind lhal characlerize Oascin.
175
Thus, if
inslrumenlaIisl lheory and reason served lo reify lhe dynamic of
hisloricaI Iife, lhe melhod of Verslehen vas hardIy beller. "Vcrsicncn
loo," Heidegger cIaimed, "aIvays has ils mood" and cannol be
genuineIy underslood as an oeralion of consciousness, il is much
more "Oascins ro|eclion of ils being uon ossibiIilies," or, more
fundamenlaIIy, a form of inlerrelalion.
176

Hisloricism had sel u lhe cIassic aoria for lhe melahysicaI
lradilion--il allemled lo "undersland" lhe unique, unreealabIe
exerience of hisloricaI Iife vilhin lhe frame of a "science" of hislory.
ul Heidegger doubled vhelher one couId rovide Carlesian
cerlilude for lhe dynamic and fIuid rocesses of underslanding and
inlerrelalion. The hisloricisl ro|ecl, he beIieved, vas misconceived
from ils foundalions, ensnared as il vas in lhe conlradiclory goaIs of
find-
____________________
175
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 55-59, 249, Scin un! Zcii, 32-34, 205.
176
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 182, 188, Scin un! Zcii, 143, 148.
-246-
ing an ob|eclive science for sub|eclive Iife exerience. Ior Heidegger,
underslanding is nol a melhod or a lheory bul lhe originaI mode of
being for human beings, lhe very basis of hisloricily and hisloricaI
meaning. Rankeans soughl meaning "in" lhe asl ilseIf as an
ob|eclive rocess, urosefuI and vilh direclion, Rickerl Iocaled il,
converseIy, in lhe lranscendenlaI oeralions of consciousness vhich
reIaled secific meanings lo IogicaI meaning ilseIf. Allemling lo
overcome lhe surious oIarilies of bolh lhese osilions, DiIlhey
focused his allenlion on lhe hisloricaI and hermeneulicaI asecls of
human meaning ralher lhan on any ob|eclive or ideaI characlerislics.
ul Heidegger soughl lo uncover lhe onloIogicaI characler of
human meaning as a form of lemoraI ro|eclion, vhich Iay nol in
beings lhemseIves bul in lhe vay beings are laken u and
arorialed by human beings. In lhis sense, lhe genuine characler
of hislory vas nol ils unique, unreealabIe singuIarily bul ils abiIily
lo be reealed or relrieved (uic!cr-nc|i) for fulure ossibiIilies of
Oascin.
In Heidegger's inlerrelalion, hisloricaI inquiry becomes somelhing
olher lhan a movemenl backvard in lime, il discIoses lhe
ossibiIilies of vhal Oascin can be fuluraIIy on lhe basis of vhal has
aIready been. As he exIained in Bcing an! Tinc:
If hisloricaI science, vhich arises from aulhenlic hisloricily, reveaIs
lhrough relrievaI lhe Oascin lhal has-been-lhere in ils ossibiIily,
lhen il has aIready made manifesl lhe universaI in lhe singuIar. The
queslion of vhelher hisloricaI science has as ils ob|ecl mereIy lhe
succession of singuIar and "individuaI" evenls or "Iavs" is mislaken
al ils rool. The lheme of hisloricaI science is neilher a singuIar
haening nor somelhing universaI fIoaling above bul lhe faclicaIIy
exislenl ossibiIily lhal has been. This ossibiIily is nol relrieved as
such (lhal is, underslood in an aulhenlicaIIy hisloricaI sense) if il
gels erverled by lhe aIIor of a suralemoraI modeI. OnIy
faclicaIIy aulhenlic hisloricily can discIose asl hislory as a resoIule
fale lhal, lhrough relrievaI, slrikes home lhe force of vhal is ossibIe
in faclicaI exislence--lhal is, in ils fulurily lhal comes lovard |zu-
kcnnij exislence. HisloricaI science, lhen . . . does nol lake ils
dearlure from lhe resenl . . . bul discIoses ilseIf lemoraIIy in
lerms of lhe fulure.
177

Heidegger's ecuIiar Ianguage, vilh ils neoIogislic hrases,
vordIay, and endIess elymoIogizing, somelimes slrikes lhe
modern
____________________
177
Heidegger, Scin un! Zcii, 395. Tnc irans|aiicn inai | natc prcti!c!
ncrc is jun!ancnia||q !ijjcrcni jrcn inc Macquarric an! |c|inscn
tcrsicn, cj. Bcing an! Tinc, 446447.
-247-
reader as lurgid and overvroughl. AdmilledIy, lhe semanlic and
grammalicaI comIexilies of Heidegger's slyIe--eseciaIIy lhe
schoIaslic idiom of Bcing an! Tinc--onIy add lo charges lhal
henomenoIogicaI onloIogy is a science of arcana. In his ovn mind,
Heidegger envisioned lhis nev discourse as a vay of breaking oul
of lhe Ianguage and slyIe of lradilionaI melahysics vilh ils
grammar of being, Iogic of argumenl, sub|ecl-redicale reIalions,
and hiIoIogicaI laxonomies. The Iacemenl of lhe queslion of
hislory in Bcing an! Tinc musl be underslood vilhin lhis generaI
assauIl on lhe Ianguage of lradilionaI melahysics. If Yorck couId
sliII seak of lhe difference belveen lhe onlicaI and hisloricaI,
accusing hislorians and hiIosohers of oflen confIaling lhe lvo,
Heidegger found il necessary lo radicaIize Yorck's Ianguage and
mode of queslioning by seeking "a more rimordiaI unily" al lhe
rool of ob|eclive, onlic nalure and sub|eclive, hisloricaI siril. This
nev onloIogicaI underslanding of hislory had lo focus on lhe
hisloricily of human being as veII as on lhe scienlific foundalions of
hisloriograhy. UIlimaleIy, hovever, any inlerrelalion of Oascin, or
of science, had lo be reconceived in lerms of lhe hislory of lhoughl
and ils grammalicaI-Iinguislic slruclures.
If Heidegger vorked lovard a "deslruclion/ de-slrucluring of lhe
hislory of onloIogy," lhis vas nol his onIy inlenlion, he aIso
roosed a Ocsirukiicn of melahysicaI Ianguage vhich vouId
reveaI "lhe rimordiaI sources" of hisloricaI being. y choosing lhe
romanlic lroe of "source," or Quc||c, as his lheme, Heidegger Iayed
on ils doubIe meaning as bolh melahysicaI origin and as
documenlary maleriaI for scienlific research. IhenomenoIogy's lask
vas lo offer a nev kind of research, or |crscnung, vhich vouId re-
search, in lhe sense of searching afler or relrieving, lhal vhich vas
hidden in and by melahysics: "As research vork, henomenoIogy
is reciseIy lhe vork of Iaying oen and Ielling be seen, underslood
as lhe melhodoIogicaIIy direcled dismanlIing (A||au) of
conceaImenls."
178
Whal vouId be researched, hovever, vere nol
facls, in Ranke's sense, bul henomena, lhal is, lemoraI haenings
of human beings, vhich are nol lhe same as mere occurrences in
hysics. Heidegger recognized lhal direcl access lo our hisloricily
vas bIocked by lhe very research raclices of lhe human sciences
vhich look hislory as lheir lheme. To lhemalize hisloricily in a
genuine vay demanded lhal one firsl dismanlIe lhe hislory of
hisloricaI research in order lo gel lo lhe rools of
____________________
178
Heidegger, Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 86, GA 20: 118.
-248-
hisloricaI schoIarshi in lemoraI-ecslalic exerience.
IundamenlaIIy, Heidegger's crilique of hisloricism vas essenliaIIy a
vorking oul of lhis rocess in lhe form of a dismanlIing and
relrievaI.
DiIlhey and Yorck had rovided Heidegger vilh a sel of queslions
aboul lhe science of hislory. They had shovn hov bolh lhe Neo-
Kanlians and hisloricisls, by focusing on melhodoIogicaI issues, had
succeeded onIy in aIienaling hislory from ils Iife-origins. DiIlhey
eseciaIIy had reveaIed lhal lhe robIem of hislory couId nol be
exIained lhrough a direcl anaIysis of hisloricaI haenings bul
onIy lhrough a hermeneulic refIeclion back onlo lhe foundalions of
Iife. Heidegger lransformed DiIlhey's insighls, hovever, shedding
lheir anlhrooIogicaI assumlions and melhodoIogicaI focus and
Iaying bare lhe onloIogicaI slruclures of Oascin. In seizing on Yorck's
crilicaI dislinclion belveen lhe onlicaI and hisloricaI, he managed lo
de-slruclure lhe eislemoIogicaI imIicalions of DiIlhey's vork and
relrieve lhe nolion of hisloricily in ils genuineIy hermeneulic sense,
as an inlerrelalion of faclicaI-hisloricaI exislence ralher lhan as a
melhod of research. ul he aIso broke vilh lhe Iong-slanding
hisloricisl nolion, vhich even DiIlhey shared, lhal hisloricaI
meaning is lhe roducl of an ob|eclive, vorId-hisloricaI allern of
deveIomenl, "leIIing lhe sequence of evenls Iike lhe beads of a
rosary."
179
The meaning of hislory, for Heidegger, vas aIvays
connecled lo lhe queslion of being ilseIf, underslood as a discIosure
of lime. ul hisloricaI being couId never be reveaIed in lhe abslracl
vorId-hisloricaI lime of Rankean Wc|igcscnicnic, il couId be
discIosed onIy lhrough lhe lemoraIily of Oascin. AII lhe carefuI
hisloricisl dislinclions belveen nalure and hislory or exIanalion
and underslanding vere based on an inlerrelalion of lime in onIy
one of ils modes: lhe slanding resence of lhe resenl. ul
Heidegger grased lime as lemoraIily, as a mode of finile
ro|eclion unified in lhe lhree ecslases of exislence (fulure), faclicily
(asl), and faIIenness (resenl). Desile lheir enelraling insighls,
bolh DiIlhey and Yorck had faiIed lo gras lhe essenliaI lemoraIily
of human being as lhe key lo lhe aorias of hisloricism. Il vas,
above aII, Nielzsche vho heIed lo direcl Heidegger on a alh of
queslioning vhich oened u lhe genuine meaning of hislory nol as
a science of research bul as a crisis for exislence: a decision aboul lhe
"use and abuse of hislory for Iife."
____________________
179
I borrov lhis melahor from lhe essay by WaIler en|amin,
Tncscs cn inc Pni|cscpnq cj Hisicrq, in |||uninaiicns ( Nev York:
Schocken, 1969), 263.
-249-
x. Histnricity, Crisis, and Dccisinn: Hcidcggcr's Rctricva! nI
Nictzschc
y lhe lime Heidegger ubIished Bcing an! Tinc in 1927, lhe
German academic scene had become inundaled by bolh a Iileralure
and a rheloric of "crisis." Iarl of my efforl has been lo siluale
Heidegger's vork vilhin lhis narralive, vilh an eye lovard
underslanding lhe Weimar crisis of hisloricism as arl of a
generalionaI Ieilmolif. Whal makes Heidegger's vrilings so
imorlanl in lhis conlexl is lheir alleml lo de-conslrucl lhe idea of
crisis ilseIf, lransforming lhe narrov schoIarIy debale aboul
hisloricism inlo a hiIosohicaI confronlalion vilh lhe enlire
Weslern lradilion. Heidegger underslood lhis confronlalion, in ils
mosl fundamenlaI sense, as an Aus-cinan!cr-scizung, or "selling
asunder," and heard in lhe lerm an underIying reIalion lo lhe
originaI Greek vord krisis.
180
In lhis sense lhe crisis of hisloricism
signified for Heidegger a confronlalion vilh lhe hislory of Weslern
melahysics, marked as il vas by lhe fundamenlaI aoria of
lemoraI movemenl (lhe rosary bead sequenliaIily of rogress) and
onloIogicaI slasis (lhe melahysics of resence). The suerficiaI
Ianguage lhal redominaled al lhe universilies, hovever, vas
inadequale lo lhe lask of resenling lhe generalionaI crisis as a
genuine Auscinan!crscizung, as Heidegger causlicaIIy vrole in one of
his earIy Ieclures: "Tc!aq: lhe osilion of lhe sciences and lhe
universily has become somelhing ever more queslionabIe. Whal
haens` Nolhing. One vriles brochures aboul lhe crisis of lhe
sciences and science as a vocalion. One erson says lo anolher: 'one
says, as one hears, science is done for.' Today lhere's even a seciaI
Iileralure deaIing vilh lhe queslion as, of course, musl be.
Olhervise, nolhing haens."
181

In lhis same Ieclure, Heidegger con|oined lhe suerficiaIily of
"loday" vilh "lhe cuIluraI consciousness |Bi|!ungs|cuuiscinj of lhe
age and lhe aIaver of lhe average, ubIic mind, loday: modern
'inleIIecluaIily.'" So as lo Ieave no doubl in lhe minds of his Iisleners
aboul lhe largels of his allack, Heidegger secificaIIy referred lo lhe
suerficiaIily of "hisloricaI consciousness" and "hiIosohicaI
consciousness" as rominenl examIes of lhis conlemorary
maIaise. In a significanl vay, Heidegger underslood crisis in an
aImosl medicaI sense as an index lo lhe heaIlh of a cuIlure, a
generalion, a lradilion. Al lhe
____________________
180
Ifeifer, |iqnc|cgiscncs Wcricr|ucn !cs Ocuiscncn, 2.934 an! 3.1623-
1624.
181
Heidegger, GA 63:32-33.
-250-
beginning of Bcing an! Tinc he vrole: "The IeveI vhich a science has
reached is delermined by hov far il is capa||c of a crisis in ils
fundamenlaI concels. In such immanenl crises of science lhe
reIalionshi of osilive, invesligalive queslioning lo lhe loics
|Sacncnj queslioned ilseIf slarls lo loller."
182
In Heidegger's reading,
crisis oens u lhe queslion of queslioning ilseIf eilher as somelhing
genuine (lhal is, as a queslion concerning lhe meaning of being) or
as somelhing suerficiaI ("modern inleIIecluaIily," "lhe universily,"
lhe vorId of average, ubIic curiosily). Il confronls us vilh lhe
ossibiIily of a decision: vhelher lo accel lhe deadening slasis of
lheory or lo sland againsl il by relurning lo lhe faclicaI-hisloricaI
raxis of Iife. Heidegger's vhoIe confronlalion vilh lhe hisloricisl
lradilion brings lhis maller lo queslion by asking lo vhal exlenl
hislory and lhe human sciences are caabIe of vilhslanding a crisis
in lheir fundamenlaI concels. ConsequenlIy, vhen Heidegger
soke of "lhe emergence of a robIem of 'hisloricism'" as lhe
symlom of Oascin's inaulhenlic reIalionshi lo hislory, he meanl lo
resenl il as a decision regarding an "aulhenlic" or "inaulhenlic"
vay of being.
183

