SCHELER
(1874 1928)
PHENOMENOLOGY
Max Scheler was born
in Munich of a Jewish mother and a Protestant father. He studied philosophy at the University of Jena
under the idealist 'philosopher of life' Rudolf Eucken, and became a Privatdozent there in 1901. He returned to Munich in 1907 and came under
the influence of Brentano and Husserl, but in 1910 he retired to follow the
life of an independent scholar in Berlin. In 1917-18 he worked for the German Foreign Office as a diplomat. After the war he returned to teaching and was
appointed professor of philosophy and sociology at Cologne. He also converted to Catholicism, but he
gradually moved away from his commitment as he developed his own religious and
philosophical concept of a 'cosmic becoming'. He moved to the University of Frankfurt shortly before his death.
METHODOLOGY/ KNOWLEDGE
[1] Scheler made full use
of the phenomenological method and indeed went much further than Husserl
in applying it to all
aspects of human consciousness and focusing particularly on what he regarded as
'essential' to human personality, namely, feelings, and especially love,
rather than just on reason or volition. Thus, in a sense, emotions are 'cognitive' and can
be said to 'intend' their own objects [a]. In his later work [see Man's
Situation in the Cosmos] he placed great emphasis on 'life philosophy' and man's being situated in
nature and culture, arguing that this had been neglected by more cognitive and
rationalist philosophies [b]. At
the same time he sought to reconcile this with phenomenology's concern with Geist, that is, 'spirit' or 'mind'. He accepts that knowing is an intentional act towards an object, but he stresses that knowledge
itself is to be interpreted in pragmatic or instrumentalist terms [c]. It must be
understood in the context of the uses to which it is to be put rather than as an intellectual relationship between
the knower and the world. Ideas brought
into being by spirit through life's 'realizing conditions' [see 4c] do not
always 'work'. Throughout his philosophical career [but especially in Sociology of Knowledge] he distinguished three kinds of knowledge,
each with its own function:
(1) Scientific
knowledge. This is knowledge of
contingent particulars, and it is characterized by man's attempt to achieve control over the natural world and human society [d].
(2) 'Essential'
knowledge. This is knowledge of 'essences', 'universals', or 'structures' of
real or imagined things categories of being,and requires the use of reason and
the phenomenologist's eidetic reduction. Man's motive for seeking this kind of knowledge is love [e].
(3) Religious
knowledge. This consists of knowledge of
'Absolute Being' or God and of man's 'salvation'. Man's aim is to achieve oneness with
this 'ultimate ground' of reality. This union is to be achieved through
a synthesis of scientific and essential knowledge; and Scheler allows that we
can have direct experience
of the Divine [f]. Similarly we can experience directly the feelings and moods
of another person, perceivable in bodily events, although the 'intimate
sphere' remains private and closed to our inspection. Indeed, he implies that it is through the prior giveness
of others that we come to know our own selves [g].
PSYCHOLOGY/ PHILOSOPHY OF MAN
[2] Implicit in
Scheler's account of three kinds of knowledge is a particular view of human
'psychology'. In his early period
(1897-1920/22) he developed an extensive and subtle survey of feeling and value
[see The Theory of Sympathy and Formalism in Ethics]. There are two key features of his phenomenological-reductive
analysis of our mental life. Firstly, he
rejected any sharp distinction between cognition and emotion; he supposed both
feeling and reason to be functioning in the activity of the mind as a whole [a]. Secondly he argued that feelings are not just subjective
states. They are intimately joined to values which are yet independent of
them (as colours are of the things we see as coloured). Feelings thus have an objective aspect [b];
and it is these that can provide a foundation for formal principles such as those of a categorical imperative.
In his later work [Man's
Situation in the Cosmos] he traced four stages in the evolutionary
development of life in the "biopsychological world": (i) an unconscious vital
impulse or life force this manifests itself in all forms of life
culminating in man; (ii) instinctual
behaviour, innate and functional, which is found in higher forms of life
above the plants; (iii) associative
behaviour, or memory, which is 'conditioned, modifiable through
learning, which is exhibited in animals and particularly in man; and (iv) practical intelligence [c], which again is characteristic of the
higher animals and especially man.
