The Genesis of the Symbolic: On the Beginnings of Ernst Cassirer's Philosophy of Culture

412 Pages·2021·2.664 MB·English

by  Arno Schubbach

Arno Schubbach
The Genesis of the Symbolic
New Studies in the History and
Historiography of Philosophy
Edited by
Gerald Hartung and Sebastian Luft
Volume 7
Arno Schubbach
The Genesis
of the Symbolic
On the Beginnings of Ernst Cassirerʼs
Philosophy of Culture
Translated by D. J. Hobbs
The translation of this work was funded by Geisteswissenschaften International –
Translation Funding for Work in the Humanities and Social Sciences from Germany,
a joint initiative of the Fritz Thyssen Foundation, the German Federal Foreign Office,
the collecting society VG WORT and the Börsenverein des Deutschen Buchhandels
(German Publishers & Booksellers Association).
ISBN 978-3-11-060702-4
e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-062363-5
ISSN 2364-3161
Library of Congress Control Number: 2021935308
Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available on the internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Translated into English from the original German:
Die Genese des Symbolischen. Zu den Anfängen von Ernst Cassirers Kulturphilosophie.
Cassirer Forschungen 16. © Felix Meiner Verlag, Hamburg 2016.
Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck

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