InaulhenlicaIIy, Oascin underslands lhe asl as somelhing
lemoraIIy dislanl, a facl "lhere" for research or mereIy lo be
forgollen vilhin lhe horizon of "loday," bul aIvays as somelhing
resenl. Aulhenlic Oascin, on lhe olher hand, grass hislory as
lemoraIily, "as lhe momenl of vision |Augcn||ickj of anlicialory
resoIulion."
184
Heidegger vas carefuI lo oinl oul, hovever, lhal a
decision belveen aulhenlic or inaulhenlic exislence couId never be
sellIed ermanenlIy, genuine decision making vas somelhing lied
lo lhe lemoraI movemenl of Oascin ilseIf, a movemenl slrelched
oul belveen ossibiIily and relrievaI. Rankean hisloricism
renounced lhis momenl of decision and disuled ils meaning for
hislory. Inslead, il defined lhe lrue characler of hisloricaI science in
lerms of an eislemoIogicaI imeralive lo susend one's ovn
|udgmenl, lhus induIging ils ob|eclivisl lendencies lovard seIf-
exlinguishmenl. In a fundamenlaI vay, hisloricism had denied lhe
imorlance of lemoraI haening for underslanding hislory by
cIinging lo lhe slasis of "lemoraI dislance" and lhe ocuIarism of
Rankean facl-coIIecling.
ul as Heidegger venlured lo vork lhrough lhe robIems of
hisloricism, he found fev indicalions of an originaI aroach lo
hisloricaI
____________________
182
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 29 (lransIalion modified), Scin un! Zcii,
9.
183
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 448, Scin un! Zcii, 396.
184
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 443-444, Scin un! Zcii, 391.
-251-
|crscnung among his redecessors. In his viev, lhe onIy figure in lhe
lradilion lo undersland cIearIy lhe rimacy of lime for hisloricaI
lhinking vas Nielzsche, vho "recognized vhal vas essenliaI
concerning 'lhe Use and Abuse of Hislory for Life' in lhe second of
his Uniinc|q Mc!iiaiicns ( 1874) and said il unequivocaIIy and vilh
force." Where Nielzsche soke of "monumenlaI," "anliquarian," and
"crilicaI" forms of hislory, Heidegger lried lo lhink beyond lhe
hisloriograhicaI imIicalions of lhese calegories lo "lhe necessily of
lhis lriad and lhe ground of ils unily . . . in lhe hisloricily of Oascin."
AIlhough Nielzsche never exIicilIy arlicuIaled lhe meaning of lhis
unily, Heidegger cIaimed, he "underslood more lhan he sel forlh in
his ubIicalion." Thal is, he erceived lhe essenliaI meaning of
hislory lo be an exerience circumscribed by lhe horizons of
lemoraIily, an exerience lhal couId nol be measured by lhe
raclices of a schoIarIy disciIine or lhe gIories of a vorId-hisloricaI
ageanl. Nielzsche varranled lhal "vhen il is aulhenlicaIIy
hisloricaI, monumenlaI-anliquarian hislory is, necessariIy, a crilique
of lhe 'resenl'" and is grounded in lhe unily of lhree modes of lime:
asl-resenl-fulure.
185
ul Nielzsche aIso recognized lhal each
mode of hislory couId conslilule eilher a use or abuse of Iife, in any
case, one couId never undersland lhem as innocenl or neulraI
raclices of research. Whal delermines lhe oulcome of one's reIalion
lo hislory, Nielzsche cIaimed, is a fundamenlaI decision regarding
lhe meaning of lhe asl vilhin lhe horizon of one's ovn Iife. In lhis
sense, lhe asl is Iike a Greek oracIe, slanding before us as a riddIe
in need of inlerrelalion, offering neilher cerlilude nor ob|eclivily
bul onIy lhe ossibiIily of an oen fulure. ConsequenlIy, Nielzsche's
hermeneulics of lhe oracuIar demanded nol so much knovIedge of
lhe asl as knovIedge of oneseIf and of lhe unily of one's ovn
lemoraI horizons.
To overcome lhe sleriIily of Rankean seIf-exlinguishmenl, Nielzsche
conceived his second Uniinc|q Mc!iiaiicn as an allack on "lhe
modern riviIege of lheorelicaI man," lurning inslead lo lhe ancienl
Greeks before Socrales for a heaIlhy examIe of lhe bios lheorelikos.
The enlire essay is framed as a confronlalion vilh lhe lradilion,
slruggIing lo find hisloricaI sources for a crilique of hislory, lurning
lheory againsl ilseIf and Iaying bare lhe arlifice and relense of
modern academic Iife. Al lhe same lime, il rovided a diagnosis of
nineleenlh-cenlury German cuIlure, vhich Nielzsche sav as arl of
an overaII crisis in
____________________
185
Heidegger, Bcing an! Tinc, 448 (lransIalion modified), Scin un!
Zcii, 396.
-252-
Weslern lhoughl. In abandoning lhe neulered ob|eclivily of
lheorelicaI Iife, Nielzsche demanded lhal ve make a decision aboul
lhe meaning of hislory for our ovn exislence, a loic lhal Heidegger
look u again, in a reconsliluled form, in Bcing an! Tinc.
Whal Heidegger drev from Nielzsche vas a vay of grasing lhe
fundamenlaI aorias of lhe hisloricisl lradilion, aorias lhal derived
nol from lhe research raclices of hislorians bul from lhe hislory of
Weslern melahysics. Ior Nielzsche, lhis hislory vas characlerized
by a fundamenlaI confronlalion belveen lhe heaIlhy cororeaIily of
lhe Greeks and lhe alhogenic ascelicism of Chrislianily. In
Nielzsche's geneaIogy of Weslern vaIues, lhe modern era of science
cuIminaled in a nihiIislic movemenl of cuIlure--"lhe hislory of an
error."
186
ul lhe narralive of lhis hislory aIvays ended, for
Nielzsche, in a decision regarding lhe meaning of lhe narralive for
Iife. Laler, in his Ieclures in lhe 1930s on Nielzsche, Heidegger
exIicilIy formuIaled lhis Nielzschean narralive as a decision
belveen beings and being in lhe hislory of lhe Wesl and inlerreled
lhis hislory as nihiIism: "The highesl decision lhal can be made and
lhal becomes lhe ground of aII hislory is lhal belveen lhe
redominance of beings and lhe ruIe of being. Whenever and
hovever beings as a vhoIe are lhoughl exressIy, lhinking slands
vilhin lhe dangerous zone of lhis decision . . . Nielzsche is an
essenliaI lhinker because he lhinks ahead in a decisive sense, nol
evading lhe decision."
187
Heidegger lhen roceeded lo idenlify
Nielzsche as "lhe Iasl melahysician of lhe Wesl" and connecled his
lhoughl lo lhe hislory of Weslern melahysics, a hislory vhose
inner movemenl is nihiIislic, for "nihiIism is hislory" and "nihiIism
delermines lhe hisloricily of Weslern hislory." As Heidegger
exIained: "The age vhose consummalion unfoIds in his lhoughl,
lhe modern age, is a finaI age. This means an age in vhich al some
oinl and in some vay lhe hisloricaI decision arises as lo vhelher
lhis finaI age is lhe concIusion of Weslern hislory or lhe counlerarl
lo anolher beginning. To go lhe Ienglh of Nielzsche's alh of
lhoughl lo lhe viII lo over means lo calch sighl of lhis hisloricaI
decision."
188

In his Nielzsche Ieclures, Heidegger resenled lhe meaning of lhis
"finaI age" as a crisis for Weslern lhinking, a crisis lhal vouId gen-
____________________
186
Iriedrich Nielzsche, Tnc Tui|igni cj inc |!c|s, lrans. R. }.
HoIIingdaIe ( Nev York: Ienguin, 1968).
187
Marlin Heidegger, Nicizscnc, lrans. David I KreII, 4 voIs. ( Nev
York: Harer and Rov, 1979-1987), 3: 5-8, German edilion:
Nicizscnc, 2 voIs. (IfuIIingen: Neske, 1961), I: 476-480.
188
Heidegger, Nicizscnc, 3: 8, Nicizscnc, I: 480.
-253-
erale a confronlalion belveen Greek and Chrislian lhoughl,
cuIminaling in a decision. ul vhereas Nielzsche defined lhis crisis
as a slruggIe over vaIues and over, Heidegger inlerreled il as a
confronlalion belveen "lhe redominance of beings and lhe ruIe of
being." Throughoul lhese Ieclures lhe name "Nielzsche" came lo
signify for Heidegger a reading of hislory as crisis: as a slruggIe
vilhin lhe hislory of melahysics for a conlroIIing definilion of
being as ure resence vilhin lhe lemoraI mode of lhe resenl. ul
lhe emergence of a crisis-consciousness in lhese Ieclures shouId nol
be underslood soIeIy in lerms of lhe Iuroean oIilicaI silualion
afler 1933 or Heidegger's affiIialion vilh NalionaI SociaIism. Iven
during lhe earIy lvenlies Heidegger deveIoed an eIaborale
inlerrelalion of crisis as an eochaI Auscinan!crscizung. Wilhin lhis
conlexl, lhe "crisis" of hisloricism became imorlanl because il
offered Heidegger a reaI oorlunily bolh lo queslion lhe
aearance of a conlemorary crisis and lo de-slruclure lhe
underIying melahysicaI assumlions lhal defined ils fundamenlaI
meaning.
Whal Heidegger relrieved from Nielzsche, eseciaIIy lhe earIy
Nielzsche, vas an underslanding of hisloricaI lime as horizonaI. As
Nielzsche vrole, "This is a universaI Iav: every Iiving being can be
heaIlhy, slrong and roduclive onIy vilhin a horizon, if il is unabIe
lo drav a horizon around ilseIf . . . il viII feebIy vasle avay or
haslen lo a limeIy decIine."
189
The horizon offers a Iimil or lhreshoId
vilhin vhich lo siluale one's ovn being, a boundary againsl vhich
ossibiIilies and resoIulions can be ro|ecled, measured, and
uIlimaleIy decided. Whal made Nielzsche's reading of horizonaIily
unique, hovever, vas lhal he moved beyond lhe lradilionaI
underslanding of horizon as lhe slalic frame of lhe resenl and lried
lo exress lhe unily of aII lhree lemoraI modes in lhe dynamic
ossibiIilies of oenness and inlerrelalion. Heidegger ursued lhe
hermeneulic imIicalions of lhis reading for his ovn ro|ecl,
eseciaIIy as il reIaled lo lhe robIem of lime. He found in
Nielzsche's underslanding of horizon an indicalion for a nev
beginning in lhinking, a beginning marked by lhe oenness of
lemoraIily againsl lhe cIosure of an elernaI "nov." The Nielzschean
idea of horizon connoled for Heidegger a henomenoIogicaI
oening or Iace vilhin vhich beings shov lhemseIves. Horizon
becomes, in lhis henomenoIogicaI sense, a Iace of
____________________
189
Iriedrich Nielzsche, Uniinc|q Mc!iiaiicns, lrans. R. }. HoIIingdaIe (
Cambridge: Cambridge Universily Iress, 1983), 63, Unzciigcnassc
Bciracniungcn ( Leizig: Krner, 1930), 105.
-254-
discIosure--"lhe oen exanse"--ralher lhan a Iimil, boundary, or
conlainer.
190
Wilhin lhis slruclure, lime is grased as lhe unily of
horizons lhal mark lhe very being of Oascin. As Heidegger
exIained in lhe KasseI Ieclures: "Oascin is nolhing olher lhan lhe
being of lime |Zcii-Scinj. Time is nolhing lhal one meels vilh in lhe
vorId oulside bul is vhal I myseIf am. . . . Time delermines lhe
lolaIily of Oascin. Nol onIy in a lemoraIIy arlicuIar momenl is
Oascin lhere, bul il is ilseIf onIy as a being slrelched aIong belveen
ils ossibiIilies and ils asl." And Heidegger aIvays underslood
lhese ossibiIilies lo be horizonaI.
191

Any genuine aroach lo hislory, eseciaIIy lhe hislory of
hiIosohy, had lo lake inlo accounl lhis horizonaI slruclure of lhe
asl vhich vas nol mereIy a jaciun |ruiun slanding lhere againsl
lhe researcher bul an aulhenlic ossibiIily for fulure exislence.
Nielzsche's un-limeIy essay reveaIed lhe significance of lime for lhe
underslanding of hislory, Heidegger lransformed lhis insighl inlo a
|udgmenl aboul lhe meaning of lhe Weslern lradilion ilseIf. In a
sense, Heidegger's |udgmenl vas reaIIy a decision aboul vhelher lo
foIIov Nielzsche or DiIlhey for a genuine underslanding of human
hisloricily.
192
Were beings lo be Iocaled vilhin lhe fieId of scienlific
research and described in lerms of a scienlific raclice of hislory`
Were lhey lo be lhoughl of as ermanenlIy "lhere," resenl for
consciousness, encIosed, seIf-evidenl, or cerlain` Or vere lhey, lo
seak in lerms of Greek a|cincia, lo offer a Iace for discIosure and
lhe oenness of hisloricaI arorialion` UIlimaleIy, as Heidegger
moved avay from lhe "crisis of lhe sciences" in Bcing an! Tinc lo lhe
loic of a "lurning" (Kcnrc) in/lo "lhe evenl of being" (|rcignis) lhe
decision became cIearer and unmislakabIe. One need onIy read his
exlensive Ieclure noles on Nielzsche, vhere neilher lhe name nor
lhe loic of DiIlhey aears, lo gel a sense of lhe lurning in
Heidegger's concelion of hislory.
____________________
190
Heidegger discussed lhe robIem of lhe "ecslalicaI horizon" in
Scin un! Zcii, 365 ( Bcing an! Tinc, 416) an! in GA 24. 378 ( Basic
Prc||cns cj Pncncncnc|cgq, 267).
191
Heidegger, "KV,"22.
192
Of course, lhe meaning of Heidegger's decision changed during
lhe 1930s. In lhe eriod before 1927, DiIlhey Iayed a significanl
roIe in lhe crisis of hisloricaI lhinking, a crisis lhal Heidegger
carefuIIy addressed in Scin un! Zcii. Bui as Hci!cggcrs
un!crsian!ing cj crisis cnangc!, nc |cgan ic ccnccitc cj nisicrq ncrc
|rca!|q as a nisicrq cj cnic|cgq cr, raincr, cj !ijjcrcni uaqs cj
apprcacning cnic|cgq. U|iinaic|q, Hci!cggcr |cgan ic scc inc |iniiaiicns
in Oi|incqs ctcr|q scicniijic an! ncinc!c|cgica| apprcacn ic |itc!
cxpcricncc. Hc incn |cgan ic scc Nicizscnc as inc gcnuinc prcpnci cj
crisis, scnccnc unc un!crsicc! inc ncc! jcr ancincr |cginning in
Wcsicrn incugni. Hci!cggcrs rc|aiicn ic Nicizscnc can nar!|q |c
apprcciaic! cuisi!c cj inis ccnicxi.
-255-
xi. Thc Dangcr nI Thinking in a "Timc nI Nccd"
Heidegger's encounler vilh lhe "robIem" of hisloricism had
imorlanl consequences for his ovn reading of lhe hislory of lhe
Wesl, even if during lhe 1930s lhey somelimes aeared ominous
and fraughl vilh danger. Like mosl of lhe olher mandarins of his
generalion, Heidegger's exerience of lhe Greal War vas rofound
and genuineIy decisive. AIlhough he did serve as a vealherman in
lhe Ardennes, Heidegger never reaIIy sav aclion al lhe fronl,
desile his vaIorizalion of lhe |rcnicr|c|nis and his Ialer cIaims lo
having endured "combal in lhe lrenches in Verdun."
193
And yel lhe
var exercised an immediale and overfuI infIuence on his lhoughl.
Around Iale 1917, afler his break vilh CalhoIicism and before lhe
var emergency semesler of 1919, he look u a nev loic: finding an
originary Ianguage for lhe henomenoIogicaI discIosure of
"vorIding" (cs uc|ici), an earIy indicalion for lhe queslion of lhe
meaning of being. ul his queslion vas never osed in an
inleIIecluaI vacuum--il vas aIvays framed by lhe crisis-menlaIily of
a secific hisloricaI silualion: a Germany confronled by economic
chaos, oIilicaI lurmoiI, cIass varfare, and lhe devaslalion of lhe
revar vision of order and slabiIily.
Like Nielzsche Uniinc|q Mc!iiaiicns, vrillen |usl afler lhe
IrancoIrussian War, Heidegger's vork of lhe earIy lvenlies is
marked by a dislinclive oslvar consciousness. Iach lhinker, in his
ovn vay, found lhe feverish ubIic resonse lo viclory or defeal lo
be an indicalion of lhe iIIs Iaguing German ubIic consciousness.
Whereas Nielzsche began his assauIl on lhe Iilerary bIandishmenls
of David Iriedrich Slrauss, Heidegger remonslraled againsl lhe
fashionabIe Ku|iurpcssinisnus of SengIer. olh calured erfeclIy
in lheir vork lhe mood of lhe day: lhe chauvinislic bombasl of
ismarck's nevIy configured |cicn and lhe crisis-menlaIily of
lroubIed Weimar. In lhe vake of calaslrohe, Heidegger inilialed a
radicaI crilique of lhe resenl, one grounded in a consciousness of
hislory. In a Ieller lo KarI Lvilh from 1923, Heidegger soke of "a
radicaI dismanlIing |A||auj and disinlegralion, a Ocsirukiicn" of lhe
oId Iuroe vhich, in lhe face of lhe idIe challer and buslIe of cIever
and enlerrising men of Iearning, demanded a concenlralion on "lhe
one lhing lhal mallers": a decision concerning "lhe exislenliaI Iimil
of one's ovnmosl hisloricaI faclicily." Heidegger's alh of inquiry
vas, hovever, free of lhe
____________________
193
Sheehan, Hci!cggcrs Icnrjanrc,21, Oll, Mariin Hci!cggcr, 104.
-256-
oId choices of lhe Wc|ianscnauung variely: "vhelher from lhis
deslruclion a nev cuIlure viII emerge or lhere viII be an
acceIeralion of decIine."
194
Inslead, Heidegger chose lo gras lhis
crisis of deslruclion nol as decIine (Unicrgang) bul as a lime of
lransilion (U|crgang). Laler, in his Ieclures of Winler Semesler 1937-
1938, Heidegger soke of bolh Nielzsche and HIderIin as lhinkers
of lhe end and as lhinkers of lransilion, because lhey rocIaimed
"lhe end of lhe firsl beginning of lhe hislory of Weslern hiIosohy."
195
In lhis lime of lransilion, vhich Heidegger underslood as a
"lurning," he accenlualed lhe significance of bolh end and
beginning: "ve sland before lhe decision belveen lhe end (vhich
may erhas run on for cenluries yel) and lhe olher beginning
vhich can onIy be a momenl of vision vhose rearalion viII
require a cerlain alience vhich lhe 'olimisls' |usl as IillIe as lhe
'essimisls' viII hardIy measure u lo."
196

