TEXT FLY WITHIN THE BOOK ONLY

OU1 60591

OSMAN1A UNIVERSITY LIBRARYCall No.)

f 3 ?/(52# 3 3> P

'

Accession

Thi/hook shouB berfoturned oil or before

the,

date

last

marked below

THE LIBRARY OF LIVING PHILOSOPHERSVolume VI

THE PHILOSOPHY OF

ERNST CASSIRER

THE LIBRARY OF LIVING PHILOSOPHERSPAUL ARTHUR SCHILPP, Editor

Already Published:

THE PHILOSOPHY OF JOHN DEWEY

(1939)(1940)

THE PHILOSOPHY OF GEORGE SANTAYANA

THE PHILOSOPHY OF ALFRED NORTH WHITEHEAD

(1941)

THE PHILOSOPHY OF

G. E.

MOORE

(1942)(1944)

THE PHILOSOPHY OF BERTRAND RUSSELLTHE PHILOSOPHY OF ERNST CASSIRER

(1949)

In Preparation:

ALBERT EINSTEIN:

P

H IL O S O P H E R- S C I E N TI ST

THE PHILOSOPHY OF BENEDETTO CROCETHE PHILOSOPHY OF SARVEPALLIR AD H AKRI S H N AN

THE PHILOSOPHY OF KARL JASPERS

Other volumes to be announced later

THE LIBRARY OF LIVING PHILOSOPHERSVolume VI

THE PHILOSOPHYOF

ERNST CASSIREREDITED BY

PAUL ARTHUR SCHILPP

1949

THE LIBRARY OF

LIVING PHILOSOPHERS, INC.

THE PHILOSOPHY OF ERNST CASSIRERCopyright, 1949, by The Library of Living Philosophers, Inc.Printed in the United States of America

FIRST EDITION

A-F

GEORGE BANTA PUBLISHING COMPANY, MENASHA, WISCONSIN

GENERAL INTRODUCTrt>&TO

"THE LIBRARY OF LIVING PHILOSOPHERS"the late F. C. S. Schiller, the greatest obJTj\. stacle to fruitful discussion in philosophy is "the curious etiquette which apparently taboos the asking of questions about a philosopher's meaning while he is alive." The "interminable controversies which fill the histories of philosophy," he goes on to say, "could have been ended at once by asking the living philosophers a few searching questions." The confident optimism of this last remark undoubtedly goes too far. Living thinkers have often been asked "a few searching questions," but their answers have not stopped "interminable controversies" about their real meaning. It is none the less true that there would be far greater clarity of understanding than is now often the case, if more such searching questions had been directed to great thinkers while they were still alive. This, at any rate, is the basic thought behind the present undertaking. The volumes of The Library of Living Philosophers can in no sense take the place of the major writings of great and original thinkers. Students who would know the philosophies of such men as John Dewey, George Santayana, Alfred

A CCORDING to

North Whitehead, Benedetto Croce, G. E. Moore, BertrandRussell, Ernst Cassirer, Etienne Gilson, Karl Jaspers, et al., will still need to read the writings of these men. There is no substitute for first-hand contact with the original thought

of the philosopher himself. Least of all does this Library pretend to be such a substitute. The Library in fact will spare

neither effort nor expense in offering to the student the bestLibrary,

* This General Introduction, setting forth the underlying conception of this is purposely reprinted in each volume (with only very minor changes).vii

viii

THE LIBRARY OF LIVING PHILOSOPHERS

possible guide to the published writings of a given thinker. shall attempt to meet this aim by providing at the end of each

We

volume in our series a complete bibliography of the published work of the philosopher in question. Nor should one overlook the fact that the essays in each volume cannot but finally lead to this same goal. The interpretative and critical discussions of the various phases of a great thinker's work and, most of all, the reply of the thinker himself, are bound to lead the readerto the

At

the

works of the philosopher himself. same time, there is no blinking the

fact that different

experts find different ideas in the writings of the same philosopher. This is as true of the appreciative interpreter and grateful disciple as it is of the critical opponent. Nor can it be deniedthat such differences of reading and of interpretation on the part of other experts often leave the neophyte aghast before

the wholetions.

mazeis

of widely varying and even opposing interpreta-

Who

right

and whose interpretation

shall

he accept?

the doctors disagree among themselves, what is the poor student to do? If, finally, in desperation, he decides that all of the interpreters are probably wrong and that the only thing for him to do is to go back to the original writings of the philoso-

When

pher himself and then make his own decision uninfluenced (as were possible!) by the interpretation of any one else the result is not that he has actually come to the meaning of the original philosopher himself, but rather that he has set up one more interpretation, which may differ to a greater or lesser degree from the interpretations already existing. It is clear that in this direction lies chaos, just the kind of chaos which Schillerif this

has so graphically and inimitably described. It is strange that until now no way of escaping this difficulty has been seriously considered. It has not occurred to students of

1

philosophy that one effective way of meeting the problem at least partially is to put these varying interpretations and critiques before the philosopher while he is still alive and to ask him toact at

one and the same time as both defendant and judge. If the world's great living philosophers can be induced to coSper*Inhis essay on "Must Philosophers Disagree?" in the volume by the same (Macmillan, London, 1934), from which the above quotations were taken.

title

GENERAL INTRODUCTIONate in an enterpriseextent, be saved

ix

whereby their own work can, at least to some from becoming merely "desiccated lecturefodder," which on the one hand "provides innocuous sustenance

for ruminant professors," and, on the other hand, gives an opportunity to such ruminants and their understudies to "speculate safely, endlessly,

and fruitlessly, about what a philosopher must have meant" (Schiller), they will have taken a long step toward making their intentions clearly comprehensible.

With

this in

pects to publish at

mind The Library of Living Philosophers exmore or less regular intervals a volume on

each case

each of the greater among the world's living philosophers. In it will be the purpose of the editor of The Library to bring together in the volume the interpretations and criti-

cisms of a wide range of that particular thinker's scholarly contemporaries, each of whom will be given a free hand to discuss

the specific phase of the thinker's work which has been assigned to him. All contributed essays will finally be submitted to the

philosopher with whose work and thought they are concerned, for his careful perusal and reply. And, although it would be expecting too much to imagine that the philosopher's reply will be able to stop all differences of interpretation and of critique, this

should at least serve the purpose of stopping certain of the grosser and more general kinds of misinterpretations. If no further gain than this were to

volumes of

this Library,

it

come from the present and projected would seem to be fully justified.

In carrying out this principal purpose of the Library, the editor announces that (in so far as humanly possible) each volume will conform to the following pattern:First, a series of expository

and

critical articles

written by the

leading exponents and opponents of the philosopher's

thought; Second, the reply to the critics and commentators by the philosopher himself; Third, an intellectual autobiography of the thinker whenever this can be secured; in any case an authoritative and authorized biography; and Fourth, a bibliography of the writings of the philosopher to pro-

x

THE LIBRARY OF LIVING PHILOSOPHERSvide a ready instrument to give access to his writings andthought.

The

editor has

deemed

it

desirable to secure the services of

an Advisory Board of philosophers to aid him in the selection of the subjects of future volumes. The names of the six prominent American philosophers who have consented to serve appearbelow.

To each of them the editor expresses his deep-felt thanks.

The first fruit of their consultation is the selection of Karl Jaspersas the subject of a subsequent study in this Library. Future volumes in this series will appear in as rapid succes-

view of the scholarly nature of this Library. The next volume in this series will be that on Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, which is scheduled to come off the press during 1949, the year which will mark Professor Einstein'ssion asis

feasible in

seventieth birthday.

PAUL ARTHUR SCHILPPEditorFAYERWEATHER HALL NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY1

01 -i 02

EVANSTON, ILLINOIS

ADVISORY BOARDGEORGEFRITZP.

ADAMS

RICHARD

P.

McKEONMURPHY

University of California

University of Chicago

KAUFMANN

ARTHUR

E.

University of Buffalo

Cornell University

CORNELIUS KRUSEAmerican Council of LearnedSocieties

HERBERT W. SCHNEIDERColumbia University

TABLE OF CONTENTSI.