METAPHYSICS/ RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY
[3] Scheler's more
metaphysical and religious thought tends to be developed in his later period
(1920-1928). Initially he was concerned
to provide a defence of his conversion to Catholicism [On the Eternal in Man]. He
talks of our experience as
a 'sea of being' which the ego splits into 'subjective' and 'objective'
realms. But underlying this experience
is the 'Absolute', infinite spirit, the ground of being. This is rational but at the same time it manifests itself as an
irrational force working through individual beings [a]. Phenomenological analysis of our consciousness reveals the a priori structure of a specifically
religious dimension or 'sphere' in which Being-in-itself is exhibited as the
'numinous', possessing such attributes as holiness, personality, infinite
goodness, power, and self-sufficiency. These can be articulated and communicated through the myths, dogmas, and
rituals (prayer, acts of repentance, etc.) which originate from within
ourselves. Our response as 'God-seekers'
to these arises from the feelings
of 'nothingness' and 'infinite dependence' we experience in the face of the
Divine [b]. But we can choose to
'fill' this sphere in a variety of ways. We may opt for faith in God our response being genuinely authentic if
we experience and acknowledge Him. Or
our experience can be empty the worship of an 'idol', in which case our
response is inauthentic. Alternatively
we can adopt an agnostic position and leave the sphere open to nothingness.
Scheler gradually moved away from his
Catholicism and came to espouse a more pantheistic position [see Man's Situation in the Cosmos]. He now regarded God, the world, and man as a unitary process of
becoming in 'absolute' time. (By
this he meant the time which is implicit in all natural processes of change and
which is presupposed by time as measurable. It is thus not the Newtonian concept but a view more in line with that
promoted by Einstein.) Within this
unitary process Spirit realizes itself in ideas, but to do so it needs to work
through history, geography, society, and so on, all of which are manifestations
of the life-energy or impulsion. God is thus seen no longer a primal creator but as inseparable from the cosmic process,
incomplete and undergoing change with it. Scheler says that "man reaches the consciousness that he is an ally and co-worker of God
only in the process of his own development and self-knowledge" [Man's Situation, IV] [c].
[4] Scheler rejects all mind-body dualisms and
accounts of man that purport to locate his 'essential nature' in a conscious
thinking self, a pure reason, pure consciousness, or a transcendental ego. Man, differs from all other animals in his 'spirit'. By spirit he means not a substance but "a
hierarchical structure of acts" [Man's Situation, III], which 'objectifies' both the
'psychic' and the 'physical' the two
aspects of the life process. As he says: "The intentions of the spirit intersect, as it were, with the temporal
processes of life" [ibid.]. The dualism we encounter in man, for Scheler, is the non-pernicious
antithesis between spirit and life [a]. Man's spirituality is manifested in his freedom to detach himself from
both his inner psychophysical condition (exhibited in self-consciousness) and
from the environment (exhibited in his attitude of objectivity towards it), and
to restructure the natural world in terms of categories such as substance,
causality, space and time. Implicit in this is man's awareness of reality as a consequence of the
power of the environment to 'resist' his inner drives [b]. Scheler rejects views which either identify spirit
with the 'rational idea (or form)' possessing its own original energy or
creative power or which attribute all man's culture-producing activities to his
capacity to repress his impulses. Instead, he argues that through the phenomenological reduction, which for him involves the
inhibiting of inner drives and the redirection of the vital energy or impulsion (which does not
belong to spirit itself), man's "fundamental characteristic" his capacity "to
isolate essence from existence" can be exercised. In order to realize ideas spirit needs also to utilize the
environment's material conditions [c], though the ideas are in consequence
degraded, and the 'purity' of spirit lost.
Scheler's philosophical anthropology reflects also his later
religious philosophy. He sees man as a spiritual 'unity of
activity' with Ultimate Being. The
emphasis is now on the concept of the person understood as "the centre of action within a
finite mode of being" [Man's Situation,
II]. The individual spirit is unique and autonomous and is not
a mere part of a wider spiritual totality [d]. While he is like other
animals in that he can acquire scientific knowledge (and hence control of
Nature), he is unique in his possession of reason and his capacity for knowledge
of 'essences'. Scheler distinguished a private and a common
aspect of the person. The common aspect
is that which is possessed by oneself and others through shared experiences;
and this is the basis of participation in social and institutional structures
whether of church or state. However, he
recognised that there are philosophies which have attempted to discover or
explain the nature of man in ways other than the phenomenological. Thus the natural and the life sciences can contribute to
knowledge of what it is to be man, though Scheler rejected any 'reductionist'
analysis of man's 'idea' or spiritual nature. Mechanical and teleological
explanations represent two modes of observing and describing the same
psychophysical unity [Man's
Situation, III]. There is therefore no incompatibility between
physical causality and man's spiritual autonomy; and we do not have to invoke
any noumenal substrate or dualist thesis [e]. Scheler's investigations into the interplay between
the scientific and philosophical accounts of human existence led to his
classification of different philosophical anthropologies: (1) man as a religious being; (2) man as a
rational animal homo sapiens; (3)
man the tool-maker; (4) man as fallen being egocentric and 'diseased'; (5)
man as the 'superman'. [See also Sociology of Knowledge.]