The crisis of lhe oslvar generalion offered lo Heidegger a nev
loic for his lhoughl: lhe lask of relhinking hislory nol as a rocess
of sequenliaI deveIomenl or hisloricoscienlific observalion
(nisicriscncr Bciracniung) bul as a medilalion on lhe lemoraI-
hisloricaI haening lhal ve ourseIves are (gcscnicni|icncr
Bcsinnung).
197
If he underslood lhis crisis, in a henomenoIogicaI
sense, as a Krisis, or "lurning" (in lhe sense of a Kcnrc lo anolher
beginning), he did so on lhe basis of a nev reading of lemoraIily,
one lhal re|ecled lhe Iinear, diachronic consciousness of Ranke for
lhe horizonaI lemoraIily of Nielzsche. In lerms reminiscenl of lhe
second UnlimeIy Medilalion, Heidegger exIained lhal "lhe
hisloricaI does nol refer lo a kind of comrehension or invesligalion
bul lo lemoraI haening |Gcscncncnj ilseIf. The hisloricaI is nol lhe
asl, aIso nol lhe resenl, bul lhe fulure-lhal vhich is lo come is lhe
origin of hislory."
198
As he began lo consider lhe generalionaI crisis
of oslvar science and cuIlure, Heidegger came lo undersland
hislory (Gcscnicnic), in a nev sense as somelhing manyIayered
(tic|scnicniig) and falefuI (gcscnick|icn), nol as a hisloricisl coIIeclion
of facls hermelicaIIy encIosed in lhe museum of lhe asl.
If lhe crisis of hisloricism vere lo have any essenliaI meaning for an
underslanding of hislory, Heidegger beIieved, lhen Weimar
hislorians vouId have lo abandon lheir suerficiaI rheloric of
"essim-
____________________
194
Lvilh, Mcin Ic|cn, 28, 31.
195
Marlin Heidegger, Grun!jragcn !cr Pni|cscpnic. Ausgcuan|ic
Prc||cnc !cr Icgik, Gcsaniausga|c 45 ( Irankfurl: KIoslermann,
1984), 133-134.
196
Ibid., 124.
197
Ibid., 40.
198
Ibid.
-257-
ism," "calaslrohe," and "decIine" for a Ianguage of discIosure and
reveIalion. IniliaIIy, Heidegger found lhe modeI for such Ianguage
in IauI's eislIes, Lulher's sermons, lhe henomenoIogicaI
inlerrelalions of ArislolIe, and lhe elhicaI ironies of Kierkegaard.
As he began lo formuIale his ovn vision of hislory in Bcing an!
Tinc, hovever, a nev Ianguage emerged. Nov Heidegger referred
lo crisis ilseIf as a form of deslruclion vhich vouId iniliale a relurn
lo lhe sources of hislory in lhe hislory of onloIogy. This nev form of
deslruclion reveaIed lhe radicaI aoria al lhe hearl of lhe hisloricisl
debale: lhe fundamenlaI incomalibiIily of lhe Greek idea of being
and lhe Chrislian exerience of lime. y inlerreling crisis in bolh
onloIogicaI and hisloricolemoraI lerms and dismanlIing lhe
lradilionaI |ragcsic||ung of his conlemoraries, Heidegger
lransformed bolh lhe slyIe and lhe meaning of lhe hisloricisl debale.
In lhis sense ve can seak of Bcing an! Tinc as a vork lhal offers a
soIulion lo lhe crisis of hisloricism by vay of a radicaI dissoIulion of
lhose melahysicaI calegories lhal firsl made hisloricism ossibIe.
As Heidegger moved lovard a fuIIer encounler vilh Nielzsche (and
HIderIin) in lhe 1930s, lhe imIicalions of lhese earIier ideas
became more exIicil. IseciaIIy in lhe Bciiragc, his ivolaI vork,
Heidegger inlerreled crisis nol as a momenlary hisloricaI evenl in
Weimar bul as "lhe evenl of being" vhich reveaIs ilseIf as lhe
ossibiIily of a lurning in Weslern hislory from lhe end of
melahysics lo a nev beginning for lhoughl. In a ecuIiar kind of
archaeoIogy, Heidegger soughl lo deslroy or de-conslrucl lhe edifice
of Weslern hiIosohy dovn lo ils slrucluraI rools in Greek arche.
ul in Heidegger's scheme of deslruclion, lhe beginning (arcnc) Iies
in lhe end (cscnaicn), and lhe end, in lhe beginning. olh momenls
are galhered logelher in a confronlalion vilh lhe hislory of being, a
hislory imIicaled in a decision aboul lhe meaning of hislory ilseIf.
In lhe Bciiragc, Heidegger Iayed vilh lhe differenl meanings of
hislory as bolh Hisicric and Gcscnicnic and framed his underslanding
of decision in and againsl lhese doubIe meanings. Ixlending his
crilique of hisloricism in Bcing an! Tinc, Heidegger argued lhal "lhe
essence of Hisicric is grounded in lhe sub|ecl-ob|ecl reIalion, il is
ob|eclive because il is sub|eclive and insofar as il is lhe one, il musl
be lhe olher. ConsequenlIy, any 'oosilion' belveen 'sub|eclive'
and 'ob|eclive' Hisicric has no meaning. AII Hisicric ends in
anlhrooIogicaI-sychoIogicaI biograhism."
199
Heidegger
inlerreled Gcscnicnic, on lhe olher hand, as lhe hislory of
____________________
199
Marlin Heidegger, Bciiragc zur Pni|cscpnic, Gcsaniausga|c 65 (
Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1989, 494.
-258-
be-ing (!ic Gcscnicnic !cs Scqns), vhere being is anolher name for
|rcignis.
200

Heidegger inlended lhal lhis re-inscrilion of hislory as lhe hislory
of be-ing vouId relrieve lhe aulhenlic onloIogicaI sense of hislory as
a crisis of lhe fuluraI--a decision aboul vhal is lo come. If lhe
Hisicric of Ranke and Droysen offered ob|eclive lrulh al a lemoraI
dislance, Heidegger's ovn inlerrelalion of Gcscnicnic offered an
eilher/or choice aboul lhe meaning of lhe enlire Weslern lradilion
|udged by one lhoughl aIone: lhe evenl of being. The lradilionaI
hisloricisl underslanding of hislory as "crisis" couId nov be lhoughl
of as a Kehre in lhe hislory of being, as a "lurning" in and lo lhe
melahysicaI eoch of lechnoIogicaI nihiIism. Like Nielzsche before
him, Heidegger inlroduced lhe loic of hislory for lhe urose of
relhinking lhe basic meaning of Weslern lhoughl, caIIing inlo
queslion ils reference for lheorelicaI melahysics by confronling a
raclicaI decision: vhelher il vas genuineIy ossibIe "lo lhink in
rimordiaI refIeclion lovard an overcoming of lhe melahysics of
lhe viII lo over--lhal is lo say, lo begin a confronlalion vilh
Weslern lhoughl by relurning lo ils beginning."
201
Again in lhe
Bciiragc, Heidegger soke of lhe Kcnrc as a "decision concerning a
decision" and of lhe "need" or "necessily" (Nci) of fulure hiIosohy
lo aIIov ils ossibiIilies lo be oen. ul in lhe same brealh he
caulioned againsl an anlhroocenlric underslanding of "decision"
vhich vouId focus soIeIy on lhe rocess of sub|eclive refIeclion
(|cj|cxicn) and vouId miss lhe deeer sense of lhe lurning. As
Heidegger ul il, lhe essence of lhis decision, vhich can be
characlerized as lhe eilher/or of being /nol-being, is "lhe oening u
of a cIefl in be-ing ilseIf, grased vilhin lhe hislory of being, and nol
as a moraI-anlhrooIogicaI decision."
202
Wilh lhis lurn avay from
anlhroocenlrism, lhe dissoIulion of hisloricism begins, bolh in lhe
sense of ils dominance as a revaiIing Wc|ianscnauung and as a
lenabIe calegory for arlicuIaling lhe "crisis" of modernily.
____________________
200
|rcignis is a fundamenlaI lerm in lhe Iexicon of lhe Ialer
Heidegger. A noloriousIy difficuIl vord lo lransIale, il is oflen
rendered inlo IngIish as "occurrence," "evenl," "evenl of being,"
"arorialion," or even as "en-ovning." Heidegger himseIf
admilled lhal "il can no more be lransIaled lhan lhe Greek vord
|cgcs or lhe Chinese vord Tao." |!cniiiai un! Oijjcrcnz (IfuIIingen:
Neske, 1957), 25, |!cniiiq an! Oijjcrcncc, lrans. }oan Slambaugh (
Nev York: Harer and Rov, 1969), 36.
201
Marlin Heidegger, "The Reclorale, 1933-34: Iacls and Thoughls,"
lrans. Karslen Harries , |cticu cj Mciapnqsics 38 ( March 1985): 485
(lransIalion aIlered), and Oic Sc||si|cnaupiung !cr !cuiscncn
Unitcrsiiai. Oas |ckicrai, 1933/34 ( Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1983),
25. AIlhough Heidegger emIoys lhe lerm Ubervindung, or
"overcoming," here, one mighl aIso lhink in lerms of lhe Ialer
Heidegger's reference for lhe lerm Vcruin!ung, or "recovery." See
Gianni Vallimo, Tnc Transparcni Scciciq ( aIlimore: }ohns
Hokins Universily Iress, : 1992).
202
Heidegger, GA 65: 103.
-259-
Heidegger's vork of dissoIulion and deslruclion did nol, hovever,
end vilh his crilique of hisloricaI lemoraIily and hisloricily in
Bcing an! Tinc. Over lhe nexl decade he reealed his efforls lo
lransform lhe occIusions (apcrias) of hisloricism inlo lhe oenness
(cupcria) and unconceaImenl of Scinsgcscnicnic. AIlhough lhe focus of
his Ieclures changed as he engaged lhe vork of HIderIin,
Nielzsche, and ScheIIing, his fundamenlaI lhemes remained lhe
same. Thus, desile lhe aearance of a break vilh his vork of lhe
lvenlies, Heidegger's sludenl Hans-Georg Gadamer mainlains lhal
"Heidegger's Kehre is an alleml and a series of allemls lo eIude
lhe robIems of hisloricism."
203
As Heidegger radicaIized lhese
"allemls" lo eIude hisloricism--by abandoning moraI-
anlhrooIogicaI decision making for lhe "saving over" of
HIderIin's oelic vord--he aIso exosed lhe Iimils of his ovn
lhinking. As ve examine his lurn lo oIilicaI queslions in lhe
lhirlies, ve need lo veigh lhe consequences of his "deslruclion" of
hisloricism and refIecl on ils dangers. Did Heidegger's narralive of a
"lurning in lhe hislory of being" rovide a more lerribIe form of
deslruclion lhan lhe academic mandarinale of Weimar couId
comrehend` If lhe ob|eclivism of Ranke's riesls of research (lhose
vhom Nielzsche caIIed "lhe eunuchs in lhe harem of hislory") Ied lo
a ecuIiar kind of imolence--an inabiIily lo decide oIilicaIIy--lhen
vhal are ve lo make of Heidegger's ovn oIilicaI decision making
afler 1933` CerlainIy, lhe mylhooeic vision of a Germanic Vc|k, lhe
nalure myslicism of a HIderIinian brolherhood, and lhe
irremediabIe Hcinucn ("homesickness") for lhe sliIIness of
Todlnauberg offered Heidegger an "olher" alh avay from lhe
lechnoIogicaI nihiIism of lhe alomic age. And yel vhere did lhe alh
Iead` Of vhal did lhe "danger" consisl` The acl of deslroying lhe oId
Iuroe and ils cuIluraI museum of lhe asl had far-reaching
consequences. Heidegger aIvays underslood lhis. Iven a cursory
Iook al lhe Ianguage of lhe Rekloralsrede, vilh ils aramiIilary
rheloric of Kanpj (slruggIe) and Wcnr!icnsi (armed service), cannol
faiI lo uncover lhe ominous ossibiIilies of a loo forcefuI deslruclion
of lhe Weslern lradilion, "vhen lhe siriluaI slrenglh of lhe Wesl
faiIs and lhe |oinls of lhe vorId no Ionger hoId, vhen lhis moribund
sembIance of a cuIlure caves in and drags aII lhal remains slrong
inlo confusion and Iels il suffocale in madness."
204

____________________
203
Hans-Georg Gadamer, Ieller lo lhe aulhor, Iebruary 26, 1990.
204
Marlin Heidegger, "The SeIf-Asserlion of lhe German Universily,"
lrans. Karslen Harries , |cticu cj Mciapnqsics 38 ( March 1985):
479-480, Oic Sc||si|cnaupiung !cr !cuiscncn Unitcrsiiai, 19.
-260-
ObviousIy, Heidegger's comIicily in lhe vorId-hisloricaI drive of
NalionaI SociaIism vas nol an incidenlaI sideIine bul vas
fundamenlaIIy reIaled lo his ovn underslanding of lhe arlicuIar
hisloricaI silualion in Weimar as one of "crisis." Wilhin lhis crisis-
narralive, Heidegger conceived of lhe deslruclion of hisloricism as
arl of a Iarger narralive of Weslern hislory guided by a movemenl
of nihiIism vhich vas unreIenling in ils dominion over lhe vorId of
beings. His allraclion lo NalionaI SociaIism vas cIear: il rovided
lhe hoe of a nev beginning in a Ianelary-oIilicaI sense. More
concreleIy, il inilialed a movemenl vilhin lhe universily ilseIf vhich
abandoned bolh lhe leid IiberaIism of lhe Vcrnunjircpu||ikancr and
lhe sleriIe connoisseurshi of lhe schoIar-coIIeclor for a more aclive,
dynamic invoIvemenl in shaing lhe "essence" of lhe universily. In
lhis sense, il rovided an urgenl crilique of lhe siriluaI mission of
lhe universily, in much lhe same vay as had Heidegger's earIier
Ieclures on IauI's eislIe lo lhe ThessaIonians. As absurd as il mighl
sound, bolh earIy Chrislianily and NalionaI SociaIism furnished
Heidegger, aIbeil in differenl vays, vilh concrele ossibiIilies for
relhinking lhe asl in lerms of lhe fulure and for overlurning lhe
comIacenl scienlism of universily educalion so lhal rofessors and
sludenls aIike mighl gel lo lhe rools of faclicaI Iife "in lhe here and
nov . . . in lhis Iace, in lhis Ieclure haII," as he decIared in 1922.
205

UIlimaleIy, Heidegger's vork of lhe lvenlies and lhirlies can be
characlerized as boId and ambilious. In uncomromising lerms il
sel forlh a overfuI reading of modernily as an age of lransilion
shaed by lhe idea of crisis. In lhe fragmenlalion, dissoIulion, and
exhauslion of lhe modern vorId, Heidegger sav nol lhe faiIure of
various vorId vievs bul a fundamenlaI eochaI shifl: an age of
U|crgang ralher lhan Unicrgang. ul even in his alleml lo
undersland lhis lransilion as a "lurning," Heidegger became
reoccuied, Iike many olhers of his generalion, vilh lhoughls of an
end--of aocaIylic, miIIenarian, and eschaloIogicaI yearnings lhal
oflen obscured economic, sociaI, and oIilicaI robIems lhal Iagued
lhe osl-VersaiIIes vorId. Heidegger lried, of course, lo envision a
alh of lransilion avay from lhis end, vhal in 1946 he caIIed "lhe
eschaloIogy of being," by going back lo lhe "firsl beginning" of
Greek lhoughl, lhe arcnc or ruIing origin of Weslern hislory.
206
ul
in relurning lo lhe hiIosohicaI/oelic origin
____________________
205
Heidegger, GA 61: 63.
206
Heidegger, |ar|q Grcck Tninking, 18, Hc|zucgc, 302.
-261-
--vhelher as HeracIilean |cgcs or as HIderIinianHcinkcnr--lhere is a
danger lhal one mighl forgel lhe origin of hiIosohy and oelry in
lhe vorId of lhe oIis.
Heidegger oflen soke in lragic lerms aboul lhe hislory of lhe Wesl,
finding ancienl anaIogues lo lhe modern silualion in lhe Iighls of
Oedius and Anligone. In An |nirc!uciicn ic Mciapnqsics ( 1935), he
soke aboul Iuroe's imminenl ruin and inlimaled lhal:
The siriluaI decIine of lhe earlh is so far advanced lhal nalions
|Vc|kcrj are lhrealened vilh Iosing lhe Iasl siriluaI over vhich
makes il ossibIe (laken in reIalion lo lhe desliny of "being") lo see
lhe decIine and lo araise il as such. This simIe observalion has
nolhing lo do vilh Ku|iurpcssinisnus nor vilh any sorl of olimism.
The darkening of lhe vorId, lhe fIighl of lhe gods, lhe deslruclion of
lhe earlh, lhe lransformalion of human beings inlo "mass man," lhe
halred and susicion of everylhing free and crealive, have assumed
such roorlions lhroughoul lhe earlh lhal such chiIdish calegories
as essimism and olimism have Iong since become Iudicrous.
207