BIOGRAPHICAL MATERIALA. DIMITRY GAWRONSKY: "ErnstHis Work."B. Four Addresses, delivered at Memorial Services, heldCassirer: His Life

andi

under the Auspices of the Department of Philosophy of Columbia University in the Brander Matthews Theater of Columbia University, New York City, on June I,

19451.

39CASE: "In Memoriam: Ernst Cassirer"

EDWARD

A2. 3.

poem"Ernst Cassirer"

4041 47 52 55 61

HAJO HOLBORN:

F. SAXL: "Ernst Cassirer"

4.5.

EDWARD CASE: "A Student's Nachruf"

.

.

CHARLES C. HENDRIK J.II.

W. HENDEL:

"Ernst Cassirer"

....

.

.

Pos: "Recollections of Ernst Cassirer"

DESCRIPTIVE1.

AND CRITICAL ESSAYS ON THEH.: "Cassirer's Conception of Phi-

PHILOSOPHY OF ERNST CASSIRERHAMBURG, CARLlosophy"2.

73121 K.: "Cassirer's Doctrine of the"Cassirer's

SWABEY, WILLIAM CURTIS: "Cassirer and Metaphysics"

3.

STEPHENS,

I.

A

Prior?'

149183

4.

KAUFMANN, FELIX:Knowledge"

Theory

of Scientific

5.

GAWRONSKY, DIMITRY:SMART, HAROLD R.:

"Cassirer's Contribution to the

Epistemology of Physics"6.

215

"Cassirer's

Theory

of

Mathe-

matical Concepts"7.)

239and

LEWIN, KURT:

"Cassirer's Philosophy of Science

the Social Sciences"8.

269

HARTMAN, ROBERTbolic

S.: "Cassirer's Philosophy of

Sym289

Forms"xi

xH9.

TABLE OF CONTENTSLEANDER, FOLKE: "Further Problems Suggested by the Philosophy of Symbolic Forms" MONTAGU, M. F. ASHLEY: "Cassirer on MythologicalThinking"11.

335

10.

359

12.

LANCER, SUSANNE K.: "On Cassirer's Theory of Language and Myth" URBAN, WILBUR M.: "Cassirer's Philosophy of Language"

379401

13.

GUTMANN, JAMES:

"Cassirer's

Humanism"

.

.

.

443

14.

SIDNEY, DAVID: "The Philosophical Anthropology of Ernst Cassirer and Its Significance in Relation tothe History of Anthropological

Thought"

.

.

465545

15.

KUHN, HELMUT:Culture"

"Ernst

Cassirer's

Philosophy

of

1

6.

BAUMGARDT, DAVID:ern Ethics"

"Cassirer and the Chaos in

Mod575 605631

17.1

8.

GILBERT, KATHARINE: "Cassirer's Placement of Art" SLOCHOWER, HARRY: "Ernst Cassirer's Functional Approach to Art and Literature"

1

9.

REICHARDT, KONSTANTIN "Ernst:

Cassirer's Contribu-

tion to Literary Criticism"

66 1

20.

RANDALL, JOHN HERMAN,

JR.: "Cassirer's

Theory

of

History as Illustrated in His Treatment of Renaissance Thought"21. SOLMITZ,

689729757

WALTER M.:of Cassirer's

"Cassirer on

Galileo:. .

An.

Example22.

Way of Thought"

WERKMEISTER, WILLIAM

H.: "Cassirer's Advance

Beyond Neo-Kantianism"23.

KAUFMANN,

FRITZ: "Cassirer, Neo-Kantianism, and

Phenomenology"III.

799

THE PHILOSOPHER SPEAKS FOR HIMSELFERNST CASSIRER: "losophy"'Spirit'

and

'Life' in

Contemporary Phi855

IV.

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE WRITINGS OF ERNSTCASSIRER (to 1946): Compiled by CARL H. HAMBURG and WALTER M. SOLMITZ) .881. . .

Chronological List of Principal

Works

910911

Index (Arranged by ROBERT

S.

HARTMAN)

PREFACEwas a real place JTJIJL in philosophic literature for the type of book which it is the aim of this Library to present, it was also quite evident that such a series would not be complete without a volume on The Philosophy of Ernst Cassirer. If there could ever have been any doubt, on this point, it existed merely among such provincial philosophical scholars as had not become personally acquainted, let alone familiar, with the writings and work of this prodigious and acute contemporary thinker. Anyone at all aware of Cassirer's philosophical contributions, and of the ever growing inasit

AS SOON

had become

clear that there

fluence of his thought upon younger thinkers, knew quite well that Cassirer's philosophy would have to be treated in this

Library. It was not at all surprising, therefore, that the editor found a ready response among scholars everywhere to his invitation to contribute to a projected Cassirer

volume.

The

present

co-operative effort, accordingly, had been largely planned long before Professor Cassirer left the hospitable shores of Swedento

Cassirer's

tragic news of Professor on April 13, 1945, reached the unexpected death, editor, many of the essays now appearing in this volume were already in the editor's hands and many others had been in the

come to the United States in 1942. At the time, therefore, that the

process of being written by their authors for

Nevertheless, this tragic

blow

among

its

some time past. manifold unhappy

consequences

seemed

to place a

volume on the philosophy of

Ernst Cassirer in the Library of Living Philosophers forever beyond the pale of possibility. For, with Cassirer dead, how could a volume on his philosophy appear in such a series? This, at any rate, was the first reaction of the editor to the unbelievable news of Cassirer's passing. And it was in this spirit, therefore, that letters went out almost immediately, notifyinganil

xiv

THE LIBRARY OF LIVING PHILOSOPHERS

the present book that, with the death of Casif sirer, the original project of a volume on his philosophy not actually completely abandoned would at least have to beall contributors to

changed so radicallythe Library.

as

no longer to

fit

into the

framework of

The storm of protest and the almost unanimity of objection which greeted this announcement forced, in the first place, acareful reconsideration of the hasty decision, and very quickly indeed, a complete reversal. Many of the contributors com-

plained that the editor was conceiving of the word "living" in the title of the series far too literally or at least too narrowly.fact that we would now never be able to present to the philosophical world either Cassirer's own autobiography or his formal "Reply" to his critics, it was perhaps

That, despite the

all

the

more

an opportunityideas

necessary that the philosophical world should have to see and view this great contemporary thinker'sin

from the varied points of view made possible precisely the kind of book which the volumes in this series have been.Althoughthisit is

versal pressure

and even more

true that the editor yielded to this almost unito the force and decisiveness of

least reluctantly.

argument, the yielding certainly did not take place in the Of course it is true that he greatly regrets

the anomaly of having a volume appear in a series dealing with "living" philosophers, when the philosopher with whose

thought the volume is concerned is no longer among the physically living. But, on the other hand, he would not be truthful,

he feels that the present volume has no legitimate place within the bounds of this particular series. After all, the volume on The Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead (Vol. Ill of this Library} also had no formal "Reply" to the expository and critical articles in the book from the pen of Whitehead and yet seemed to fill ato claim that

where he

for these reasons

real philosophical

need just the same. And, in the case of the Whitehead volume, this problem was in a sense at least evenserious thanit

more

For, when

the Whitehead

would appear to be in the present instance. volume appeared in print, Professor

Whitehead himself was still very much alive even though he had just gone through a terrible siege of double pneumonia at

PREFACEthe age of eighty.If, in

xvcase,

Whitehead's

we were preventedthis series

from carrying out the fundamental idea of

by the

commanding imperative of veryCassirer

serious illness, in the case of

ourselves stopped at the point of "The Philosopher's Reply" by the finality of death itself. But, though death might prevent us from giving our readers the

we found

very careful and minute formal "Reply," which the editor knows Cassirer had planned to write for the present volume, even that tragic fatality was not able to stop the continuedstrong influence which Cassirer's thought is having upon serious reflection in the contemporary world. Nor should it be allowedto stop the present

theas

volume nowasit

much

volume. For better or for worse, therefore, done or, more accurately speaking, is done could be done once Cassirer himself was no longeris

will pick

with us. And, frankly, though the reviewers almost inevitably on the anomaly of the appearance of this book underof this series, after reading the material which has gone into the making of this book, the editor himself does not at all

the

title

feel apologetic for its publication. For this volume will best like its fulfill its real function in philosophical literature ifit will send the reader of The Phipredecessors in this series Ernst Cassirer to the books and other writings of losophy of

where he may learn by experience why he would have been the loser, if he had never made the detailed acquaintance of this acute philosophical mind and of the great and profound contributions which that mind has made to the thinking and knowing of man. There is one temptation in the writing of this Preface to which the editor dare not yield. It is all too tempting to discuss Cassirer the philosopher; but this is done by twenty-three contemporary philosophers who have contributed to this volume and most of whom are far better qualified for this task than is the editor. It is even more tempting to trespass upon the goodCassirer himself,taste of editorial prerogatives

by discussing here Cassirer the

man, the gentleman, the personal friend. But to this temptation also the editor must turn a deaf ear, since others, who have

known him much longer and

far

more

intimately, have dis-

cussed this aspect within the covers of this book. I shall merely

xvi

THE LIBRARY OF LIVING PHILOSOPHERSI

consider the personal acquaintance and contacts with Ernst Cassirer to be among the greatest experiences and privileges of my life. In the judgment of this writer, it is not too

say that

much

to say of Cassirer: Ecce It is profoundly sad to contemplate his leaving us in the midst of his great creative and

Homo!

self unfinished

productive career, with dozens of tasks which he had set himand others barely begun.