ETHICS
[5] [See especially Formalism in Ethics and The Nature of Sympathy.] Ethical and aesthetic values for Scheler are cognitively and
emotionally a priori, in so far as reason and emotion
are preconditions of experience. So what are values? They
are the universal and essential properties of objects by virtue of which we
call them good. He distinguished five
types all located in what he called man's 'order of love' (ordo amoris) and each experienced in
particular kinds of feelings [a]. In ascending order of
quality they are: (1) sensory values,
such as pleasant and unpleasant; (2) pragmatic values needs and utility; (3) 'life' values, for
example, nobility and 'ordinariness'; (4) mental or 'spiritual' values,
subdivided into aesthetic, juridical, and cognitive (in relation to truth); and
(5) religious values, especially the holy and the unholy.
The purpose of ethics for Scheler was (as in the
case of knowledge) broadly utilitarian and pragmatic to achieve authenticity,
love and oneness with others and with God [b]. He contrasted what he saw as the authenticity and
spontaneity of one's "ideal responsibility to be" (idealisches Seinsollen) with the artificial formality of the
"ethical obligation to act" (ethisches
Tunsollen). In achieving the former
we genuinely encounter and respect the subjectivity of another person; and this
transcends understanding, empathy, or even the feeling of "being at one" with him (Einsfhlen) [c]. In ascending from the qualitatively lower
values to the highest we experience love, culminating in what Scheler called 'fulguration'
(Aufblitzen) the 'lightning flash
or intuition of the loved object' value. Love is thus the
foundation of religious ideals [d].
CRITICAL SUMMARY
Scheler is of particular
interest for his use of the phenomenological method to analyse values and
religious feelings rather than just consciousness and experience in the
Husserlian manner. His sociology of
knowledge, which attempts to describe the relationships between distinct but
interdependent spheres of the natural and human sciences, is also important, as
is his contribution to philosophical anthropology in general. He has, however, been criticized for his
concentration on emotion and action and for his 'pragmatic' approach to
knowledge and ethics. It is argued that
he has not paid sufficient attention to theory and intellectualizing. It is probably fair to say that while Scheler
was right to reject the empty formalism of Kant's ethics, his own claim that
values and emotions are revealed in subjective experience by phenomenological
analysis and are 'objective' realities has not been satisfactorily
demonstrated. As against this, he
deserves credit for his attempts to overcome the traditional distinction
between cognition and feeling by relating them within the context of the mind
as a functioning unity.
Scheler: Zur Phnomenologie und Theorie der
Sympathie-Gefühl und von Liebe und Hass (1913) (Contributions
to Phenomenology and Theory of Sympathy and of Love and Hate) (revised and
reprinted as Wesen und Formen der Sympathie see below); Der Formalismus in der Ethik und die materiale Wertethik, 2 vols
(1913-16) (Formalism in Ethics and
Non-Formal Ethics of Values: A New Attempt toward the Foundation of an Ethical
Personalism, trans. M. S. Frings and R. L. Funk); Vom Ewigen im Menschen) (1921) (On
the Eternal in Man, trans. B. Noble); Wesen und Formen der Sympathie (1923) (The Nature and Forms of Sympathy, trans. P. Heath); Versuche
zu einer Soziologie des Wissens (1924) (Problems of a Sociology of
Knowledge, trans. M. S. Frings) later expanded as Die Wissenformen und
die Gesellschaft (1926) (The Forms of Knowledge and Society); Die
Stellung des Menschen im Kosmos (1928) (Man's Situation in the Cosmos [Nature], trans. and
introd. H.
Meyerhoff); A selection from his works is available in H. J. Bershady, On Feeling, Knowing, and
Valuing: Selected Writings, and
in Max Scheler: Selected Philosophical Essays, trans. D. R. Lachterman.
Studies:
Introductory
M. S.
Frings, Max Scheler: A Concise Introduction into the World of a
Great Thinker.
More advanced
M. D. Barber, Guardian
of Dialogue. Max Scheler's
Phenomenology, Sociology of Knowledge, and Philosophy of Love.
M. S. Frings, The Mind of Max Scheler.
E. Kelly, Structure and Diversity. Studies in the Phenomenological Philosophy of
Max Scheler.
J. H.
Nota, Max Scheler, the Man and his
Work.
Collection of
essays
M. S.
Frings (ed.), Max Scheler (1874-1928): centennial essays.
CONNECTIONS
Scheler