Laler in lhese Ieclures Heidegger soke of Oedius's bIindness and
lhe confIicls of Anligone, lhemes lhal became for him encryled
messages aboul lhe bIindness of lhe hiIosoher and lhe nihiIislic
confIicls vilhin lechnoIogicaI viII lo over. In his discussion of
Aniigcnc, for examIe, Heidegger lransIaled lhe enlire lexl of
SohocIes' firsl choraI ode concerning lhe Ioss of home and lhe
condilion of lhe uncanny (!as Unncin|icnc, in Greek, lo !cincn). The
lerm uncanny--lhal vhich casls us oul of lhe home (Hcin)--became
for Heidegger a symboI of lhe exlreme Iimils of lhe human being,
indicaling bolh ils vonderfuI overs al conlroIIing lhe eIemenlaI
forces of nalure and oinling lo ils vioIenl, deslruclive, and
"slrange" (unncin|icn) caacily for overovering aII Iimils.
Heidegger beIieved lhal SohocIes' descrilion of lhe human being
as "lhe uncanniesl"--a crealure bolh "vonderfuI" and "lerribIe" (ic
!cincn)--oinled lo an avareness aboul lhe confIicling forces al lhe
source of human exerience. Ior Heidegger, hovever, lhese
confIicls exressed an underIying unily vilhin being ilseIf, a unily
lhal he underslood, aradoxicaIIy, as a fundamenlaI abyss. Mosl
human beings, Heidegger cIaimed, relrealed from lhis insighl
concerning lhe vonderfuI/lerribIe source(s) of exerience inlo lhe
safe, secure famiIiarily of lhe everyday vorId. ul lhere vere
____________________
207
Marlin Heidegger, An |nirc!uciicn ic Mciapnqsics, lrans. RaIh
Manheim ( Garden Cily, N.Y.: Anchor, 1961), 31, |in|ciiung in !ic
Mciapnqsik (Tiibingen: Niemeyer, 1953), 24.
-262-
olhers vho exerienced lhis abyss in a crealive vay, seeing ils
vonder and lerror as lhe source of hisloricaI exislence ilseIf vhich
heIed lo Iay lhe foundalion of lhe oIis. Re|ecling lhe convenlionaI
lransIalion of pc|is as "cily" or "cily-slale," Heidegger mainlained
lhal "oIis means lhe Iace, lhe lhere |Oaj in vhich, cui of vhich,
and jcr vhich hislory haens." Wilhin lhe oIis lhere are
reeminenl (nqpsipc|is) crealors and ruIers vho exerience lhe oIis
bolh as lhe grcun! of hislory and as lhe a|qss lhal Ieaves one cily-Iess
(apc|is). Heidegger exIained, hovever, lhal even as lhese cilizens
become reeminenl in lhe oIis, "In lhis Iace vhere hislory
haens, lhey become al lhe same lime apc|is, vilhoul cily and
Iace, aIone, uncanny and vilhoul a home, vilhoul issue in lhe
midsl of being as a vhoIe, al lhe same lime vilhoul slalule and
Iimil, vilhoul slruclure and order because as crealors lhey musl firsl
ground lhis aII."
208

These crealors, such as Oedius, Anligone, and HeracIilus (and
Heidegger himseIf), exerience lhe lension belveen being apc|is and
nqpsipc|is as lhe very source of lheir queslioning. Their lhoughls
focus on beginnings and on lhe slrange over of Ianguage, vhich
somelimes aears foreign and incomrehensibIe lo lhe olher
members of lhe oIis. In his HeracIilus Ieclures, Heidegger
exIained lhal such figures oflen seem aoIilicaI because lhey do nol
busy lhemseIves vilh queslions of immediale ubIic concern.
209
Yel,
he cIaimed, lhese soIilary founders enelrale benealh lhe surface of
oIilicaI aclivily lo lhe ground of lhe pc|is ilseIf as lhe sile of human
exislence. Thus, desile lhe ubIic aearance of forsaking lhe
oIilicaI vorId, in lheir slrange allunemenl lo lhe queslion of being,
lhey engender lhe mosl aulhenlic and originaI oIilicaI acl. Oul of
lhe crisis of lhe Greek oIis, lhese lhinkers unIeash lhe oelic vord
of being and lhe reveIalory over of lhe Iogos.
Heidegger underslood lhal lhe crisis of lhe oIis, Iike lhe oelic
lexls of SohocIes, lhe oracuIar sayings of HeracIilus, and lhe
briIIianlIy Iuminous lemIes and slalues hevn from lhe rocks of lhe
dealhIess Allic earlh, mighl discIose lhe lrulh of lhe ancienl vorId in
a nev sense. And yel even as he vaIorized lhe oIis as lhe icpcs, or
"sile," of lhe reveIalion of being--lhe Iace, lhe lhere |Oaj, vherein
and as vhich Oa-scin is hisloricaI--he, loo, vas slruck by lhe same
unyieIding lension belveen lhe reeminence of lhe hysioIis (lhe
____________________
208
Heidegger, |nirc!uciicn ic Mciapnqsics, 128 (lransIalion modified),
|in|ciiung in !ic Mciapnqsik, 117.
209
Marlin Heidegger, Hcrak|ii, Gcsaniausga|c 55 ( Irankfurl:
KIoslermann, 1979), 1113.
-263-
reclor, lhe lhinker, lhe vorId-renovned aulhor of Bcing an! Tinc)
and lhe homeIessness of lhe aoIis.
210
In his lurn in lhe lhirlies lo a
HIderIinian foIk reIigion of nalure, Heidegger comIeled lhe
SohocIean cycIe of lragic bIindness and evasion: caughl in lhe
irony of seeing deeIy inlo lhe mysleries of lhe vord of being and
yel nol being abIe lo see lhe very oIilicaI consequences of his ovn
lhinking. The grealer irony here is lhal Heidegger, lhe reeminenl
rohel of crisis, shouId have missed lhe lruIy foundalionaI crisis of
our limes, an evenl, or |rcignis, lhal reveaIed lhe nihiIism of lhe
dealh of God in aII loo murderous images and yel vilhdrev inlo lhe
siIence of lhe unsoken. Though oen lo lhe ossibiIilies of hislory
and lo "lhe cIefl in being," Heidegger faiIed lo comrehend lhe
horribIe consequences of his ovn hysioIis/aoIis evasions.
Iinded by his ovn OediaI fiIialion lo "lhe one lhing lhal
mallered"--lhe queslion of being--Heidegger faiIed lo see lhe "evenl"
of Auschvilz. In his ercelive vork Hci!cggcr, Ari an! Pc|iiics,
IhiIie Lacoue-Labarlhe vriles aboul lhe con|oining of |rcignis
and Auschvilz in Heidegger: "AII I can say is lhal Auschvilz
beIongs lo a shere beyond lragedy, al once more and Iess lhan
lragedy: more, because lhe infinile searalion is absoIuleIy
hyerboIic: Iess, because no (re)resenlalion of il is ossibIe. . . .
Thal is, unforlunaleIy, vhal Heidegger, vho knev a good deaI
aboul lhe caesura (vhal eIse, afler aII, is lhe |rcignis`) and
Heidegger aIone can enabIe us lo undersland, he vho obslinaleIy
refused, hovever, lo acknovIedge Auschvilz as lhe caesura of our
limes."
211

In 1935 Heidegger couId sliII vrile in bIalanlIy chauvinislic lerms
aboul lhe German nalion "as lhe mosl melahysicaI Vc|k" and
suggesl lhal il "musl move ilseIf beyond lhe cenler of ils fuluraI
haening inlo lhe originary reaIm of lhe overs of being." He lhen
added, "If lhe greal decision concerning Iuroe is nol lo Iead lo
annihiIalion, lhen il can onIy be made lhrough lhe unfoIding of nev
hisloricaIspiriiua| forces from oul of lhe cenler."
212
ObviousIy, lhese
nev "siriluaI" (gcisiigc) forces vouId aIso carry lhe doubIe sense of
a "ghoslIy" burden, as Derrida has oinled oul.
213
The
Germanocenlric vision of hislory, insired by lhe oelic vord of
HIderIin, vouId Iead Heideg-
____________________
210
Heidegger, An |nirc!uciicn ic Mciapnqsics, 128, |in|ciiung in !ic
Mciapnqsik, 117.
211
IhiIie Lacoue-Labarlhe, Hci!cggcr, Ari, an! Pc|iiics, lrans. Chris
Turner ( Oxford: IackveII, 1990), 46.
212
Heidegger, An |nirc!uciicn ic Mciapnqsics, 32 (lransIalion
modified), |in|ciiung in !ic Mciapnqsik, 29.
213
}acques Derrida, Oj Spirii, lrans. Geoffrey enninglon and RacheI
ovIby ( Chicago: Universily of Chicago Iress, 1989).
-264-
ger back lo Ire-Socralic origins for a vay oul of lhe crisis of lhe
modern siril. ul couId lhe romise of a "nev beginning" in
NalionaI SociaIism bring lo comIelion lhe "firsl beginning" of
Greek lhoughl`
Ierhas, in lhe end, vhal a crilicaI reading of Heidegger rovides is
anolher vay of lhinking aboul beginnings lhan as HeracIilean archai
according lo Heidegger's ovn eochaI scheme of lhe hislory of
hiIosohy. Ior if ve lake his vork seriousIy, ve are offered lhe
ossibiIily of reading Heidegger againsl himseIf, remembering aII
lhe vhiIe his ovn abiding reference for lhe vord of ArislolIe: ic cn
|cgciai pc||acncs.
214
eing is said in many vays, il can lake lhe form of
a syslem exressed vilh enduring cIarily, or il can vilhdrav inlo a
siIence more overfuI lhan lhe sayings of hiIosohers, a siIence of
absence, and an absenl olher named onIy by lhe name of Auschvilz.
Il vouId be unfair lo |udge Heidegger's vork soIeIy by his ovn
siIence on lhis "loic" for lhoughl, and yel, in some fundamenlaI
vay, any meaningfuI aroach lo his vork musl gras lhis evenl of
hislory as a ivolaI infIuence on his reading of lhe hislory of
hiIosohy and lhe hislory of lhe Wesl.
Heidegger's hiIosohicaI ro|ecl, if ro|ecl il vas, deslroyed lhe
very foundalions of hisloricism vhich Iay al lhe rool of hislory,
uncovering ils hidden melahysicaI sources and ils endIess
relenses lo "scienlific" (re)resenlalion and seIf-exlinguishmenl.
ul in lhis acl of deslruclion, Heidegger's decision aboul
being/beings became enlangIed in lhe dangerous hisloricily of his
ovn NalionaI SociaIisl rools. Whal Heidegger's vork offers, even in
ils aIarming oIilicaI rheloric, is a vision of crisis lhal renders lhe
nineleenlh-cenlury "crisis of lhe sciences" lriviaI and
suererogalory. Ior Heidegger roerIy grased Krisis as a lurning,
as a crilicaI evenl nol mereIy in lhe hislory of hisloricaI vriling bul
in hislory ilseIf as an aIelheic rocess of discIosure and conceaImenl.
Whal Iies conceaIed, hovever, is nol somelhing caabIe of
reveIalion in lhe usuaI sense bul onIy an aocaIyse of lhe hidden
dangers in being, dangers lo vhich Heidegger, loo, vas sub|ecl.
If il makes sense lo siluale lhe crisis of modernily vilhin lhe
lradilion of hisloricism, as I have lried lo do, lhen Heidegger's vork
occuies a cenlraI osilion vilhin lhis frame of queslioning. The
move from an eislemoIogicaI foundalion for lhe human sciences lo
an es-
____________________
214
Marlin Heidegger, Wnai |s Pni|cscpnq? biIinguaI ed., lrans. }ean T.
WiIde and WiIIiam KIuback ( Nev Haven, Conn.: CoIIege and
Universily Iress, 1956), 96-97.
-265-
chaloIogy of being demonslraled |usl hov lroubIing lhe queslion of
hislory became for lhe generalion of German lhinkers afler 1880. Yel
if Heidegger found no "soIulion" lo lhe crisis, he did al Ieasl hoId
oul lhe ossibiIily of ils dissoIulion. Modernily ilseIf, as lhe slruggIe
lo define and undersland lhis dissoIulion, makes no sense vilhoul
lhe idea of crisis. Resonding lo lhe silualion as a lhinker "in a lime
of need," Heidegger reframed lhe queslion of hislory (Gcscnicnic) by
selling il vilhin lhe Iarger conlexl of vhal he lermed a jaic or !csiinq
(Gcscnick) senl from being. Al lhe concIusion of his essay "Whal Are
Ioels Ior`" ( 1946), he aIIuded lo "lhe coming vorId era," an era lhal,
he argued, "is neilher a decay nor a dovnfaII" bul "a desliny vhich
resls in being and Iays cIaim lo human being."
215
Re|ecling lhe
"hisloricaI" (gcscnicni|icn) narralive of lhe modern eoch for a
"falefuI" (gcscnick|icn) and oslhisloricaI reading of an age lo come,
Heidegger demonslraled hov far he had moved from lhe Neo-
Kanlian alleml lo "resoIve" lhe crisis of hisloricism. y lhinking
"hislory" and "crisis" logelher as oinls of inlerseclion for
underslanding lhe modern eoch, Heidegger caIIed inlo queslion
modernily ilseIf. As a seIfslyIed "lhinker in a deslilule lime," he
chaIIenged lhe German lradilion of hisloricaI lhinking from Ranke
lo Meinecke and exosed ils melahysicaI foundalions lhrough his
vork of Ocsirukiicn. ul his oelic, "falefuI" lhinking sel forlh
dangers of ils ovn, marked as il vas by a oIilicaI commilmenl lo
anolher kind of crisis. y selling hiIosohy againsl oIilics and
oIilics againsl hislory, Heidegger reveaIed lhe lensions al lhe hearl
of a Iong lradilion, lensions lhal couId hardIy be resoIved in slriclIy
"hisloricaI" lerms. In lhe end, by re|ecling lhe melahysics of
Wc|igcscnicnic for "lhe desliny of lhe vorId's nighl," he affirmed his
commilmenl lo "desliny," even if he aIvays underslood desliny as a
queslion aboul hislory.
216
The hislory of modernily as a narralive in
lhe form of a queslion is sliII lo be decided. Heidegger's deslruclive
reading heIed lo frame lhe queslion, Ieaving il ever more
queslionabIe and oening u lhe ossibiIily of a differenl kind of
hisloricaI refIeclion on lhe crisis of modernily.
____________________
215
Marlin Heidegger, "Whal Are Ioels Ior`" lrans. AIberl
Hoflsladler, in Pccirq, Ianguagc, an! Tncugni ( Nev York: Harer
and Rov, 1971), 142(lransIalion aIlered), Hc|zucgc, 295.
216
Heidegger, "Whal Are Ioels Ior`"142, Hc|zucgc, 295.
-266-
Pnstscript
Hisloriograhy is a narcolic averling us from hislory.
-- Marlin Heidegger, Basic Qucsiicns cj Pni|cscpnq
Heidegger's roIe vilhin lhe lradilion of hisloricism has been
negIecled, overIooked, marginaIized, and dismissed by many
commenlalors--on lhe geneaIogy of hisloricism and on Heidegger's
vork. My argumenl lhroughoul lhis book has focused on lhe need
lo Iocale Heidegger's lhoughl vilhin lhe lradilion of hisloricisl
lhinking and, converseIy, lo siluale lhe hisloricisl mode of
queslioning vilhin Heidegger's lhoughl. I have lried lo lhink
lhrough lhis muluaIIy delermined reIalion by cenlering my
discussion on lhe nolion of crisis and crisis-lhinking. Il seems lo me
lhal Heidegger's underslanding of modernily siluales lhe herilage
of Carlesian and InIighlenmenl lhinking vilhin a narralive of
lechnoIogicaI dominalion and viII lo over. I beIieve lhal such an
aroach grovs oul of Heidegger's ovn allemls lo accounl for lhe
meaning of hislory (Gcscnicnic) in lerms of a nev underslanding of
human lemoraIily. This vay of grasing hislory focuses nol on lhe
eislemoIogicaI-melhodoIogicaI reconslruclion of "vhal acluaIIy
haened" bul lries lo aroach hislory as somelhing lhal sliII
avails us--as somelhing fuluraI ralher lhan as somelhing asl.
As Heidegger began lo move oul of lhe conslricled shere of Bcing
an! Tinc, vilh ils anlhroocenlric Ianguage of care, mood,
conscience,
-267-
and guiIl, he lried lo relhink lhe robIems of hislory, hisloricily, and
hisloriograhy vhich reoccuied him in lhal vork. Ior lhe
Heidegger of lhe lhirlies, queslions aboul hislory no Ionger concern
lhe lradilion of hisloricism. In lhe summer semesler of 1920,
Heidegger sliII cIaimed lhal he no Ionger look "lhe ghosls of
hisloricism and reIalivism seriousIy", seven years Ialer, in Bcing an!
Tinc, he indicaled hov lhe robIem of hisloricism reveaIs a
fundamenlaI aIienalion of Oascin from ils ovn hisloricily.
1
And yel
for lhe Heidegger of lhe lhirlies, queslions aboul hislory are no
Ionger embedded vilhin lhe hisloricisl discourse bul have been
vioIenlIy lransformed inlo a nev Ianguage of oracuIar
ronouncemenl, a oIilicaI discourse aboul a "secrel" Germany: lhe
Germany of a HIderIinian brolherhood born of a nev oelicaI-
hiIosohicaI Ianguage and a oslmelahysicaI underslanding of
hislory and lemoraIily.
The manlic Ianguage of lhe recloraI address signaIed a nev
aroach lo hislory and lhe hisloricaI. There, in his aeaI lo lhe
young sludenls of Ireiburg, Heidegger effecliveIy deslroyed lhe
romanlic aeaI for a hisloricisl narralive of hislory. Inslead, he
caIIed for a resoIule commilmenl "lo recover lhe grealness of lhe
beginning" reared in Greek hiIosohy.
2
ul lhis "firsl"
beginning, he reminded his Iisleners, vas nol a hisloricaI evenl lhal
couId be eslabIished, knovn, and reresenled by Rankean
melhodoIogy or lhe scienlific sludy of hislory. Il invoIved a
oslhisloricisl underslanding of lemoraIily in vhich lhal vhich
has been (!as Gcucscnc) is nol lied lo lhe aslness of lhe asl bul
relurns back as a fulure (Zu-kunji) lhal comes lovard us, oening
u ossibiIilies in lhe resenl (Gcgcnuari). In lhis sense, for
Heidegger, "Hislory is lhe arrivaI of vhal has been."
3
Throughoul
his Ialer career Heidegger mainlained lhal lhis oslhisloricaI,
oslmelahysicaI underslanding of lemoraIily exressed lhe
"essence of hislory."
4
In lhe recloraI address, for examIe,
Heidegger insisled lhal "lhe beginning sliII is. Il does nol Iie |cnin!
us as somelhing lhal vas Iong ago, bul slands |cjcrc us. . . . The
beginning has invaded our fulure."
5
Tvo years Ialer, in inc
|nirc!uciicn ic Mcia-pnqsics
____________________
1
Marlin Heidegger, "Pnancncnc|cgic !cr Anscnauung un! !cs
Aus!rucks," Nachschrifl from I. }. rechl, Universily of Ireiburg
}uIy 19, 1920.
2
Marlin Heidegger, Oic Sc||si|cnaupiung !cr !cuiscncn Unitcrsiiai.
Oas |ckicrai, 1933/ 34 ( Irankfurl: KIoslermann: 1990), 13.
3
Marlin Heidegger, "Grun!saizc !cs Ocnkcns," janr|ucn jur
Psqcnc|cgic un! Psqcncincrapic 6 ( 1958): 35.
4
Ibid.
5
Heidegger, Sc||si|cnaupiung, 12-13.
-268-
hysics, Heidegger reealed his in|unclion lhal "lhe beginning be
begun again in a more originary vay", again he vanled "lo relrieve
lhe beginning of | Germany'sj hisloricaI-siriluaI Oascin in order lo
lransform il inlo an olher beginning."
6
"This is ossibIe" he cIaimed-
-and indeed il became somelhing he conlinuaIIy vorked on righl
lhrough 1944 in his Ieclures on Nielzsche, HIderIin, Iarmenides,
and HeracIilus.
TradilionaI German hisloricism as far back as Herder, Ranke, and
HegeI underslood hislory as a meaningfuI rocess of rogressive
deveIomenl vhich handed dovn lhe over of lradilion lo lhe
resenl as il shaed lhe fulure. ul Heidegger underslood hislory as
an |rcignis, as a recirocaI arorialion of human beings and lhe
hislory of being, an evenl vhose beginning marked lhe beIonging
logelher of being and humanily and vhose end lhrealened lo
annihiIale lhe very ossibiIily of hislory. eing's alh of reveIalion
had, in Heidegger's accounl, conceaIed ils ovn !qnanis, ils ovn
movemenl inlo resence, even as il vilhdrev back inlo absence.
This vay of underslanding being as hisloricaI, as an aIelheic rocess
of vhal Thomas Sheehan has caIIed "res-ab-sence," finaIIy broke
vilh lhe German lradilion of hisloricism and ils melahysicaI
narralive of hislory as somelhing aIvays "resenl," somelhing
aIvays "lhere" vailing lo be reveaIed.
7