Thethis

volume

editor's debt of gratitude to each of the contributors to is so self-evident that a mere mention of this fact

should

suffice.

But, in view of the fact that

many

of

them have

hadis

to wait four years, or even longer, to see the arduous work of their mind finally in print, the editor's debt, in this instance,

even greater than usual. The reasons which have delayed the appearance of this volume time and again are, however, fartoo

numerous

editor's sincere regrets

to bear repetition here. Suffice it to record the and abject apologies for a situation which

has caused but overto be

him much agony and everof which he had

much

little (if

increasing embarrassment, any) control.

words of gratitude and appreciation need, however, penned for the never failing helpfulness and encouragement through all these three and one-half years since her illusSpecialtrious husband's death

given by the

widow

of Ernst Cassirer,

Mrs. Toni

Cassirer.

When at times

the obstacles seemed almost

insurmountable, it was Mrs. Cassirer's everlasting faith which kept the project going. Here truly is a woman who knew

andto

still knows her husband's greatness and who never failed understand the significance of what he was trying to do with

and thought. Death did not spare the contributors to this volume either. Two of these are no longer with us. First, Kurt Lewin, whose essay for the present volume had been mailed to the editor on January 3rd, 1947, passed away very suddenly only five weeks later, namely on February nth, 1947. Thirteen months later, in March 1948, the news of F. Saxl's death reached us. The latter's contribution to this volume were remarks he delivered on the occasion of the Memorial Services held for Cassirer at Columbia University. Little did he realize that, by the time his remarks would appear in print, he himself would havehis life

PREFACEjoined those forservices.

xvii

whom

it is

altogether fitting to hold memorial

Of Kurt Lewin, Alexander M. Dashkin, writing in Jewish Education (for Feb.-March issue, 1947), had the following to say: "Kurt Lewin was one of the very few men in our midst who had the right to be called a genius. He was an inventive, comprehensive mind, a warm large personality, with anindefatigable capacity for resourceful work." The editor is proud to be able to present, in this volume, what was undoubtedly one

of the last pieces of such creative

work from the pen

of

Kurt

Lewin.

These

lines are being written

on the very eve of the

editor's

departure for five months' sojourn in Europe, including a semester's lecturing in one of Germany's newly re-opened universities.

this

This means that the burden of proofreading and seeing volume through the press will largely have to fall upon

other shoulders. In the editor's absence he counts himself exceedingly fortunate in having been able to secure the able assistance of his present colleague, old friend

Professor Robert

phy

and former student, of the department of philosoBrowning, at Northwestern University. Upon Dr. Browning and such

W.

additional aids as hethat of Dr.

is

able to marshal,

such, for example, as

David Bidney of the Viking Fund, New York City, who has already kindly offered his good services because of his deep interest in this project and his knowledge of the editor's temporary absence , the detailed technical work of seeing this volume to final fruition will largely devolve. To them the editor, as well as the contributors and readers, owe a deep and greatdebt of gratitude, especially in view of the fact that all such

on a project like this unsupported as it is by endowments or by any university press can only be a labor of love. The same goes for Professor Robert S. Hartman, of the Department of Philosophy of Ohio State University, another one of the editor's former students, who again was kind enough to undertake the laborious task of preparing the index and of seeserviceit through the press. A brief look at the index will convince even the casual observer of the immensity of this task and of the consequent obligation under which the editor feels himself to Dr. Hartman.

ing

xviii

THE LIBRARY OF LIVING PHILOSOPHERS

In conclusion the reader's attention must be called to the deplorable fact that the main works by Cassirer have been out of print for some time and are simply not to be had anywhere. This situation should certainly be remedied as soon as at all possible. New German editions of Cassirer's works are sorely needed. But, if Cassirer is ever truly to come into his own in the English speaking world, it is high time that some enterprising university press in this country should soon supply the phillish of at least

osophical reading public with authorized translations into most of Cassirer 's major works. Certainly

Engsome

well-to-do reader of the present volume could do far worse than offer his financial aid to such an enterprising universitypress for the purpose of at least partial subsidies for such publication.

P. A. S.

DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITYEVANSTON, ILLINOISAugust3,

1948

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSGrateful acknowledgementtheis

made

to the to

Open Court Publishing Company,

Yale University Press, to Harper and Brothers, and

to the Princeton University Press, for their kind permission to quote at length from the works of Ernst Cassirer, without requiring a detailed

enumeration. Exact title, name of publisher, and place and date of publication of each of Cassirer's works are enumerated in the Bibli-

ography to

this

We

also wish to express

volume, found on pages 885 to 909. our appreciation to the editors and publishers

philosophical and literary journals quoted, and to the of all other books used by our contributors, for the privilege publishers of utilizing source materials therein found relevant to the discussion of

of the

numerous

The

Philosophy of Ernst Cassirer.

ADimitry Gawronsky

ERNST CASSIRER: HIS LIFE AND HIS WORK

A Biography

ERNST CASSIRER: HIS LIFE AND HIS WORKHe was ERNST the fourth child of aCASSIRER was born in Breslau on Julyrich

brother and two sisters infancy, before Ernst was born, and his mother therefore bestowed upon the second boy, the impassioned love she had felt for her lost son and in memory of this tragic loss and the ordeal she underwent she called her second son Ernst. To the last daysof her life, Ernst was her most cherished child, although two other sons and three daughters came after him. As a boy, Ernst was exceptionally cheerful and buoyant, yet easy to handle. In his games he displayed an inexhaustible

28, 1874. Jewish tradesman j a preceded Ernst. His brother died in

imagination j he was full of new tricks and pranks, and nothing seemed to reveal that his life would be devoted to and concentrated contemplation. He was endowed with a quiet great courage and, as a boy of ten, it was nothing to him to swim the broad Oder River across and back. The most outstanding feature of the boy was his keen sense of fair play and justice. Althought the most beloved child of the family, he never tolerated the slightest discrimination against his brothers and sisters, never accepted any favors, refused anything which was not alsoin his nature

given to the others. Ernst was an impassioned music lover and never missed an opportunity to attend a concert or an opera. In his early classes at the "Gymnasium" he was just an average pupil, much more likely to be at the bottom than at the head of his class. He kept so busy playing with his brothers and friends that there was little time left for study. But a change was not far off. Ernst's maternal grandfather, although a self-taught person, was an exceptionally cultured man of wide intellectual scope and truly philosophical mind. He lived not far from Breslau, and every summer Ernst paid a

4visit to his

DIMITRY GAWRONSKY

his grandgrandfather. There, in conversations with latter's vast library, father, whom he dearly loved, and in the awoke and grew Ernst's interest in the problems of the intel-

lectual life. All his life Cassirer

was convinced that he inherited his philosophical vein of thought from his grandfather. At the age of twelve he had already thoroughly read many literary and historical works. Shakespeare, whose work he found in his father's library, especially appealed to him and Ernst read and

reread all of Shakespeare's plays several times; only Hamlet was missing from his father's library, and Ernst was quite un-

aware of the existence of this play. Then, on his thirteenth birthday, he received a book containing Shakespeare's complete works and he was most amazed and thrilled to "discover" Hamlet.