And yel, didn'l Heidegger's version of lhe hislory of being offer
anolher melahysicaI gran! rccii of lhe lolaIizing over of Weslern
lhinking--underslood vilhin lhe anlhroocenlric horizon of human
being` Heidegger's viIIingness lo lake u lhe loic of hislory vas
never simIe. In his vorks afler 1933 one nolices an essenliaI lension
in his lhinking belveen a oslmodern, aeslhelic-ecoIogicaI
Heidegger, vho varned of lhe "danger" of lechnoIogicaI viII lo
over, and a reaclionary, oIilicaI-ideoIogicaI Heidegger, vho
enlrealed lhe German Vc|k lo accel lhe chaIIenge of "fuIfiIIing ils
hisloricaI mission."
8
In lhis sense one is lemled lo seak of al Ieasl
lvo Heideggers: lhe Heidegger of aramiIilary service "lo lhe
desliny |Gcscnickj of lhe slale" and lhe Heidegger of Gc|asscnncii, of a
circumsecl allunemenl lo lhe aIlernaling cadences of being's oelic
song, ils malins and ils
____________________
6
Marlin Heidegger, |in|ciiung in !ic Mciapnqsik ( Tbingen:
Niemeyer, 1976), 29 (lransIalion mine), cf. |nirc!uciicn ic
Mciapnqsics, lrans. RaIh Manheim (Garden Cily, N.Y.: Anchor,
1961), 39.
7
Thomas Sheehan, "On Movemenl and lhe Deslruclion of
OnloIogy," Mcnisi 64, no. 4 ( Oclober 1981): 537.
8
Heidegger, Sc||si|cnaupiung, 13.
-269-
vesers. No maller hov ve read Heidegger--as fascisl aoIogisl, as
sheherd of being--ve mighl beller undersland his lhoughl if ve
acknovIedge hov decisiveIy il vas shaed by his underslanding of
modernily as an eoch of crisis: a lurning in Weslern lhinking bolh
cnic and auaq jrcn lhe alh of "ruinous bIindness," "lechnoIogicaI
frenzy," and nihiIislic viII lo over vhich dominales lhe lvenlielh
cenlury and vhose echoes ve hear in lhe names IasschendaeIe,
Auschvilz, Hiroshima, Sara|evo.
9

Heidegger's ovn commilmenls lo NalionaI SociaIism and lo lhe
oenness of a|cincia and |rcignis vere never essenliaIIy al odds--al
Ieasl in his ovn mind. They each refIecled a reoccualion vilh
crisis-lhinking and vilh lhe Ocsirukiicn of lhe comforlabIe,
reassuring orlhodoxy of hisloricism. Heidegger vanled lo break
vilh convenlionaI hislory so lhal he mighl relrieve lhe "firsl"
beginning of Greek lhoughl in lhe Ire-Socralics. He aIvays
underslood lhe hislory of lhe Wesl as a hislory of forgelling and of
having forgollen lhis rimordiaI Greek beginning, lhe arcnc, or
"ruIing origin," of Weslern lhinking. He vas ullerIy convinced lhal
neilher hisloricisl schoIarshi nor noslaIgic oelry couId recIaim lhe
force of lhal firsl beginning in any meaningfuI vay. Il couId be
arorialed onIy by finding hinls, oinlers, or "formaI indicalions"
vilhin lhe Weslern lradilion ( Ickharl, HeracIilus, HIderIin,
Nielzsche) vhich sliII carried lhe force of lhis firsl beginning. Hence,
vhen Heidegger vriles in lhe vinler semesler of 1937/38 lhal "lhal
vhich is lo come is lhe origin of hislory, bul lhe mosl fuluraI coming
is lhe greal beginning," he is simIy reslaling lhe message of lhe
recloraI address and of Bcing an! Tinc-nameIy, lhal lhe hislory of
being is nol an anaIogue lo lhe hislory of hiIosohy or lhe hislory
of hisloricaI vriling.
10
Ralher, il is an anarchic Iay of
crealive/deslruclive forces, vilhoul cause or ground-a Iay belveen
arche and eschalon lhal denies lhe cIosure rovided by archaeoIogy
and eschaloIogy.
And yel lhis "Iay" vilhin and of lhe hislory of being is nol vilhoul
ils dangers. On lhe one hand, Heidegger's ovn IayfuI engagemenls
in "lhe Gcscnick of lhe slale" reveaI lhe dynamics of deslruclion
invoIved in lhe German mission (Aujirag) of relrieving lhe Greek
beginning.
11
On lhe olher hand, by dismanlIing lhe melahysicaI
Ian-
____________________
10
Marlin Heidegger, Grun!jragcn !cr Pni|cscpnic, Gcsaniausga|c 45 (
Irankfurl: KIoslermann, 1984), 40.
11
Heidegger, Sc||si|cnaupiung, 16.
9
Heidegger, |nirc!uciicn ic Mciapnqsics, 37, |in|ciiung, 28.
-270-
guage and slruclure of hisloricisl lhinking, Heidegger offered a
differenl vay of lhinking aboul "hislory"--a oslhisloricaI, IayfuI,
and anarchic allilude aboul lhe asl vhich underslood il as fuluraI,
as somelhing lhal comes lovard us ralher lhan somelhing lhal
recedes from viev. Such a viev of hislory inevilabIy invoIves
ambiguily. There is no singIe melahysicaI arche or firsl rinciIe
lhal mighl ruIe or govern lhe diverse meanings Iaid oul in lhe
hislory lhal is sliII unicrucgs, sliII on lhe alh of unfoIding ils hidden
foIds. Heidegger's inlerrelalion of hislory oens a sace for lhe
oslmodern underslanding of lime as acausaI, disconlinuous,
nonreresenlalionaI. On lhis reading, hislory becomes oIyvocaI,
disseminaled in many vays and in a muIliIicily of conlexls, nol
seaking one Ianguage or riviIeging one alh of lrulh bul alluned
lo lhe IuraIily of dissonance, consonance, assonance, and resonance
vhich reveaIs lhe myriad ossibiIilies of |rcignis, lhe recirocaI
arorialion of human beings and lhe hislory of being. Ior
Heidegger, il is as if hislory vere lo Iay cIaim lo us ralher lhan ve lo
il.
ecause Heidegger's lhoughl is marked by bolh oenness and
cIosedness, by anlimodernily and oslmodernily, any cIaims ul
forvard for a definilive reading of his vork musl aIvays remain
robIemalic. He himseIf did nol rovide a road ma for lhe
nolorious vindings on lhe alh of lhinking. We are Iefl lo be our
ovn carlograhers or ralher lo undersland hov lhe very desire for a
carlograhy of being vouId viliale lhe IayfuI excursions and
eochaI sendings lhal lhe Gcscnick of being enlaiIs. If Heidegger's
lhoughl alh vas loo overfuIIy marked by lhe insighl inlo lhe
"lrulh of lhe Vc|k as lhe oenness of being," a lrulh lhal, being
German and Greek, eIided any Hebraic infIuences and found ils
rools in lhe Iover-middIe-cIass cuIluraI oIilics of a HIderIinian
foIk reIigion, lhen erhas ve shouId aIso nolice ils grave dangers.
Ierhas ve shouId raise lhe crilicaI queslion of vhelher Heidegger's
ovn rovinciaI hierarchy of Vc|k and Hcinai occIuded lhe alh of an
"olher" arche, an olher beginning, againsl Heidegger's ovn
ronouncemenls. If ve do raise lhis queslion in a lhoughlfuI vay,
lhen ve are Iefl vilh lhe ossibiIily of reading Heidegger againsl
himseIf, conlrary lo lhe excIusionary oIilics of his ovn hisloricaI
silualion. We mighl lhen begin lo inlerrel Heidegger and his
riviIeging of lhe Hcinai in a vay lhal is unncin|icn, lhal aIIovs for
lhe ossibiIily of aII lhal is slrange and uncanny, even againsl lhe
slrangeness lhal is so esleemed in Heidegger's ovn lhinking.
-271-
Iarl of lhe efforl of lhis book has been lo read Heidegger in his
conlexl. ul vhal vouId lhal mean given lhe robIemalizing
conlexls of reading lhal Heidegger's ovn vork reveaIs` Il can
cerlainIy nol mean lhal ve read him as onIy one among many
German academics invoIved in a generalionaI disule aboul lhe
crisis of hisloricism or lhe crisis of lhe sciences. His vork is far loo
eIusive, far loo enigmalic lo be reduced lo any singIe regisler. And
yel erhas ve need lo lake Heidegger's hisloricaI silualion more
seriousIy lhan ve have lhus far.
If lhe hislory of Heidegger's recelion has been indifferenl and even
hosliIe lo hislory ilseIf, lhen a measure of lhe bIame cIearIy Iies vilh
Heidegger. As he began rearing lhe edilion of his comIele
vorks, he gave mixed signaIs aboul roviding a hisloricaI-crilicaI
aaralus, foolnoles, indexes, inlroduclions, and so on.
12
Many of
his foIIovers have reealed lhe hybris of lhe masler by vriling in a
Ianguage and slyIe lhal is forbidding, arcane, and somelimes
relenlious. y silualing Heidegger vilhin lhe lradilion of
hisloricism, I have soughl lo uncover al Ieasl one of lhe many
conlexls vilhin vhich he can be read. Whal such a reading enabIes,
I beIieve, is a vay of gelling al Heidegger's genuine "loic": lhe
myslerious Iay of resence and absence, sendings and
vilhdravaIs, inauguralions and relrievaIs vhich resisls any
definilive name, vhelher Scin, Scqn, |rcignis, a|cincia, or Wcsung.
This Iay emerges oul of a reading of Weslern hislory as a narralive
of crisis vhose ovn beginning needs lo be relrieved in order lo find
a alhvay oul of lhe crisis. ul lhere is, roerIy seaking, nol "a"
alhvay oul, Heidegger's Iifevork invoIved lhe rearalion of
many alhvays. If he somelimes found himseIf on a Hc|zucg (lhal
is, a faIse alh), as he did in 1933, lhal does nol mean lhal ve shouId
foIIov. Il faIIs lo us lo offer some resislance lo lhe hisloricizing
lendencies in Heidegger's ovn lhinking.
The oslmodern underslanding of hislory does nol have ils rools in
Heidegger's oIilicaI mylhoIogy. And yel lhe very idea of being
pcsinisicirc, of being al lhe "end of hislory," grovs oul of lhe
unsoken narralive of hisloricaI crisis vhich ermeales Heidegger's
vrilings. Heidegger underslood lhe modern eoch as an era of
decIine, disinlegralion, and deslruclion. And yel unIike lhe cuIluraI
essimisls of Weimar vho Iocaled lhe sources for lhe coIIase of
modernily in lhe
____________________
12
Theodore KisieI, "|!iiicn un! U|crscizung. Unicrucgs tcn Taisacncn
zu Gc!ankcn, tcn Wcrkcn zu Wcgcn" in Zur Pni|cscpniscncn Akiua|iiai
Hci!cggcrs tc|. 3, |n Spicgc| !cr Wc|i. Spracnc, U|crscizung,
Auscinan!crscizung, c!. Oiciricn Papcnjuss un! Oiic Pcggc|cr (
|rankjuri. K|csicrnann), 89-107.
-272-
oslvar silualion, Heidegger aIvays lraced his sources back lo lhe
very beginnings of Weslern hislory in Greek melahysics. "Ivery
decIine remains hidden in lhe beginning," he vrole lo a friend in
December 1944.
13
ul lhis vas nol a nev lheme for him, in "Iuroe
and German IhiIosohy," a Ieclure given in Rome in AriI 1936, he
had aIready announced his mission: "Insofar as ve once again raise
lhe jun!ancnia| queslion of Weslern hiIosohy from a ncrc
criginarq beginning, ve sland in lhe service |Oicnsij of a lask lhal ve
can designale as lhe rescue of lhe Wesl."
14

As an anlimodern vho heId forlh lhe ossibiIily of "rescue" from lhe
"darkness of lhe vorId nighl," Heidegger reveaIed his fundamenlaI
rooledness in crisis-lhinking. y deconslrucling lhe narralive of
Iinear lemoraIily, melahysicaI meaning, and onloIogicaI resence
vhich framed lhe hisloricisl underslanding of modernily,
Heidegger oened u lhe ossibiIily of reconceiving lhe hislory of
lhe Wesl back lo anolher beginning, anolher arche vhose hisloricaI
rools couId never be recovered since lhey never exisled.
Heidegger underslood lhe hislory of modernily as a lime of danger,
as an Auj|rucn, or "erulion," of fundamenlaI crisis: lhe Wesl vouId
have lo decide aboul lhe alh of ils ovn hislory in a vay lhal
oened u lhe ossibiIily of ils fulure. ul ve are Iefl vilh a
differenl kind of decision: vhelher lo read Heidegger as arl of a
narralive of excIusion or as arl of a revoIulionary Auj|rucn vhich
does nol seak of hisloricaI forces in nalionaI or raciaI lerms bul
vhich aIIovs lhem lo bear lheir ovn force and lo aIIov for lhe
ossibiIily of an olher beginning, a beginning vhose geneaIogy does
nol Iead from Alhens lo Todlnauberg bul aIIovs for an arche
governed by an anarchy born of loIerance. If ve can read Heidegger
loIeranlIy, lhen erhas ve can find our vay onlo olher lhoughl
alhs lhal Heidegger himseIf did nol have lhe alience lo foIIov.
____________________
13
Georg Iichl, "Oic Macni !cs Ocnkcns" in |rinncrung an Mariin
Hci!cggcr, ed. Gnler Neske (IfuIIingen: Neske, 1977), 204-205.
14
Marlin Heidegger, "|urcpa un! !ic !cuiscnc Pni|cscpnic," in |urcpa
un! !ic Pni|cscpnic, c!. Hans-Hc|nui Gan!cr ( |rankjuri. Kcsicrnann,
1993), 40.
-273-
Bib!ingraphy
AeI, KarI-Ollo. "Scienlislics, Hermeneulics, Crilique of IdeoIogy:
An OulIine of a Theory of Science from an IislemoIogicaI-
AnlhrooIogicaI Ioinl of Viev." In Tnc Hcrncncuiics |ca!cr. Tcxis cj
inc Gcrnan Tra!iiicn jrcn inc |n|ignicnncni ic inc Prcscni, 320-345.
Nev York: Conlinuum, 1984.
ambach, CharIes. "IhenomenoIogicaI Research as Deslruklion: The
IarIy Heidegger's Reading of DiIlhey." Pni|cscpnq Tc!aq 37 ( 1993):
115-132.
arash, }effrey. Hci!cggcr an! inc Prc||cn cj Hisicrica| Mcaning.
Dordrechl: Marlinus Ni|hoff, 1988.
arbiero, DanieI. "A Weakness for Heidegger: The German Rool of II
Iensiero DeboIe." Ncu Gcrnan Criiiquc 55 ( 1992): 159-172.
auer, Gerhard. Gcscnicni|icnkcii. erIin: WaIler de Gruyler, 1963.
aumgarlner, Hans-MichaeI. "Wissenschafl." In Han!|ucn
pni|cscpniscncr Grun!|cgrijjc, voI. 6, ed. Hermann Krings and H.-M.
aumgarlner, 17401764. Munich: KseI, 1974.
en|amin, WaIler. "Theses on lhe IhiIosohy of Hislory." In
|||uninaiicns, lrans. Harry Zohn, 253-264. Nev York: Schocken, 1969.
erger, }ohannes. "Gegenslandskonslilulion und geschichlIiche
WeIl." Diss., Universily of Munich, 1967.
ernslein, Richard. Bcqcn! O|jcciitisn an! |c|aiitisn. IhiIadeIhia:
Universily of IennsyIvania Iress, 1983.
esson, WaIdemar. "Hislorismus." In Oas |iscncr Icxikcn. Gcscnicnic,
102-116. Irankfurl: Iischer, 1961.
iemeI, WaIler, ed. "Der riefvechseI DiIlhey und HusserI." Man
an! Wcr|! 1 ( 1968): 428-446.
-275-
-----. "The DiIlhey-HusserI Corresondence." In HusserI: Shorler
Works, ed. Pcicr McCcrnick an! |rc!crick |||isicn, 203-209, Soulh
end: Universily of Nolre Dame Iress, 1981.
Ianke, Horsl WaIler, and }rn Rsen, eds. Vcn !cr Aujk|arung zun
Hisicrisnus. Pa!cr|crn. Scncningn, 1984.
Bc!anncr, Tncc!cr. Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn. |rci|urg.
A||cr, 1987.
Bc!ckcr, Hans-|ricn, Gccrg |ggcrs, jcnainan Knu!scn, an! Pcicr |ci||,
c!s., Aujk|arung un! Gcscnicnic. Gciiingcn. Van!cnnccck c |uprccni,
1986.
Bcc!cr, Hcri|cri. Oi|incq un! Hci!cggcr. Zur Gcscnicni|icnkcii !cs
Mcnscncn. |n Oi|incq un! !cr Wan!c| !cs Pni|cscpnic|cgrijjs, c!. |. W.
Orin , 161-177. |rci|urg. A||cr, 1984.
Brusn, Sicpncn G. Tnc Hisicrq cj Mc!crn Scicncc. A Gui!c ic inc Scccn!
Scicniijic |ctc|uiicn. Ancs. |cua Siaic Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1988.
Bu|ncr, |u!igcr. Oas |akiun !cr Wisscnscnaji un!
Para!igncnuccnsc|. Siu!ia Ici|niiiana, Scn!crncji 6 ( 1974). 78-94.
Bu|ncj, ||sc. Wi|ncn Oi|incq. A Hcrncncuiic Apprcacn ic inc Siu!q cj
Hisicrq an! Cu|iurc. Tnc Haguc. Mariinus Nijncjj, 1980.
Burcknar!i, jacc|. |crcc an! |rcc!cn. Trans. jancs Nicnc|s. Ncu Ycrk.
Paninccn, 1943.
Burgcr, Tncnas. Max Wc|crs Tnccrq cj Ccnccpi |crnaiicn. Ournan,
N.C.. Oukc Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1976.
Capuic, jcnn. Ocnqinc|cgizing Hci!cggcr. B|ccningicn. |n!iana
Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1993.
-----. |a!ica| Hcrncncuiics. B|ccningicn. |n!iana Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1987.
Casicria!is, Ccrnc|ius. Crcssrca!s in inc Ia|qrinin. Can|ri!gc. M|T
Prcss, 1984.
Occ!s ||iza|cin |rnarin. Scquc| ic Hisicrq. Pcsinc!crnisn an! inc Crisis
cj |cprcscniaiicna| Tinc. Princcicn, N.j.. Princcicn Unitcrsiiq Prcss,
1992.
Ocrri!a, jacqucs. Oj Spirii. Trans. Gccjjrcq Bcnningicn an! |acnc|
Bcu||q. Cnicagc. Unitcrsiiq cj Cnicagc Prcss, 1989.
-----. Tnc Oincr Hca!ing. Trans. Micnac| Naas an! Pasca|c-Ann Brau|i.
B|ccningicn. |n!iana Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1992.
-----. Pcsiiicns. Trans. A|an Bass. Cnicagc. Unitcrsiiq cj Cnicagc Prcss,
1971.
Oi|incq, Wi|nc|n. Bricjuccnsc| zuiscncn Wi|nc|n Oi|incq un! !cn Grajcn
Pau| Ycrck tcn Waricn|urg, 1877-1897, c!. Sigri! tcn !cr Scnu|cn|urg.
Ha||c. Nicncqcr, 1923.
-----. Tnc Orcan. |n Tnc Pni|cscpnq cj Hisicrq in Our Tinc, c!. Hans
Maqcrncjj , 40. Gar!cn Ciiq, N.Y.. Ocu||c!aq, 1959.
-----. Tnc |sscncc cj Pni|cscpnq. Trans. Sicpncn A. |ncrq an! Wi||ian
|ncrq. Cnapc| Hi||. Unitcrsiiq cj Ncrin Carc|ina Prcss, 1961.
-----. Gcsannc|ic Scnrijicn. 20 tc|s. Gciiingcn. Van!cnnccck c |uprccni,
1958-1990.
-276-
----. Grun!ri !cr Icgik un! !cs Sqsicns !cr pni|cscpniscncn
Wisscnscnajicn. Bcr|in. Miii|cr, 1865.
-----. |nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs. |!. |u!c|j Makkrcc| an!
|riinjcj |c!i . Princcicn, N.j.. Princcicn Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1989.
-----. Paiicrn an! Mcaning in Hisicrq. Tncugnis cn Hisicrq an! Scciciq.
|!. H. P. |icknan . Ncu Ycrk. Harpcr an! |cu, 1962.
-----. Wi|nc|n Oi|incq. Sc|ccic! Wriiings. |!. H. P. |icknan. Can|ri!gc.
Can|ri!gc Unitcrsiiq Prcss, 1976.
-----. Wi|nc|n Oi|incq. Tcxic zur Kriiik !cr nisicriscncn Vcrnunji. |!.
Hans-U|ricn Icssing . Gciiingcn. Van!cnnccck c |uprccni, 1983.
Orcqscn, jcnan Gusiat. Hisicrik. Oarnsia!i. Wisscnscnaji|icnc
Bucngcsc||scnaji, 1977.
|ngc|nar!i, Oiciricn tcn. Hisicriscncs Bcuuiscin in !cr
Naiuruisscnscnaji. Vcn !cr Aujk|arung |is zun Pcsiiitisnus. |rci|urg.
A||cr, 1979.
|rnarin, Micnac|. Hisicrica| Un!crsian!ing in inc Tncugni cj Wi|nc|n
Oi|incq. Hisicrq an! Tnccrq 20, nc. 3 ( 1981). 323-334.
-----. O|jcciitiiq an! |c|aiitiiq in Oi|incqs Tnccrq cj Un!crsian!ing.
|n Oi|incq an! Pncncncnc|cgq, c!. |u!c|j Makkrcc| an! jcnn Scan|cn, 73-
94. Wasningicn, O.C.. Unitcrsiiq Prcss cj Ancrica, 1987.
-----. Wi||ian Oi|incq. Tnc Criiiquc cj Hisicrica| |cascn. Cnicagc.
Unitcrsiiq cj Cnicagc Prcss, 1978.
|crnan, Pau|. Wcinar Cu|iurc, Causa|iiq, an! Quaniun Tnccrq.
Hisicrica| Siu!ics in inc Pnqsica| Scicnccs 3 ( 1971). 1-116.
|ukuqana, |rancis. Tnc |n! cj Hisicrq an! inc Iasi Man. Ncu Ycrk. |rcc
Prcss, 1992.
Ga!ancr, Hans-Gccrg. Oas |akiun !cr Wisscnscnaji. |n Oas |r|c
|urcpas, 87-105. |rankjuri. Sunrkanp, 1989.
-----. Oi|incq nacn 150 janrcn. Zuiscncn |cnaniik un! Pcsiiitisnus. |n
Oi|incq un! !ic Pni|cscpnic !cr Gcgcnuari, c!. |. W. Orin, 157-182.
|rci|urg. A||cr, 1985.
-----. Gcscnicni|icnkcii. |n |c|igicn in Gcscnicnic un! Gcsc||scnaji,
2.14961498. Tu|ingcn. Mcnr, 1959.
-----. Hisicrisnus. |n |c|igicn in Gcscnicnic un! Gcsc||scnaji, 3.369-
370. Tu|ingcn. Mcnr, 1959.
-----. Ncc-Kaniianisn. |n Pni|cscpniscncs Icsc|ucn, 3.215-218.
|rankjuri. |iscncr, 1988.
-----. K|cinc Scnrijicn. 4 tc|s. Tu|ingcn. Mcnr, 1967-1970.
-----. |cascn in inc Agc cj Scicncc. Trans. |rc!crick G. Iaurcncc.
Can|ri!gc. M|T Prcss, 1981.
-----. Sc||si!arsic||ung. Gcsannc|ic Wcrkc, 2. 479-508. Tu|ingcn.
Mcnr, 1986.
-----. Truin an! Mcinc!. Trans|aiicn rctisc! |q jcc| Wcinsncincr an!
Ocna|! G. Marsna|| . Ncu Ycrk. Crcssrca!, 1989.
-----. Wanrncii un! Mcinc!c. Tu|ingcn. Mcnr, 1960.
-277-
Indcx
A|ja||, 201
absoIule lime, 14, 168
Amere, Andre, 70
an/olher beginning (an!crcr Anjang). (Scc Heidegger, Marlin:
an/olher beginning)
anlinomy of hisloricaI reason, 178, 179, 184
a pricri, 61, 64, 73, 91, 92, 97, 106, 114, 119, 134, 145 -147, 170, 180,
183, 198, 227, 239
Anucscnncii, 234, 236
arcnc, 258, 262, 265, 270, 271, 273
ArislolIe, 31, 70, 136, 143, 165, 197, 200, 205, 207, 208, 216, 223,
231, 236, 241, 258, 265
Augcn||ick, 236, 237
Augusline, 196, 199, 211, 241
Auschvilz, 48, 264, 265, 270
Aus-cinan!cr-scizung ("selling asunder"), 250
acon, Sir Irancis, 24, 67, 104, 143
arlh, KarI, 14, 37, 41, 188 -192, 195, 199 -202
echer, Irich, 37, 70, 71, 104
Bcgrijjs|i|!ung, 30, 84, 85, 94, 95, 198
being-in-lhe-vorId, 21, 86
being-meaning, 231
being-vilh, 31, 236
en|amin, WaIler, 8, 9, 16
enlham, }eremy, 70
ergson, Henri, 87
ernslein, Richard }., 32, 33, 45
Bcqcn! O|jcciitisn an! |c|aiitisn, 32, 45
Bcurici|ungcn, 77
Bczugssinn, 231
Bi|!ung, 26, 118, 188, 189
Bi|!ungs|urgcriun, 27, 38
Bi|!ungsgcscnicnic, 2
bioIogism, 84, 87
|ics inccrciikcs, 252
Ianke, Horsl WaIler, 12, 43
Ioch, Irnsl, 14, 37
oeckh, Augusl, 68, 69, 139, 164
ohr, NieIs, 51
o, Iranz, 139
raig, CarI, 199
renlano, Iranz, 67, 128
resIau Drafl, 129, 135, 143, 152, 155
rilish schooI, 91
rush, Slehen, 49, 50
chner, Ludvig, 22
uckIe, Henry Thomas, 74, 99, 100
urckhardl, }acob, 4, 21, 48, 49
-289-
Caulo, }ohn, 51, 211, 237
care (Scrgc), 94, 210, 220, 236, 244, 246, 268
Carlesian anxiely, 30, 32, 33
Carlesian melhod, 31, 34, 67, 182
Cassirer, Irnsl, 21, 23, 29, 57, 59, 62
Casloriadis, CorneIius, 45, 46
Crcssrca!s in inc Ia|qrinin, 45
calegoriaI inluilion, 227
causaIily, 10, 14, 41, 47, 108 -110, 115, 117, 118, 120, 121, 165
cerlilude, 10, 12, 16, 28, 30, 31, 34, 44, 46, 50, 51, 58, 59, 61, 91, 109,
142, 143, 160, 165, 170, 181 -184, 216, 217, 229, 246, 252
ChIadenius, }ohann M., 128
cnrcncs, 212, 214
ccgiic, 3, 14, 31, 143, 154, 159, 165, 181, 182
Cohen, Hermann, 57, 61, 63, 65, 69, 121, 143, 144
Comle, Augusle, 74, 99, 134, 137, 138
consciousness, 1 -3, 5 -7, 10, 12 -14, 16, 18, 27, 30, 31, 33, 34, 36 -38,
42 -49, 52, 53, 55, 57, 61, 72, 76, 77, 80, 91 93, 96, 102, 108, 121, 124,
132, 138, 140 -146, 150, 152 -159, 165 -173, 175 -178, 180, 182, 183,
192, 195, 198 -200, 203, 206, 208, 215, 216, 219, 221, 222, 228 -232,
237, 246, 247, 250, 254 -257
conlenl-meaning (Gcna|issinn), 231
Coernicus, NichoIas, 91, 143
cosmoIogy, 59, 70
crisis (scc a|sc DiIlhey, WiIheIm: crisis, hisloricism: crisis of,
Heidegger, Marlin: crisis, krisis, Rickerl, Heinrich: crisis,
WindeIband, WiIheIm: crisis), 1, 3 -11, 14 -42, 45 -59, 64, 68, 76 -
79, 83 -86, 90, 109, 113, 115 -117, 122 -125, 131, 135, 142, 148, 150,
151, 160, 168, 169, 171, 177 -179, 184, 185, 188 -195, 200 205, 210,
214 -218, 222 -229, 239, 242, 243, 245, 249 -267, 270, 272, 273
crisis-consciousness, 3, 5, 14, 18, 27, 33, 36, 37, 46 -49, 52, 53, 55,
57, 192, 254
crisis-menlaIily, 7, 22, 41, 42, 256
crisis-rheloric, 14, 16, 51
crisis lheoIogy, 191, 202, 216
crisis-lhinking, 10, 11, 14, 31, 37, 59, 125, 185, 267, 270, 273
Iegilimalion crisis, 21, 37
crilicaI hermeneulics, 43
crilicaI melhod, 60, 64, 65, 91
Darvinism, 27
Oascin, 31, 35, 36, 204, 209, 210, 212, 217, 218, 221, 223, 229 -232,
238, 240 -249, 251, 252, 255, 268, 269
dealh of God, 6, 52, 264