At this early age and for the remainder of his life Cassirer acquired the capacity for concentrated and persistent there work. His entire behavior began to change slowly.

Now

was only

little

time

left for play,

and

in his class

he became

admittedly the best pupil. In higher classes Cassirer's teachers were often amazed at the depth of his knowledge and maturity and when he completed his studies at the of his

judgment,

"Gymnasium"marks.

his graduation certificate contained the highest

Without losing any time, Cassirer entered the University of Berlin. He was then eighteen years of age and the major subHe made ject he had selected for a study was jurisprudence. this choice more upon the insistence of his father, who was

own free will. largely interested in the field of law, than of his and began to concentrate Soon he gave up this line of study upon German philosophy and literature. In addition he listenedeagerly to lectures on history and art. And yet all these studies somehow did not give Cassirer complete satisfaction; something was lacking in them; he missed in them a certain degree of depth in understanding and failed to find any solution of funda-

mental problems. It was undoubtedly this sense of dissatisfaction which caused Cassirer to change universities several times; he went from Berlin to Leipzig, from there to Heidelberg, and then back to Berlin. In the meantime he further enlarged the

CASSIRER: HIS LIFE

AND

HIS

WORK

5

scope of his studies and found himself becoming

more and more

interested in philosophy. Thus it happened that in the summer of 1894 he decided to take a course on Kant's philosophy given

by Georg Simmel, then a young and

brilliant

Privatdozent at

the University of Berlin. This was a time when strong idealistic tendencies seemed to win a decisive victory over mysticism, which for many centuries

had dominated German

spiritual culture.

Already

in the first

half of the thirteenth century Meister Eckhart, one of the greatest of the German mystics, had impressively revealed the very core of his creed in the following words: "Man, yes, I

God before time and the world were created; yes, was included in the eternal Godhead even before it became God. Together with me God has created and is still and always creating. Only through me He became God." This conception, born out of titanic pride, infinite egotistic power, and ecstasy of passion, for five long centuries and virtually unopposed had dominated German spiritual culture; it never remained a movestood withI

ment of

intellectuals only, or of

any other small group of peo-

ple; in fact, all the great folk

those five centuries

movements in Germany during were movements of outspoken mysticism.

different nature

In the eighteenth century, however, tendencies of a very came to the fore within German culture. Leib-

in

niz and Wolf, Lessing and Goethe, Schiller and Kant created Germany a bright atmosphere of genuine humanism; idealistic

tendencies, intermingled with radical rationalism,in intellectual life. Yet, this

became

most potent

triumph of Germany's reason and of humanism was only shortlived; with the beginning of the nineteenth century a huge wave of mysticism again arose in Germany, breaking through all ramparts of measure and reason and overflowing the spiritual culture of Germany.

Then

again, in the last third of the nineteenth century Otto

Liebmann and Hermann Cohen initiated a philosophical movement which harked back to Kant and to the idealistic tendenciesof the eighteenth century. Several philosophical "schools" soon arose in Germany, all quite similar in this basic tendency and

diverging from each other in only more or less important details. When Ernst Cassirer began his academic studies, this

6

DIMITRY GAWRONSKY

neo-Kantianism dominated many of the German universities to an almost exclusive degree. Hans Vaihinger for a score of years kept in his desk the completed volume of his Philosophy of As ljy a fictional and pragmatistic conception of knowledge, and wrote his commentary on Kant in which he embarked upon an orthodox interpretation of Kant's texts, word by word andsentence by sentence. And Simmel, the future leading "philosopher of life," wrote and lectured on Kant's philosophy.

For some weeks Cassirer regularly attended Simmel's lecOnce, when lecturing on Kant, Simmel dropped the following remark: "Undoubtedly the best books on Kant are written by Hermann Cohen; but I must confess that I do nottures.

understand them."

Immediately after the lecture, Cassirer went to his bookshop and ordered Cohen's books; and no sooner had he begun studying them than his decision was made to go to Marburg and there to study philosophy under Cohen's guidance. However, Cassirer did not want to go to Cohen at once. The young student studied Kant's and Cohen's works thoroughly, as well asthose of several other philosophers essential for the understanding of Kant, such as Plato, Descartes, and Leibniz. In addition

he devoted a large part of his time to the study of mathematics, mechanics, and biology sciences which were indispensable for an understanding of Cohen's interpretation of Kant.

When, in the spring of Marburg to hear Cohen for

1896, Cassirer finally arrived in the first time, he knew a great deal

about Kant's and Cohen's philosophies. There was something very peculiar about Cohen's appearance: he was stout and short, with an incredibly huge head towering over his broad shoulders. He had an almost abnormally high forehead. His eyes flashed,fascinated,

and penetrated, despite the dark

glasses

which he

always wore. In his lectures and seminars, and even in his private conversations, one could not help experiencing the presenceof a great

mind and the

with an

ecstatic belief in

heart of a prophet, filled to overflowing the value of truth and the power of

matter what problem Cohen discussed a mathehe always spoke with matical, epistemological or ethical onegoodness.a deep, intense passion, which was usually controlled perfectly

No

CASSIRER: HIS LIFE

AND

HIS

WORK

7

by the measured flow of his slow and powerful language until the passion broke through in a few words or short sentences. Then Cohen would shout with mighty voice at his listeners, emphasizing the importance of his words with an energetic

movement

of his hands.

interesting Cohen's lectures were, his seminars were even more stimulating. He was truly a spiritual "midSocratic dialogue,

However

wife" in the Socratic sense. Always using the method of the he had a great pedagogical ability to let the

students themselves find the answers to questions discussed. His patience and his personal interest in the intellectual develop-

ment of everyfare,

single one of the studentshis

was inexhaustible. Atit

the same time he was keenly concerned with their general wel-

and wheneverfirst

help was needed, he always gave

to

his utmost.

In the

seminar hour which Cassirer attended he volun-

teered to answer a rather difficult philosophical question asked conversation arose between them, and within a few by Cohen.

A

minutes Cohen was quite aware of the type of student that sat before him. Later on this first meeting with Cassirer belonged to Cohen's most pleasant reminiscences, and he enjoyed telling it frequently and in great detail} how a new student, whom he

had never seen before, very youthful in appearance, a little shy but determined, raised his hand and in a firm voice gave a quite correct and complete answer to his question. "I felt at once," said Cohen, "that this man had nothing to learn from me." At that time Cohen was surrounded by quite a few disciples, and some of them already had studied philosophy with him for years; but from the first moment Cassirer towered above them all. He was quite at home in all the most intricate problems of Kantian and Cohenian ways of thinking. It was a firmly established custom in Marburg that afterevery seminar Cohen'sdisciples, often five or six at a time,

accompanied him to the threshold of his house. But Cassirer, who in every seminar distinguished himself by the scope of his knowledge and by the brilliancy of his philosophical mind, at first did not approach Cohen or his students. For years already Cassirer had been entirely'absorbed in his studies and had little

8

DIMITRY GAWRONSKY

time to spare for social intercourse; he did not enjoy any type of discussion with his friends, probably because his own intensive thinking furthered his intellectual progress even more. He

became almost unsociable. In this mood he came to Marburg; he was always most polite and friendly to everybody, but kept so obviously aloof that Cohen's disciples nicknamed him "the Olympian." Most amazed of all was Cohen himself; he took a great liking to Cassirer and keenly felt the latter's outstanding philosophical talent; but he wondered at his strange behavior. Finally Cohen developed a peculiar suspicion. There was onegroup of people whom Cohen could not tolerate: the converted Jews; he never even shook hands with them. Cohen evidently thought that Cassirer was also converted and was avoiding any personal contact with his teacher because he was aware of Cohen's attitude towards such people. When Cassirer finally heard of this surmise, he at once called on Cohen, and this was the beginning of an intimate friendship between them which lasted to the end of Cohen's days. Now Cassirer became the acknowledged leader in the circle of Cohen's disciples. He lived in a house which for decades was a sort of headquarters for Cohen's students, and with several of these students Cassirer came into close personal conwas, however, still quite impossible to entice Cassirer to go to a party or to spend an evening in a cafe, which was the almost obligatory pastime of the German students; but he tooktact. It

a fancy to studying with some of his new friends. Thus he read Dante and Galileo with an Italian disciple of Cohen; he studiedintricate

Greek

texts with a classical philologist,

and for hours

he discussedtician.

difficult

mathematical problems with a mathema-

it was that all these were experts in their respective fields, people, although they willingly acknowledged Cassirer's superiority and received from him a great deal more than they were able to give him in return. Soon all students of Cohen knew that, whenever they needed a helping hand, they could turn to Cassirer, and this very busy man who treasured every minute of his time was

And

the most interesting part of

always ready to spend hours explaining anybody who approached him.

difficult

problems to

CASSIRER: HIS LIFE

AND

HIS

WORK

9

Byall

the end of Cassirer's

the

Marburg not only University, but all the town as well, knew of the prodigy.first

semester in

Cassirerat all}

became quite popular, but he did not enjoy popularity he sincerely hated any kind of notoriety in connection

with his person.