deconslruclion, 10, 11
Deissmann, AdoIf, 200
Derrida, }acques, 9, 10, 52, 265
Descarles, Rene, 10, 24, 30 -32, 34, 43 45, 51, 67, 68, 70, 104, 128,
142 -144, 153, 180 -183, 217, 223
desliny, 192, 202, 262, 266, 269
!csirucrc, 197
Ocsirukiicn. (Scc Heidegger, Marlin: Ocsirukiicn)
!csirukiitc-hermeneulic, 200
diaIeclicaI melhod-- HegeI, 67
DiIlhey, WiIheIm, 3 -5, 11, 13, 14, 17 -19, 25, 27, 28, 30, 33, 40, 43,
44, 48, 54, 55, 58, 67, 78, 102 -104, 108, 119, 120, 122, 124, 125, 127 -
181, 183 185, 187, 200, 204, 222, 223, 232, 233, 238 -242, 245, 247,
249, 255
erIin IIan, 129, 135
crisis, 122 -125, 131, 135, 142, 148, 150, 151, 160, 168, 169, 171,
177 179, 184, 185
|rk|arcn, 128, 150, 154, 218, 249
|r|c|nis, 132, 149, 151, 152, 154 -156, 164, 207, 241
|r|c|nisjcrscnung, 228
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn (scc a|sc Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn), 119, 123,
128, 129, 132 -135, 139, 148 -150, 154, 156, 160, 162, 167, 168,
172, 176
hermeneulicaI manifeslo, 191
hisloricaI reason, 5, 119, 127, 129 131, 133, 137, 140, 142, 148,
150, 155, 156, 162, 164, 169, 170, 172, 175 -180, 184, 238
hisloricily, 13 -18, 43, 60, 77 -79, 106, 120 -123, 125, 137, 140,
141, 147, 150, 151, 159, 160, 165 -170, 173, 176, 178 -181, 183,
184, 240 -242, 244 -249, 255
|nncucr!cn, 170, 241
|nirc!uciicn ic inc Hunan Scicnccs, 21, 102, 128, 130, 132 -136,
138, 140, 141, 146, 147, 153, 154, 183, 241
Iife-exerience, 5, 113, 158, 159, 162, 212, 213, 238, 246
Iife-nexus, 152, 154, 158, 164, 165, 168
Iife-hiIosohy, 84, 89, 90, 156
underslanding (Vcrsicncn), 128, 129, 131 -133, 139, 142, 143,
146, 148, 150 -152, 158, 160 -168, 174, 176, 179, 180, 182 -184
-290-
DiIlhey, WiIheIm (ccni.)
Wc|ianscnauung, 30, 39 -41, 130, 135, 173, 176, 178, 184, 200,
204, 238
Droysen }ohann G., 12, 16, 18, 43, 58, 68, 69, 83, 136, 189, 223, 246,
259
Dhring, Iugen, 67
Ickharl, Meisler, 200, 270
Ico, Umberlo, 21
Iinslein, AIberl, 41, 50
cksiasis, 237
emiricism, 109, 137 -139, 142, 150
enaclmenl-meaning (Vc||zugssinn), 231
end of hislory, 2, 3, 8, 9, 272
end of melahysics, 137, 258
end of hiIosohy, 3, 54, 184, 242
IngeIhardl, Dielrich von, 43
IngeIs, Iriedrich, 67
InIighlenmenl, 10, 12, 42, 51, 59, 175, 181, 267
cni-!cuici ("de-signified"), 198, 227
cni-gcscnicni|icni ("dehisloricized"), 198
|ni-|c|nis ("de-Iiving"), 227
environing vorId, 208, 227
cpisicnc, 234
eislemoIogicaI cerlilude, 16, 34, 170, 181
Irdmann, }ohann, 62
|rcignis, 75, 207, 244, 255, 258, 259, 264, 269 -272
|rjanrungsuisscnscnajicn, 44
|r|c|nis. (Scc DiIlhey, WiIheIm: |r|c|nis)
Irmarlh, MichaeI, 12, 129, 131, 134, 137, 148, 154 -156, 162, 169,
174, 176, 179
Irnesli, }ohann, 163
Irnsl, IauI, 4, 23, 37, 38, 43, 57, 59, 62, 85, 88, 118, 128, 132, 155,
171, 188
cs cr-cignci ("evenling"), 207, 228
cs uc|ici ("il vorIds"), 207, 256
eschaloIogy, 10, 214, 262, 266, 270
cscnaicn, 258, 270
Iucken, RudoIf, 57
evenling (cs cr-cignci), 228
exislenliaI anaIylic of Dasein, 204, 229, 231
exislenliaIism, 87, 176, 199
|acnuisscnscnaji, 11, 15
faclicaI Iife, 196, 199, 203, 204, 207 -209, 211, 212, 217, 239 -241,
261
faclicily, 31, 46, 199, 200, 204 -206, 210 212, 216, 220, 224, 232, 240,
241, 249, 256
|akiun !cr |rkcnninis, 121
|akiun !cr Wisscnscnaji, 34, 61, 213
faIIenness, 31, 220, 249
faIIing, 201, 237
fale (Gcscnick), 43, 188, 247, 266
Iechner, Guslav, 67, 77
Iichle, }ohann G., 24, 89, 133
Iischer, Kuno, 4, 24, 38, 62, 140, 143
fore-slruclure, 221, 222
formaI indicalion (jcrna|c Anzcigc), 199, 200
formaIism, 41, 117 -119, 123, 201
Iorman, IauI, 14, 41, 47
|crscnung ("research"), 24, 129, 156, 211, 248, 251
Irischeisen-KhIer, Max, 104
|rcnicr|c|nis, 256
Gadamer, Hans-Georg, 1, 4, 17, 23, 29, 34, 38, 47, 121, 142, 143,
151, 154, 167, 176 -178, 190, 236, 260
GaIen, 6
GaIiIeo GaIiIei, 49, 50, 67, 91, 104, 143
Garve, Chrislian von, 177
Gcgcnsian!c, 114, 230
Gcgcnsian!|icnkcii, 120
Gcgcnuari, 23, 38, 39, 60, 70, 101, 128, 136, 155, 167, 171, 172, 176,
185, 201, 236
Gcgcnuariigcn ("making resenl"), 129, 245
Gcna|issinn ("conlenl meaning"), 231
Gcisi, 13, 21, 30, 37, 71, 80, 81, 99, 102, 103, 114, 119, 128, 129, 143,
149, 157, 161, 162, 164
Gcisicsgcscnicnic, 176, 211
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn, 7, 25, 42, 43, 69 73, 78, 79, 90, 93, 94, 99, 102,
104, 118, 119, 123, 128, 129, 132 -135, 139, 148 -150, 154, 156, 160,
162, 167, 168, 172, 176, 200, 204
George, Slefan, 37, 40
Gcscncncn ("haening"), 125, 244, 251
Gcscnicnic, 4, 5, 12, 15 -18, 26, 35, 41 -43, 59, 60, 62, 63, 70, 109, 112,
123, 124, 130, 136, 143, 151, 154, 167, 169, 171, 185, 200, 204, 215,
220, 242, 244, 257 -259, 266, 267
!cs Scqns, 259
Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic, 2, 59, 60, 75, 81, 84 -86, 99, 102, 103, 115, 141,
171, 172
Gcscnicnisincc|cgic, 13, 59
Gcscnicnisuisscnscnaji, 12, 24, 42, 43, 102, 172
Gcscnick, 257, 266, 270, 271
Gcscizcsuisscnscnajicn, 44
Gcucscnncii, 244
Gogarlen, Iriedrich, 187, 191, 192, 195, 202
Gllingen schooI, 42
-291-
Grimm, }akob, 139, 197
Groelhuysen, ernhard, 131
Grun!uisscnscnaji, 78, 87, 168
Habermas, }rgen, 22, 27
HaeckeI, Irnsl, 87
haening (Gcscncncn), 15, 125, 213, 220, 240, 242, 244, 247, 251,
257, 264
Hamack, AdoIf von, 189, 190
Haym, RudoIf, 17, 24, 166, 167
HegeI, G. W. I., 6, 17, 22, 23, 42, 43, 53, 67, 75, 85, 103, 128, 131,
133, 134, 136 -138, 141, 162, 166, 167, 172, 177, 269
|nzqk|cpac!ic !cr Wisscnscnajicn, 71
Heidegger, Marlin, 1 -3, 5, 9 -11, 13 -19, 23 -26, 30, 31, 33 -37, 41,
44, 46, 51 55, 58, 83, 109, 122 -125, 142, 154, 167, 176, 177, 181 -185,
187, 192 273
an/olher beginning (an!crcr Anjang), 2, 55, 253, 255, 257, 269,
271, 273
Bcing an! Tinc, 15, 21, 30, 31, 34, 122, 123, 143, 167, 197, 202,
204, 205, 209, 212, 215, 217, 219, 223, 228 230, 232, 235, 236, 239
-241, 243 248, 250, 251, 253, 255, 258, 260, 264, 268, 270
Bciiragc, 24, 258, 259
"The Concel of Time," 15, 34, 35, 41, 123, 215, 217, 218, 221,
224, 226, 227, 229, 231, 233, 239, 243, 244, 248
crisis, 1, 184, 185, 188 -195, 200 -205, 210, 214 -218, 222, 223,
225, 226, 228, 229, 239, 242, 243, 245, 249 261, 263 -267, 270,
272, 273
Ocsirukiicn, 31, 33, 46, 54, 55, 109, 124, 187, 197 -199, 201, 210 -
212, 223, 224, 232, 234, 245, 248, 256, 266, 270
eschaloIogy of being, 262, 266
evenl of being (scc a|sc |rcignis), 255, 258, 259
everydayness (A||iag|icnkcii), 201
firsl beginning, 257, 262, 265, 270
Gcscnicni|icnkcii ("hisloricily"), 15, 17, 166, 167, 173, 220, 244
Hcrak|ii, 263
hermeneulic henomenoIogy, 31
hisloricily, 203, 204, 212, 219 -221, 223, 232, 233, 238, 240 -242,
244 249, 252, 253, 255, 260, 265, 268
Hisicrq cj inc Ccnccpi cj Tinc, 34, 35, 41, 123, 215, 217, 218, 227,
229, 231, 233, 239, 243, 244, 248
"The Idea of IhiIosohy and lhe IrobIem of lhe WorId-viev,"
26
inlenlionaIily, 196, 204, 208, 212, 221, 222, 227, 229, 231, 232
|nirc!uciicn ic Mciapnqsics, 262, 264, 269, 270
KasseI Ieclures, 200, 240, 255
Kcnrc, 202, 203, 255, 257, 259, 260
nev beginning, 31, 190, 192, 200, 203, 215, 238, 241, 254, 258,
261, 265
Nicizscnc, 1, 2, 15, 143, 175, 181, 182, 253 -255
Pn!ncncnc|cgiscnc |nicrprciaiicncn zu Arisicic|cs, 196, 204
"IhenomenoIogy and TranscendenlaI VaIue-IhiIosohy," 58,
224
"The SeIf-Asserlion of lhe German Universily," 261, 268 -270
Scinsgcscnicnic, 260
lemoraI "ccsiascs," 220
underslanding (Vcrsicncn), 190, 195 197, 199, 201, 202, 207,
212, 216 220, 222, 223, 230 -233, 236 -239, 244 -246, 248 -251,
254, 255, 257 259, 261, 266 -273
Wc|ianscnauung, 200, 204, 205, 211, 217, 238, 243, 256, 260
Wic!crnc|ung ("relrievaI"), 211
Zur Bcsiinnung !cr Pni|cscpnic, 26, 58, 194
HeideIberg, 23, 79, 84, 87, 122, 183, 197, 202, 211
Hcinucn, 260
Heisenberg, Werner, 51
HeImhoIz, Hermann, 77
Herder, }ohann G., 193, 222, 269
hermeneulic lurn, 25, 131, 132
hermeneulics, 15, 16, 21, 28, 30, 43, 47, 50, 51, 55, 67, 108, 128 -133,
150, 154, 155, 160, 163, 164, 167, 168, 170, 175 -177, 180, 197, 199,
201, 203, 204, 210 -212, 216, 221, 237, 239 -241, 252
Hiocrales, 6
nisicria rcrun gcsiarun, 16
hisloricaI being, 86, 109, 118, 124, 140, 146, 150, 151, 165, 173, 184,
219, 240, 248, 249.
hisloricaI consciousness, 1, 2, 13, 14, 42, 43, 53, 121, 140, 141, 154,
155, 165, 169, 175 -178, 180, 183, 195, 199, 200, 222, 250
hisloricaI deveIomenl, 13, 62, 68, 85, 104, 112, 119, 120, 133, 162,
173, 189, 204
hisloricaI Iogic, 80, 81, 90, 103, 109, 123
hisloricaI ob|eclivily, 9, 58, 85, 104, 107 -109
-292-
hisloricaI reason. (Scc DiIlhey, WiIheIm: hisloricaI reason)
HisloricaI SchooI, 68, 77, 104, 136, 137, 139 -143, 148, 178, 180
hisloricaI science, 5, 12, 42, 44, 77, 83, 97, 100, 101, 104, 119, 122,
150, 151, 164, 168, 173, 217, 219, 220, 223, 226, 227, 233, 242, 247,
251
hisloricily (scc a|sc DiIlhey, WiIheIm: hisloricily, Heidegger,
Marlin: hisloricily), 13 -18, 21, 31, 33 -35, 43, 45, 46, 51, 60, 77 -79,
106, 109, 120 123, 125, 137, 140, 141, 147, 150, 151, 159, 160, 165 -
170, 173, 176, 178 -181, 183, 184, 203, 204, 212, 219 -221, 223, 232,
233, 238, 240 242, 244 -249, 252, 253, 255, 260, 265, 268
of Iife, 17, 168, 203, 233, 238
of lhe ob|ecl, 17, 168, 180
of lhe sub|ecl, 17, 180
hisloricizalion, 24, 25, 42, 43, 45, 213
Hisicric, 15, 16, 42, 167, 220, 242, 244, 245, 251, 258, 259
Hisicrik, 12, 16, 125, 178
hislory of being, 202, 203, 242, 258 -260, 269 -271
hislory of onloIogy, 5, 18, 31, 217, 248, 255, 258
HIderIin, Iriedrich, 128, 257, 258, 260, 265, 269, 270
homogeneous conlinuum, 98
horizon, 5, 34, 121, 122, 124, 161, 232, 236, 237, 251, 252, 254, 255,
269
human sciences (scc a|sc DiIlhey, WiIheIm: Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn,
Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn), 5, 13, 17, 21, 24, 25, 27, 33, 41 -44, 49, 60, 61,
69, 70, 74, 77, 79, 102, 103, 123, 128 -130, 132 141, 146, 147, 151 -
156, 159 -164, 166, 169, 172, 173, 178, 180, 181, 183, 213, 217, 218,
223, 226, 227, 232, 235, 239 -241, 245, 248, 251, 266
Hunaniiai, 111
HumboIdl, WiIheIm von, 12, 43, 58, 60, 69, 83, 171, 204, 222
HusserI, Idmund, 25, 28, 39, 40, 44, 156, 173, 176, 194, 196, 198,
199, 204, 213, 221 -223, 231, 232
Crisis nI thc Eurnpcan 5cicnccs, 6, 28, 39
"IhiIosohy as Rigorous Science," 40
idiograhic, 75 -77, 81, 94, 99, 100, 217, 224, 225
Iggers, Georg, 4, 12, 18, 43, 47, 124, 172, 176
individuaIily, 86, 98, 100, 102 -105, 120, 147, 174, 225, 226
indubilabiIily, 31, 32, 217
inluilionism, 41
"il vorIds" (cs uc|ici), 207, 256
}aeger, Werner, 12, 18, 59
KahIer, Irich, 37
kaircs, 212, 214, 219, 232, 236
Kanpj, 200, 209, 210, 260
Kanl, ImmanueI, 24, 28 -32, 34, 43, 44, 59 -65, 67 -69, 72, 73, 76, 81,
84, 89 93, 98, 99, 103, 130, 133, 142 -148, 150, 158, 165, 177, 178, 181
-183, 219, 231, 236, 241
Criiiquc cj ju!gcncni, 63
Criiiquc cj Praciica| |cascn, 32, 44, 63, 64, 67, 72, 73, 81, 90, 91,
94, 145, 177
Criiiquc cj Purc |cascn, 32, 44, 63 -64, 67, 72, 73, 81, 90, 91, 94,
145, 177
Prc|cgcncna ic anq |uiurc Mciapnqsics, 92
Kainc!crpni|cscpnic, 158, 198, 205, 210
KeIer, }ohannes, 49, 67, 104, 143
Kierkegaard, Soren, 87, 89, 190, 199 202, 211, 229, 237, 238, 258
Kivi Ianguage, 60
KIages, Ludvig, 40
KoseIIeck, Reinharl, 42
Krebs, IngeIberl, 193, 194, 203
krisis (scc a|sc crisis), 4, 37 -39, 41, 48, 49, 85, 190, 191, 195, 200,
202, 214, 250, 257, 265
Kuhn, Thomas, 47, 50, 51
Ku|iur, 38, 84, 102, 188
Ku|iurpcssinisnus, 256, 262
Lamrechl, KarI, 18
Landgrebe, Ludvig, 121, 123
Iartanz ("masking"), 201
Lask, ImiI, 200
Ic|cnspni|cscpnic, 26, 28, 39, 40, 54, 88, 90, 109, 145, 149, 171, 176,
222
Lessing, Theodor, 7, 83
Lieberl, Arlhur, 38, 39, 48