Undoubtedly the credit for Cassirer's stupendous knowledge must be attributed to a large degree to his exceptional memory. Cohen told us several times that as a young student Cassirer was able to quote by heart whole pages of almost all the classical poets and philosophers. And, in a sorrowful voice, Cohen never forgot to add: "Even all modern poets, like Nietzsche and Stefan George, he could quote you by heart for hours!" This prodigious memory served Cassirer faithfully to the end of his days and made him capable of finding with the greatest of ease any quotations he needed in all those countless books he had read during his life time. Yet Cassirer's memory was not just ait passive capacity, a sort of storage for acquired knowledge was rather an er-mnern in Goethe's sense, a process of repeated

to see all essential elements of a

mental absorption, combined with a keen ability problem and its organic relation to other problems. Cassirer's sharp and most active intellect constantly used the rich material of his memory, incessantly reviewing and reshaping it under different aspects, thus keeping it vividly present in his mind. When Cassirer came to Cohen, the latter's philosophy was in a state of transition. Cohen worked at that time on his own system of philosophy, which he began publishing a few years later. Cohen's chief goal at that time was to free Kant's philosophy from inner contradiction and to emphasize more strongly its fundamental methods and ideas. In his "critique of reason" Kant tried to measure the real power of the human intellectcreative

and

and the part it played in the cognition of the external world. result Kant reached was the following: the human intellect not only classifies and combines our sensations and perceptions, but does much more besides j it forms them from the outset and makes them possible, so that even the simplest sensation exists in the human mind owing to the analytical and synthetical power of the human intellect which carries in itself visible marks

The

io

DIMITRY GAWRONSKY

of this power. are very much mistaken when we think that, for instance, a "white ceiling' ' or a "brown floor" are just simplesensations} quite the contrary is true: "white," "ceiling," "brown," "floor" presuppose already whole systems of concepts, continuous application of analytical and synthetical functions of

We

Any sensory intuition, Kant taught in the central of his Critique of Pure Reason, in the "Transcendental chapter Deduction of the Pure Concept of Reason," is only possible as aourintellect.

product of the creative activity of the fundamental functions of our intellect; yet in the chapters preceding and following this one Kant insisted upon the necessity of accepting the sensory intuition as the very source of the creative synthetic power of

our

intellect.

Furthermore, having showed the indispensability

of reason for the true understanding of nature, for the creation of natural science as a thoroughly consistent system of knowl-

edge, Kant

did not part with his conception of the "thingin-itself," according to which all our knowledge has nothing to do with the world of ultimate reality, but can only deal withstill

the sphere of

humanly (i-e. y sensorily) conditioned appearances. Thus Kant decisively broke with the naive and shallow belief of the German Enlightenment in the miraculous power of the

intellect, with its tendency to solve with the help of trite and schematic reasonings all mysteries of the cosmos; he put the greatest stress upon the necessity of clear insight into the basic

limitations

which characterize the creative work of humanall these limitations

reason.

Yet

Kant accepted only for the

realm of theoretical knowledge, not for the field of ethical activity; in this latter sphere Kant was convinced that the

knowledge of good as well as its materialization depend exclusively on the human intellect, that all emotions and feelingssuch as friendship, sympathy, love insofar as they are instrumental in the realization of good, only obscure and debase the purity of moral principles.

Cohen

tried to rectify these inconsistencies.

To him

"sensa-

tion" was only a problem which could be consciously put and solved by the methods of the human intellect: this bright

yellow stain in the skies is in reality the centre of a whole planetary system which reveals in its substance and movements

CASSIRER: HIS LIFE

AND

HIS

WORK

11

a miraculous chain of natural laws. This knowledge is genuine and is directed towards the true object, behind which no "thingis deficient and is able and painfully 5 only as a result of the infinite slowly progress of science can a true knowledge of the object be won.is

in-itself"

hidden. Yet, our knowledge

to progress

only the completely exploded object, reached at the infinitely remote limit of our knowledge, is the real "thing-initself."

And

Thus, Cohen's philosophy decisively preached the predominant role of the intellect in the realm of knowledge and did away with some of the basic limitations of intellectual powerwhich were accepted by Kant. Yet, it was quite different in the realm of volition; there Cohen was much less rationalistic than

Kant and was convinced that it was the intensity of our emotions and feelings on which depended the energy of our volition; they supplied the "motor power" for our actions. Hence came Cohen's preference for mathematics and natural science; there the work of our intellect could be observed and studied in its unadulterated form. And, since the intellect was to Cohen the backbone of the human mind, he strongly insistednecessity of starting philosophical studies with epistemology. Cassirer knew this already from Cohen's books and eagerly studied mathematics and natural science before he went

upon the

Marburg. Now he devoted almost all of his time disciplines and to the problems of knowledge.to

to these

During the

first

semester Cohen

already began

asking

Cassirer which subject he would like to choose for his doctor's thesis. After some hesitation Cassirer decided to write on LeibFirst of all there was the great versatility of Leibniz's prolific genius and his fundamental achievement in the fields of logic, mathematics, andniz.

Many reasons determined this choice.

natural science, in which at that time Cassirer was primarily interested. Next, the exceptional difficulty of the task also chal-

lenged Cassirer j Leibniz had set forth his philosophy not in book form mainly, but piecemeal, in his vast correspondence; and the system of his philosophy consequently had to be reconstructed out of these dispersed elements. In addition, the slowly developing recognition of Leibniz's great importance for the

12

DIMITRY GAWRONSKY

development of modern philosophy caused the Berlin Academy to make Leibniz the subject for a prize competition, andCassirer decided to participate in this competition. In less than two years Cassirer had completed his sizablefirst part of it, dealing with Descartes' of knowledge, was accepted by the Marburg philosophitheory cal faculty as a doctor's dissertation and obtained the highest

work on Leibniz. The

possible mark in form of the very seldom conferred "opus eximum." Cassirer was at once admitted to the oral examination, during which he once more kept his teachers breathless by the immensity of his knowledge and brilliancy of his understanding, and was awarded the doctor's degree "summa cum laude." The entire book on Leibniz Cassirer presented to the Berlin Academy. There he was not quite so fortunate: the Academy decided not to give the first prize to anyone Cassirer's book obtained the second prize, followed by a long and most flattering commendation, where his great erudition, philosophical talent and brilliancy of presentation were highly praised, but the prevalence of rational and systematic tendencies, along withj

the primary concentration upon the epistemological problems were given as reasons for the withholding of the first prize from him. Some 130 years before the Berlin Academy had made a similar grave mistake, which world opinion had to correct in subsequent years, by withholding the first prize from Immanuel Kant. Did not that famous Academy commit a similar error inCassirer's case?

Upon receiving his Doctorate from Marburg University, Cassirer went back to the home of his parents, who meanwhile had moved to Berlin. There he at once began working on a newproblem, which grew out of his research on Leibniz he decided to give a comprehensive picture of the development of epistemology in the philosophy and science of modern times. He continued to live in seclusion, devoting all his time to his studies. Yet, his aloofness never was a matter of unsociability: it was his vivid awareness of the greatness of the task he had

embarked upon, combined with the all-devouring work, which forced him to spare to the limitenergy.

interest in hishis

time and

CASSIRER: HIS LIFEIt

AND

HIS

WORK

13

wedding in Berlin, in 1901, that Cassirer met his first cousin from Vienna. He had previously seen her only once, eight years earlier, when she wasa child of nine. Allof Cassirer's nature, his love and deep understanding of music, his fine feeling for genuine beauty had in no way suffered from his assiduous scientific reartistic traits

was on the occasion of a

close relative's

and philosophical meditations; they always added a great deal to the irresistible charm of his personality and were immediately and deeply felt by the young girl. This first meeting determined their whole future. They fell in love with each other and married a year later in Vienna. This was indeed an exceptionally happy and harmonious union. Their mutual understanding was perfect, and Cassirer'ssearches

wife always succeeded, thanks to her remarkable understanding and insight, in creating for her husband, even during the most

stormy periods of their tinuous work.

life,

appropriate conditions for his con-

Immediately after the wedding the young couple went to Munich, where they lived for more than a year. It was during this year that their first son, Heinz, was born (he is now member of the philosophical faculty at the University of Glasgow, Scotland). In 1903 Cassirer returned with his family to Berlin,

where he began writing his history of epistemology. Cohen constantly pressed upon him and urged him to embark upon an academic career, yet Cassirer showed little desire to go to some small university town and live there for years in its atmosphere of gossip and latent anti-Semitism. He much preferred to stay in Berlin, where most of his and his wife's relatives lived and where the treasure of the State and University libraries were at his disposal. His work developed rapidly, and as early as 1904 the two volumes of his Erkenntnisfroblem ("Problem of Knowledge") were finished. It was one of Cohen's most cherished stories how once, while visiting Cassirer in Berlin in 1904, he had asked Cassirer how his work was progressing. "Without saying a word," Cohen would relate, "Cassirer led me into his study, opened a drawer of his desk, and there it was, a voluminous, completely finishedmanuscript of his

new work."

14

DIMITRY GAWRONSKYIn 1906 theof

lem

one in

volume of the Erkenntnis-problem ("ProbKnowledge") was published, followed by the second 1908. The outstanding qualities of this work werefirst

rapidly recognized by students of philosophy all over the world} it appeared in several editions and slowly became one of the standard works on the history of human thought. Cassirer'soriginal intention

had been

to give a broad picture of

modern

European thought as it led to, and culminated in, the philosophy of Kant. This he did in the first two volumes of his Erkenntnis'problem. Fifteen years later he added one morevolume,in

which he

set forth

in post-Kantian philosophy;

the development of epistemology and shortly before he came to

America

(in the

published of the evolution of epistemology

as yet unof 1941) he finished the fourth volume, where he has given a broad picture

summer

days.* of Cassirer, the more one admires the intellectual scope of the man who was able to write it. Immense was the number of books Cassirer had to study and

The more one

studies this

up work

to our

own

familiarize himself with in the interest of this work.thisis

And

yet,

the least spectacular part of it. Really amazing is Cassirer's ability to penetrate scores of individual systems of thought, reconstruct them in all their peculiarities, accentuateall that is original

and fruitful in them, and reveal all their weaknesses and inconsistencies. Cassirer had an incredibly fine

mind

for the slightest nuances of thought, for the minutest differences and similarities, for all that was of fundamental or

of secondary importance; with steady grasp he picked up the

development through all its stages and ramifications; and, in showing how the same concept acquired a different meaning, according to the diverse philosophical systems in which it wasapplied as a constructive element, Cassirer laid the first foundation for the ideas which he later developed as his theory of

"symbolic forms." Scores of Italian and German, French and English philosophers, almost or completely fallen into oblivion, came back in Cassirer's book to new life and historical impornow* EDITOR'S NOTE: This (fourth) volume of Cassirer's Erkennlnis'problem is being translated into English under the direction of Professor Charles W. Hendel and will in due time be published by the Yale University Press.

CASSIRER: HIS LIFE

AND

HIS

WORK

15

tance as organic links in the development of ideas or as connections between well known philosophical systems} thus making the continuity of philosophical thought more consistent andtrue.

He was the first to introduce into the history of philosophy

such names as Kepler, Galileo, Huygens, Newton, and Euler, by giving a detailed analysis of their philosophical conceptions,

methods and achievements, and by proving their fundamental importance for the theory of knowledge. Kant's own assertion that he tried to introduce Newton's method into philosophy now became quite clear in Cassirer's representation of Newton's and Kant's systems of thought. Yet Cassirer's greatest achievement in this work consisted in the creation of ascientific

broad general background by connecting the evolution of

knowledge with thereligion, psychology

totality of spiritual culture: mythos and and metaphysics, ethics and aesthetics

drew all these problems into his deliberations as soon as he found some links missing in the development of theirCassirer

epistemology.

Most noteworthypresentation in this

is

also the style

and the whole manner ofprob-

work.

The most intricate philosophical

lems are treated in a quite clear and simple way; one gets the impression that the author deeply felt his responsibility to truth and to the reader; in every sentence he sincerely tried to help the reader to advance on the thorny path of truth. Cassirer's style makes any subject he discusses almost transparent, and his argumentation glides along like a broad and mighty stream,with great convincing power. The great success of his Erkenntnisproblem, which becameobvious immediately after the appearance of the first volume, caused Cassirer to yield to Cohen's ardent desire and to embarkfinally

attached to

upon an academic career. Yet, there was one condition it he was ready to become Privatdozent only in the University of Berlin, since he still did not want to leave the

city. He knew how difficult this undertaking was, first, because he was a Jew, and secondly, because he was Cohen's disciple and considered himself a member of the Marburg school, which at that time was one of the most renowned and hated "schools" in Germany. In his quiet manner Cassirer said to

1

6

DIMITRY GAWRONSKY

Cohen: "In this way I do not risk anything. I need not go anywhere and waste my time. And if they do not want me it is all right with me." At that time philosophy was by no means brilliantly represented at the University of Berlin. The famous Dilthey was already retired and only occasionally gave a few lectures for a selected group of students. Simmel was still there, but owing to his Jewish lineage and notwithstanding the importance of his books (especially his voluminous Soziologie, which became a standard work of pre-Hitlerite German science) and the brilliant success of his lectures, he was an assistant professor and virtually without any influence. The leading roles were played by Stumpf and Riehl, both quite serious scholars, but without any real importance (the following untranslatable pun was thenvery popular with the students at the University of Berlin: "Philosophic wird in Berlin mit Stumpf und Riehl ausgerottet").tic

Stumpf was

philosophy ;

bitterly opposed to any form of idealisRiehl tried to interpret Kant in a realistic sense

and was an outspoken antagonist of the Marburg "school." Yet it was precisely these two men that Cassirer had to deal with when he decided to become Privatdozent of the University ofBerlin.

According to the regulations valid at that time in the University of Berlin a candidate for "Privatdozentur" had to present a scientific study in the form of a book or manuscript and then, if his study had been accepted, he was invited to a socalled colloquium, where he had to give a trial lecture and to answer questions or critical comments on views expressed by him. Cassirer sent in his Erkenntnisproblem, which was at once accepted. A few weeks later he was invited to the colloquium, and as subject for his trial lecture he had chosen the "Ding an sichy" one of the most intricate concepts of Kant's philosophy. In

Erkenntmsfwoblem Cassirer had given a very interesting interpretation of this notion: he showed that the "Ding anhis

sichy

"

being within Kant's philosophy always a limit of aor

maximum

value, radically changed its meaning according to the particular group or system of concepts with reference to which in any given case it played the role of the

minimum

CASSIRER: HIS LIFElimit.