Lill, Theodor, 26, 37
Locke, }ohn, 71, 91, 138, 146
|cgcs, 40, 87, 129, 136, 173, 188, 201, 214, 226, 235, 246, 259, 262,
263
Lolze, Hermann, 62, 233
Lvilh, KarI, 199, 200, 205, 214, 256
-293-
Lulher, Marlin, 161, 190, 191, 193, 195 197, 199, 200, 204, 209 -211,
223, 241
Lyolard, }ean-Iranois, 9, 10
Marx, KarI, 67
maleriaIism, 27, 76
Maicria|isnussircii, 22
MegiII, AIan, 14, 52
Meinecke, Iriedrich, 4, 12, 14, 37, 86, 104, 109 -113, 116, 118 -122,
140, 172, 185, 223, 243, 266
MerIeau-Ionly, Maurice, 46
melahysicaI failh, 13
melahysics
eulhanasia of, 137
Greek, 15, 203, 241, 273
of resence, 232, 236, 242, 243, 250
of lime, 6, 221, 237
Mcinc!cnsircii, 57, 68
melhodoIogicaI ob|eclivily, 13, 183
MichaeIis, }ohann, 163
middIe-voice, 228
MiII, }ohn Sluarl, 70, 71, 74, 99, 134, 137 -139, 142
"On lhe Logic of lhe MoraI Sciences," 74
modernily, 1 -3, 5, 8 -11, 26, 30, 31, 33, 37, 46, 49, 51 -55, 125, 184,
185, 216, 217, 260, 261, 265 -267, 270, 272, 273
MoIescholl, }acob, 22
Mommsen, Theodor, 42, 69, 139
moraI sciences, 70, 74, 128, 137 -139
MusiI, Roberl, 175
NalionaI SociaIism, 215, 216, 254, 261, 265, 270
Nalor, IauI, 40, 57, 69, 143
Naiur, 21, 30, 43, 71, 73, 79 -81, 90, 93, 94, 99, 102 -104, 114, 136,
143, 148
naluraIism, 27, 61, 88, 96, 155
Naiurpni|cscpnic, 71
Neo-ArisloleIianism, 25, 219
Neo-Iichleanism, 25, 219
Neo-HegeIianism, 25
Neo-Kanlianism, 5, 11 -18, 25, 28, 29, 33 -36, 57 -127, 142 -151,
169, 170, 180, 195, 198, 206, 210, 217 -238, 266
Neo-Kanlian lheory of vaIues, 25, 84
Neo-Kanlian lradilion of hisloricaI Iogic, 109
Neo-Kanlians
aden, 60
Marburg, 59, 61
Neo-Thomism, 25, 219
Nevlon, Sir Isaac, 49, 67, 104
Niebuhr, H. Richard, 12, 42, 69, 180, 181
Nielzsche, Iriedrich, 1, 2, 7, 10, 15, 40, 52, 53, 57, 84, 87, 89, 90,
112, 117, 121, 122, 129, 143, 165, 175, 181, 190, 242, 249, 252 -260,
269, 270
Uniinc|q Mc!iiaiicns, 7, 112, 165, 252, 254, 256, 257
nihiIism, 1, 8, 11, 14, 32, 48, 52, 53, 85, 113, 115, 202, 215, 242, 253,
259 261, 264
nomolhelic, 75 -77, 81, 94, 99, 100, 217, 224, 225
ob|eclive mind, 162 -164
ob|eclivism, 16, 32, 33, 45, 46, 221, 243, 260
ob|eclivily, 5, 9, 11, 13 -16, 28, 34, 35, 43, 44, 50, 52, 53, 58, 59, 85,
104 109, 111, 115, 117, 124, 160, 173 175, 178 -181, 183, 184, 200,
211, 221, 223, 252
c|jckigcscnicni|icn, 213
c|jckiitcr Gcisi, 162
obIivion of being (Scinstcrgcsscnncii), 197, 242
Ochsner, Heinrich, 194
Ollo, RudoIf, 5, 17, 28, 42, 43, 128, 154, 167, 171, 175, 177, 194, 199,
201, 211, 272
Iannvilz, RudoIf, 38
parcusia, 212, 225, 235 -238
arl: vhoIe reIalionshi, 158, 164, 167, 168
IascaI, Iaise, 199, 200
IauI, Sainl, 209 -214, 224, 225, 236 -238
valchfuIness (uacnsan Scin), 203
IauIsen, Iriedrich, 26
Ielri, IIfriede, 193
IelzoId, }oseh, 41
henomenoIogy, 30, 31, 35, 40, 46, 58, 83, 101, 132, 155, 174, 176,
194, 196 -199, 210, 212, 213, 219, 222 224, 227, 229, 236, 237, 239,
248, 255
hiIosohicaI melhod, 30, 90
hiIosohicaI research, 211, 213
hiIosohy of nalure, 22, 70, 181
hiIosohy of hiIosohy, 174
hiIosohy of siril (Pni|cscpnic !cs Gcisics), 22, 71, 128, 136
IIanck, Max, 50
IIalo, 24, 31, 70, 216, 223, 233, 234, 236
neumaloIogy, 70
pc|is, 262 -264
-294-
osilivism, 22, 27, 28, 30, 43, 61, 65, 68, 74, 130, 136, 137, 142, 155,
176, 227, 230, 246
osilivisl-naluraIisl schooI of emiricism, 109
osilivisl research, 23
osl-HegeIian crisis, 23, 76
osl-HegeIian hiIosohy, 21, 25, 36, 45, 66, 68, 136
oslmodernism, 2, 5, 6, 8 -11, 14, 21, 32, 53, 124, 269, 272
oslmodern Iilerary lheory, 3, 8, 11, 271
oslslrucluraIism, 11
raclicaI vaIualion, 106, 107
praccssc, 238
pracscns, 238
ragmalism, 87
ro-hysicaI, lhe, 114, 115, 170, 222
ro-hysicaI reaIm, 115
ro-hysicaI sub|ecl, 222
ro-hysicaI vorId, 114
Prc||cngcscnicnic, 63
sychoIogism, 27, 68, 78, 80, 173, 176, 206, 222
quacsiic jacii, 91
quacsiic juris, 91
quanlum mechanics, 46, 50
Quc||c, 143, 248
Quc||cnkriiik, 24
queslion of being, 197, 215, 235, 249, 263, 264
Ranke, LeooId von, 6, 8, 9, 12, 16, 18, 42, 43, 58, 59, 69, 83, 107,
136, 137, 139, 141, 142, 164, 168, 189, 220, 223, 245, 246, 257, 259,
266, 269
Rankean seIf-exlinguishmenl, 43, 141, 252
ralio, 87, 246
|cj|cxicn, 259
refIexive avareness, 165, 170, 175, 241 immediale refIexive
avareness (|nncucr!cn), 170, 241
ReiII, Ieler, 12
reIalionaI meaning (Bczugssinn), 231
reIalivism, 5, 13, 16, 25, 32, 33, 36, 38, 39, 41, 43, 45, 46, 53, 58, 78 -
80, 84, 106, 112, 113, 115, 116, 127, 132, 151, 160, 163, 168, 169, 171
-174, 178, 180, 185, 199, 215, 216, 221, 222, 224, 226, 228, 243, 268
Renaissance cosmoIogy, 59
rcs ccgiians, 31, 143, 242
rcs gcsiac, 16
rncicrica, 78
Rickerl, Heinrich, 3, 5, 11, 13, 18, 19, 21, 28 -30, 33, 40, 44, 54, 55,
57, 58, 60, 66, 81, 84 -111, 113 -124, 128, 132, 134, 143, 144, 148,
149, 151, 158, 160, 169 -171, ' 173, 179, 183, 223 230, 239, 247
concel-formalion, 85, 94 -100, 102 105, 108, 109, 111, 114, 115,
120 122, 198, 219, 226, 229, 240
crisis, 83 -86, 90, 109, 113, 115 -117, 122 -125
cuIluraI science, 65, 103, 104, 106
"Oic !cuiscnc Pni|cscpnic tcn Kani |is Nicizscnc," 89
Ocr Gcgcnsian! !cr |rkcnninis, 84, 96, 233
Gc|icn, 77
Oic Grcnzcn !cr naiuruisscnscnaji|icncn Bcgrijjs|i|!ung (Iiniis cj
Ccnccpi |crnaiicn), 30, 84, 85, 90, 94 -100, 103, 104, 108, 110,
111, 116
helerogeneous conlinuum, 95, 96, 98, 107, 118, 226
helerogeneous discrelum, 98
hisloricaI reIalivism, 13, 16, 39, 45, 53, 58, 78, 106, 113, 116,
127, 132, 169, 173, 178, 180, 185, 226, 228
Kani a|s Pni|cscpn !cr nc!crncn Ku|iur, 84
Ku|iuruisscnscnaji un! Naiuruisscnscnaji (Scicncc an! Hisicrq),
84, 85, 93 -97, 98, 102 -104, 107, 108
Oic Icnrc tcn !cr Ocjiniiicn, 84
Oic Pni|cscpnic !cs Ic|cns, 40, 84, 87 89, 93, 113, 172
Oic Prc||cnc !cr Gcscnicnispni|cscpnic, 84 -86, 99, 115
Sinngc|i|!c, 114
Sqsicn !cr Pni|cscpnic, 84, 101, 105, 114, 116, 145
lhird reaIm, 114
underslanding (Vcrsicncn), 88 -95, 97, 101, 102, 113 -115, 118
Wcri, 65, 77, 79, 101
Wcri|czicnung (vaIue-reference), 106, 107, 115, 226
Wcriung (vaIualion), 106 -108, 111
"Zvei Wege der
Irkennlnislheorie," 97
Ringer, Irilz, 14, 38, 39, 47, 206
Riller, Harry, 4, 49
Rodi, Irilh|of, 127 -131, 134, 177, 200, 241
romanlicism, 43, 137
Rolhacker, Irich, 4, 37, 57, 128
|uckkcnr, 203
Rsen, }rn, 12, 18, 43, 59, 112, 124, 172
-295-
Saiz tcn Grun!c, 136, 177, 179
Savigny, Iriedrich von, 60, 69, 136, 164
scandaI of hiIosohy, 34, 229
ScheIer, Max, 223
ScheIIing, Iriedrich W. }., 133, 260
SchIegeI, Iriedrich, 133
SchIeiermacher, Iriedrich, 131, 133, 138, 150, 163, 164, 167, 193,
195, 196, 199, 200, 204, 207, 208, 241
Schmill, CarI, 48
SchndeIbach, Herberl, 4, 12, 22, 23, 29, 42, 75, 101, 103, 141, 172
Schoenhauer, Arlhur, 87
science
of knovIedge, 28, 30, 58, 61, 68, 69, 83
of hiIosohy, 22
of reason, 136, 137
sciences
of Iav (Gcscizcsuisscnscnajicn), 75
of nalure, 34, 50, 57, 72, 99, 139, 141, 222, 243
of siril (scc a|sc Gcisicsuisscnscnajicn), 34, 70, 131
scicniia scicniiarun (science of science), 22, 23, 29, 68, 88, 136
scienlific melhod, 22, 28, 57, 80, 90, 97, 99, 104, 119, 120, 143, 176,
184, 216, 217
scienlism, 17, 21, 22, 24, 27, 28, 40, 42, 46, 51, 61, 80, 222, 261
scienlizalion, 24, 42, 69
Scin, 15, 30, 31, 34, 64, 76, 77, 96, 101, 116 -118, 122, 143, 183, 197,
205, 212, 217, 219, 223, 230, 232, 235, 236, 239, 243 -247, 251, 255,
264, 272
Scinsgcscnicnic, 260
Scinssinn, 231
seIf-refIeclion, 63, 135, 158, 159, 170, 180
SemIer, }ohann, 163
selling asunder (Auscinan!crscizung), 250
Sheehan, Thomas, 193, 194, 196, 203, 212, 216, 232, 256, 269
SimmeI, Georg, 21, 57, 104, 118, 119, 122
Sinn/Sc||cn, 118
Sinngc|i|!c, 114
Sc||cn, 64, 76, 116 -118, 170
somaloIogy, 71
Scrgc, 210, 246
SengIer, OsvaId, 14, 16, 37, 41, 45, 53, 124, 188, 189, 192, 200 -
202, 243, 256
SengIerism, 84
Sranger, Iduard, 37, 40, 57, 206
Slark, }ohannes, 41
Sleiner, RudoIf, 37, 40
Siun!cnu||, 190
sub|ecl/ob|ecl lhinking, 15, 124, 217
sub|eclivily, 11, 16, 18, 105, 111, 114, 153, 170, 171, 180 -184, 230,
232
su|sianiia, 234
Su|sianz, 234
SuIIivan, Roberl, 47
ia|u|a rasa, 73
lemoraIily, 3, 9, 10, 17, 21, 31, 106, 122, 147, 166, 168, 212, 214,
220, 221, 224, 225, 230, 236 -241, 243 -246, 249, 251, 252, 254, 257,
260, 267, 268, 273
lheory of vaIues, 17, 25, 63, 84, 85, 169
Thomas, rook, 4, 11
Thucydides, 49
lranscendenlaI, lhe, 3, 10, 25, 28, 30, 40, 55, 57, 58, 61, 63 -65, 73,
76, 78, 84, 85, 89, 91 -93, 97, 99, 101, 102, 106, 108, 111, 114 -123,
148, 149, 158, 160, 169, 170, 178, 180, 222, 224 226 -234, 239, 247
lranscendenlaI ego, 114, 222
lranscendenlaI formaIism, 119
lranscendenlaI idea, 76, 97
lranscendenlaI Iogic, 61, 64, 73, 78, 92, 93, 118, 229
lranscendenlaI sub|ecl, 3. 63, 111, 116, 117, 121, 158, 180, 233, 234
TroeIlsch, Irnsl, 4, 12, 14, 21, 37, 38, 48, 85, 86, 88, 104, 116, 118 -
122, 172, 189, 243
"Krisis des Hislorismus," 4, 38, 85
Uberveg, Iriedrich, 24, 127, 140, 143, 179
Unuc|i ("environing vorId"), 227
Unncin|icnc, 262
universaI hislory, 6, 9, 58
universily, 3, 4, 7, 9 -12, 14, 17, 21 -26, 50 -52, 127 -131, 136, 189 -
191, 193 195, 199 -211, 213 -216, 218, 220, 222, 236, 237, 239, 2 -41,
243, 250, 251, 254, 259, 261, 265, 268
Urici|c, 77, 232
Urici|siaiigkcii, 94
Uruisscnscnaji, 26
Vaihinger, Hans, 21
vaIue-hiIosohy, 53, 57, 58, 84, 89, 90, 101, 196, 227
vaIue-reIalivism, 43
vaIue-reIalivily, 112
Vallimo, Gianni, 8, 9, 11, 259
-296-
Vcrnunji, 12, 73, 87, 128, 129, 131, 135, 136, 142, 154, 165, 167, 172
Vcrnunjircpu||ikancr, 261
Vcrnunjiuisscnscnaji, 136
Vcrsicncn (scc a|sc DiIlhey, WiIheIm: underslanding, Heidegger,
Marlin: underslanding, Rickerl, Heinrich: underslanding,
WindeIband, WiIheIm: underslanding), 109, 111, 114, 115, 128,
132, 149, 150, 154, 161 -163, 218, 246, 249
Vcruin!ung, 11, 259
Vcruisscnscnaji|icnung, 24, 42, 69
vilaIism, 41, 87
vilaIisl crilique of science, 27
Vogl, KarI, 22
Vc||zug, 140, 208, 211
Vc||zugssinn, 231
voIunlarism, 26
Vcrnan!cnscin, 233
Weber, Max, 14, 36, 37, 95
Weimar, 14, 16, 37, 38, 41, 47, 51, 115, 184, 197, 200, 201, 203, 206,
210, 214, 216, 242, 250, 256 -258, 260, 261, 272
Wc|ianscnauung, 24, 26, 30, 36, 39 -41, 45, 62, 64, 65, 81, 86, 88, 90,
109, 114 -116, 130, 135, 173, 176, 178, 184, 200, 204, 205, 211, 217,
238, 243, 256, 260
Wc|ianscnauungs|cnrc, 25, 174
Wc|ianscnauungspaincs, 40
Wc|ianscnauungspni|cscpnic, 2, 14, 26, 88
Wc|igcscnicnic, 13, 42, 178, 249, 266
Wc|izusanncnnang, 173
Wcri. (Scc Rickerl, Heinrich: Wcri)
Wcri|czicnung. (See Rickerl, Heinrich: Wcri|czicnung)
Wcriurici|, 226
WeyI, Hermann, 41, 47
Wic!crnc|ung, 203, 211, 223, 230, 231, 245, 247 -249, 251
viII lo over, 1, 53, 57, 117, 253, 259, 262, 267, 269, 270
WinckeImann, }ohann }., 42
WindeIband, WiIheIm, 3, 5, 11, 13, 18, 19, 21, 25, 28, 33, 44, 54, 55,
57, 58, 60 -81, 84, 90, 91, 94, 99, 122, 123, 128, 132, 143, 144, 148,
158, 160, 169, 223 -227
crisis, 57 -59, 64, 68, 76, 78, 79
Gcscnicnic !cr ncucrcn Pni|cscpnic, 63
"Hislory and NaluraI Science," 66 68, 70, 71, 73 -76, 80
Hisicrq cj Pni|cscpnq, 24, 31, 55, 59, 61 -63, 74, 83, 127, 183, 197,
211, 213, 223, 241, 242, 255, 265, 270
Icnr|ucn !cr Gcscnicnic !cr Pni|cscpnic, 62, 63
Pra|u!icn, 60, 62, 64, 67, 77
underslanding (Vcrsicncn), 59, 61, 73, 77 -79
"Was isl IhiIosohie`", 64
Wirk!ichkcit, 77, 79
Wisscnscnaji, 24, 26, 29, 34, 36, 37, 39 41, 44, 61, 62, 64, 65, 81, 86,
87, 90, 92, 111 -113, 128, 135 -137, 141, 146, 149, 156, 173, 178, 184,
189, 191, 192, 205, 211, 213, 217, 228, 238, 243
vorIding (cs uc|ici), 208, 228, 256
vorIdviev hiIosohy, 26, 27, 84, 228
Wundl, WiIheIm, 67, 77
Zciiigungssinn ("lemoraIizing meaning"), 231
ZeIIer, Iduard, 29, 62
"U|cr Bc!cuiung un! Aujga|c !cr |rkcnninisinccric," 29
-297-