AND

HIS

WORK

17

Thus, the "Ding an s\ch" has one meaning in the "Transcendentale Aesthetik" (Part I of Kritik der reinen Vernunft^y and an essentially different meaning in the "Deduction der reinen Verstandesbegriffe" (Part II of the same work), and it is, therefore, fruitless to define this notion without takingwhichinto consideration the peculiar nature of the specific ideas with it is connected in any special case.

again we can vividly feel the future originator of the theory of "symbolic forms." Yet, Stumpf and Riehl were, of course, not satisfied at all, and they both, especially the latter,

Here

violently attacked Cassirer's theory.

real things surrounding us," said there in the corner: to me it is a real thing, which gives us heat and can burn our skin; but to you it is just a mental image, a

"You deny the existence of Riehl. "Look at that oven

Time and again Cassirer tried to explain the true of the Kantian criticism, that human reason creates our meaning knowledge of things, but not the things themselves; yet withfiction!"

out avail. When the colloquium was over, both Stumpf and Riehl pleaded against admitting Cassirer as Privatdozent. But Dilthey, who was also present at the colloquium, decisively took Cassirer Js side and finished his plea with these words: "Ilike to be a man of whom posterity will say that he Cassirer." This was sufficient to turn the tide: without rejected further discussion the faculty gave Cassirer the venia legendi.

would not

In subsequent years the writer of this biography came to Berlin many times and frequently had the opportunity of attending Cassirer's lectures. Thus he was able to observeCassirer's rapidly growing popularity; he saw how the original attendance of a few students grew to several dozens, then to

This was an outstanding success; for at that time were not obligatory for anyone, and his classroom was, therefore, crowded only because the students felt that what they got from him was true and substantial knowledge. Besides, his delivery was most attractive, his speech was

many

scores.

Cassirer's lectures

very vivid and fluent, exact and eloquentJ

at the

same time.

Especially popular were Cassirer s seminars; there, in close personal contact with his students, he displayed all the charm

and benevolence of his nature, he analyzed with endless patience

1

8

DIMITRY GAWRONSKY

and sympathetic understanding any expressed opinion and, if necessary, cautiously corrected it or interpreted it in the most fruitful possible way. He was a true paidagogos in the Platonic sense, deeply convinced that the teacher is largely to blame forthe insufficiencies of his pupil. However, when circumstances

demanded

it,

Cassirer could

he was a real master of fencing. Once it was in in 1910 our common friend persuaded us to attend a Berlin, lecture of a disciple of Avenarius. The lecture was quite confused and Cassirer was quite irritated by the lack of knowledge and understanding shown by the speaker. During the discussion, Cassirer took the floor and in the short space of less than half an hour he not merely revealed his amazingly deep and exact knowledge of Avenarius, but he uncovered so brilliantly all the inconsistencies of the main speaker that the entire lecture seemed literally to dissolve into thin air before our very eyes. When he finished, the audience cheered and laughed and went home without even listening to the lecturer's attempted stammering rejoinder. Much more important, however, was another occasion where Cassirer displayed his qualifications as a brilliant polemicist. It was when Leonard Nelson, the founder of the so-called New-Friesian "school," violently attacked Hermann Cohen. Here again it was the unfairness of the criticism, thethat lack of understanding or any desire for true understanding which induced Cassirer to answer Nelson. A polemic developed which could have become very interesting, if the opponents had been equal in intellectual stature. As things were, Cassirer towered above his antagonist to such a degree that all the time

show

they fought on different levels: Nelson tried to ridicule single sentences, taken out of Cohen's books, especially of his Logik der reinen Erkenntnis, which is a profound and creative workbut a hard nut to crack} whereas Cassirer was mainly interested in the very roots of the dissension and tried to show, by analyzing the original Kant-Fries relationship, the dangers of an ex-

aggerated psychologism for epistemology. The first great systematic work of Cassirer appeared in 1910, his Stibstanzbegrif und Funktionsbegrif. Despite the originality of the basic conception

and whole structure of this work

CASSIRER: HIS LIFEor,

AND

HIS

WORK

19

, it was several years before just because of this the importance of this work was duly recognized by the scientific world and by the philosophically interested public. Then,

maybe

however,

it

became the

first

work

of Cassirer to be translated

into several foreign languages, including English and Russian, As the title of the book indicates, it is devoted to the problem

of concepts. (Although in the title of the authorized English translation, viz., Substance and Function, this fact is almost lost sight of.) For more than two thousand years the science of logic

was based upon

Aristotle's doctrine of concepts, which says that generalization is always the result of abstraction: from a group of similar things, for instance, round, oval, square, the attributes common to them all are abrectangular tablesin a general concept, "table." This theory, Cassirer argues, has one decisive weakness: whence and

stracted

and summarized

get those groups of similar things that we allegedly use as the basis for our abstractions? does it happen that

how do we

How

from one perception, say that of a round

table,

we proceed

to

other perceptions which are similar to the first one and not to the perceptions of, for instance, "auto," "star," "water," in which case we would not obtain a group of similar things? Is it

not obvious that we use the first perception as a kind of criterion with the help of which we are able to decide what belongs to our group of similar things and what not? Thus Aristotle'sabstraction

becomes only possible as the result of a

selec-

tion, of the coordinated activity of the human reason, which is the first and fundamental step toward general notions. "What

stance that

lends the theory of abstraction support is merely the circumit does not presuppose the contents, out of which

it

the concept is to develop, as disconnected particularities, but that tacitly thinks them in the form of an ordered manifold fromfirst.

concept, however, is not deduced thereby, but presupposed; for, when we ascribe to a manifold an order and connection of elements, we have already presupposed the con-

the

The

cept, if not in 1 tion."

its

complete form, yet in

its

fundamental funcabstractionp. 17.

Thus1

Aristotle's theory of concept, based

upon the

Ernst Cassirer, Substance and Function. Chicago

London, 1923,

20of

DIMITRY GAWRONSKYcommon

elements from a group of similar things, is nothing else than an obvious circulus viciosus. Yet this is not all. The

theory of abstraction shows also another decisive weakness: in order to form a concept only such attributes are retained which

given group, whereas all particularities are not included in a general concept they are thrown aside and fade away. And the more general a conjustareto all elements of a

common

cept

is,

the less attributes

it

contains, the

more

particularities

disappear in the process of abstraction. Yet, "the genuine concept does not disregard the peculiarities and particularities whichit

but seeks to show the necessity of the occurrence and connection of just these particularities. Here the moreit,. .

holds under

.

universal concept shows itself also the more rich in content." Scientific concepts are all of this kind} they are general ideas, but their true function consists of expressing the rule from which

2

a

numberIn

his Substance

of concrete particular forms can be derived. and Function Cassirer also undertook the

task of showing what particular kinds of concepts the different realms of the exact and natural sciences, underly what is the logical essence of such categories as number, space,difficult

time, energy,in the

forth. Cassirer was particularly interested of how the structure of concepts changes its problem character when we pass from one field of science to another j for instance, from mathematics to physics, or from physics to

and so

biology, etc. In carrying out this plan, he made, for the time in the history of human thought, the very important

first

and

successful attempt to give a systematic analysis of concepts which underly the science of chemistry. The last part of the

book

devoted to the theory of knowledge proper, to the concepts and methods by which human reason transforms sensoryis

impressions into the systems of objective science. The members of the Marburg school were very proud of this new performance of Cassirer. Yet, the opposition came this time

Hermann Cohen

from a quarter from which it had been least expected from himself. Already while reading the proofs, Cohen obtained the impression, that as he expressed it later in a letter to Cassirer "our unity was jeopardized." Especiallypp. 19-20.

CASSIRER: HIS LIFEone long paragraphin Cassirer's

AND

HIS

WORKto

21

book seemed to Cohen

be

quite inconsistent with the teachings of the

Marburg

school,

and, although all of Cohen's closest disciples were convinced that Cohen was mistaken, Cassirer, who invariably held Cohenin deepest respect, at once decided to reshape the despite the fact that he did not agree with Cohen

whole page, and that his

book was already

in the final stages of printing. Upon reading the finished book, Cohen wrote to Cassirer: "I congratulate you

and all members of our philosophical community on your new and great achievement. If I shall not be able to write the second part of my Logic, no harm will be done to our common cause,since

But

to a large degree fulfilled in the criticism comes after that: "Yet, after

my

project

is

your book."first

3

my

readingin

of your book Irelation

still

cannot discard as

of Marburg: you put the center and you believe that you have accomplished with the

wrong what I told you of gravity upon the concept

help of this concept the idealization of all materiality. The expression even escaped you, that the concept of relation is acategory; yet it is a category only insofar as it is function, and function unavoidably demands the infinitesimal element in

which alone the root of the ideal

reality can be found."

controversy goes back to Cohen's daring attempt to establish the infinitesimal numbers as an absolute element, to put this absolute element before the whole number and to derive the latter

The

from the former. There can beis

little

doubt,

an impossible undertaking; the value of a number depends always on its relation to other numbers in which it may be contemplated: five is only fiye in relation to one, yet it is an infinite number in relation to an infinitesimal one, and an infinitesimal number in relation to an infinite one. Cassirer's "function," as contrasted with "substance," meant just that: it is impossible to ascribe an absolute value to a mathematical element, since this value is determined by different relations to which it may belong.logically as well as mathematically, that thisCassirer's theory of concept proved its great fruitfulness for the whole field of theoretical knowledge; it freed the principles

and methods of human reason from the shadow of absoluteness3

From

Cohen's letter to Cassirer of August 24, 1910.

22

DIMITRY GAWRONSKYtheir functional nature as flexible instruments of

and disclosed

human knowledge. And

just as the functional concept contains a direction, a certain point of view which serves as a basis of measurement for the similarity of single elements and arranges them in groups and series according to their affinity, so "theideal connections spoken of by logic and mathematics are the permanent lines of direction, by which experience is orientated

in

its scientific

shaping.

The function of these connections is their

permanent and indestructible value, and is verified as identical 4 through all changes in the accidental material of experience." The publication of this important work brought about no change in Cassirer's academic career j he was still Privatdozent in Berlin, and not one single German university invited him, even as an assistant professor. Every time a chair in philosophy became free, Cassirer was invariably listed by the respective faculty as a candidate, but, oddly enough, his name was always put in the second place. Cassirer himself was quite content with his limited academic activities in the University of Berlin ; he not only never complained, but he did not even seem to feel the unfairness of the situation. He enjoyed his life and work in Berlin, his great success as teacher and scholar, even though officially it remained unrecognized. Harvard University was the first to invite him, in 1914, for two years as visiting professor. However, personal reasons prevented Cassirer at that time from accepting this invitation. The same year he was awarded the Kuno Fischer Gold Medal by the Heidelberg Academy. Upon Cassirer's special request he was given a bronze medal instead, and the difference in monetary value 3,000 R.M. was sent to the Red Cross. Although Cassirer was highly absorbed by his research work and academic activities, he still found time to organize and direct a new edition of Kant's works. For this edition he wrote an extensive biographical and philosophical introduction to Kant's system. In this introduction he gives a very clear both popular and truly scientific picture of the evolution of Kant's central ideas and makes several important contributions to the understanding of Kant's philosophy. Perhaps the most important4

Op.

cit.,

p. 323.

CASSIRER: HIS LIFEof these contributions

AND

HIS

WORK

23

is Cassirer's analysis of the fundamental ideas of Kant's Kritik der Urteilskrajt and his explanation of why Kant based his theory of judgment upon two seemingly

so different roots as the philosophy of art, biology, on the other.

on the one hand, and

Thus

far all of Cassirer's publications

had been devoted

to

the problem of knowledge. Although he was vitally interested in all the problems of art, ethics, and religion, and assiduously

worked on them, he somehow did not feel ready to write down the results of his research; and meanwhile he was busy with the preparations for the third volume of his Erkewntws'problem.

The

outbreak of the First

World War changedhis

was drafted for Civil Service, and

work

his plans. consisted of the

He

reading of foreign newspapers. Thus he was able to contemplate the war from different points of view and to obtain a truer picture of events j he knew already in the early stages of the

war

that

Germany was doomed.

Besides, his

whole nature was

absolutely contrary to the imperialistic megalomania of Prussian militarism. Yet he was a philosopher, not a politician, and

he found

his

own way

of expressing his attitude toward the

ultimate spiritual values around which the struggle raged: he published his book Freiheit und Form.

All truly humanitarian and

idealistic tendencies of

German

culture, everything which proclaimed the dignity and freedom of individuals and of nations Leasing and Schiller, Kant and

was convincingly and eloquently expounded by Cassirer in this book, providing a magnificent picture of man's struggle for his spiritual liberation, showing Lessing's cosmopolitanism and sublime tolerance, Schiller's keen sensitiveness and passion for freedom, Kant's radical, conception of natural right, and Goethe's redemption of the individual as milestonesof this eternal process. Cassirer showed in this book that his feeling for all forms of

Goethe

poetry was just as deep and incisive as his understanding of science. His interpretation of Goethe's lyrics, his analysis of Goethe's poetical work in the different stages of its develop-

ment belong

to the best that has ever been written

on

this sub-

ject. Cassirer's

strong

artistic

vein enabled

him

to grasp the

24

DIMITRY GAWRONSKY

inner core of Goethe's symbols, to provide those symbols with

profound and most surprising interpretation. "Mahomed," "Pandora" to mention only two examples in Cassirer's masterly exposition appeared suddenly in a new light and their unfathomable wisdom and beauty became visible to anyone. No less penetrating was his analysis of Goethe's achievements in the fields of aesthetics, morals, and religion. Cassirer always felt keenly that great poets and belletrists were, in their innermost,

and

endeavoring to find a solution to the eternal problems of being life, akin to the search of the great philosophers} they onlyexpressed their thoughts and beliefs in the form of concrete symbols and images, and not in the form of abstract reasoning.

Goethe's

titanic personality,

the originality, depth and versa-

tility of his creative power irresistibly attracted Cassirer all his life, and in a long series of special articles he followed up his

study of Goethe. Brilliant was the way in which he revealed the deepest ideological roots of Goethe's polemic attitude towards

Newton, or described Goethe's conception of history, or compared the spiritual worlds of Goethe and Plato. All who knew Cassirer personally admitted that his face reminded them of Goethe^ yet their mental similarity was even more striking it was the same wide scope of spiritual interests, the same tendency to regard every event in the light of endless historical perspectives, to transform every single fact into an element of an infinite system. It was undoubtedly this affinity of mentaltendencies which accounted for Cassirer's unique understanding of Goethe

War nicht das Auge sonnenhaft,Die Sonne Konnt'es nie erblicken..

.

.

World War

I

brought a deep spiritual

crisis in

Europe.

One

belief especially

had been shattered to its very foundation: the idea that human reason was a decisive power in the social life of man. When, at the beginning of the twentieth century,Georges Sorel advanced his theory that not reason but social myth was the driving power of human history, that the actions of human societies were determined not by objective truth and cool deliberation but by peculiar images, mostly born out of hatred, revulsion, contempt, and filled with strong impulses and

CASSIRER: HIS LIFE

AND

HIS

WORK

25

emotions, images, which have nothing to do with truth and often represent the greatest possible falsehood the scholars

only laughed at him and paid no attention at all to his "queer" ideas. Yet, the progress of the war and the subsequent years which saw the birth of several totalitarian ideologies and theirvictorious

march

to

power

in the largest countries of

Europe,

ruined and disarrayed by the war, clearly showed the extent of truth contained in Sorel's social theories. The stormy pace ofa new approach to the problems of ways and means for its understanding. This was the background for Cassirer's theory of symbolic forms his great contribution to the understanding of the most vital problems of our time and of history.historical events

demanded

reality, different

When

the author of this article again

met

after the termination of

World War

I,

Cassirer, shortly Cassirer was already

quite absorbed in his new work. Cassirer once told how in 1917, just as he entered a street car to ride home, the conception of the

symbolic forms flashed upon him 5 a few minutes later, when he reached his home, the whole plan of his new voluminous work

was ready in his mind, in essentially the form in which it was carried out in the course of the subsequent ten years. Suddenlythe onesidedness of the Kant-Cohen theory of knowledge became quite clear to Cassirer. It is not true that only the human

reason opens the door which leads to the understanding of reality, it is rather the whole of the human mind, with all its

and impulses, all its potencies of imagination, feeling, volition, and logical thinking which builds the bridge between man's soul and reality, which determines and moulds our confunctions

ception of reality. "The true concept of reality cannot be pressed into a plain and abstract form of being, it rather contains the

whole manifold and wealth ofany new

spiritual life.

... In

this sense

not only the concept and system of 'symbolic form' knowledge, but also the intuitive world of art or myth or languaccording to a saying of Goethe's a revelaage, represents

from the inside toward the outside, a 'synthesis of world and mind,' which alone makes certain for us the genuine 5 unity of both." The whole world of reality can be graspedtion directed5

Ernst Cassirer, Phttosofhie der symbolischen Formen. Vol.

I, p.

46.

26

DIMITRY GAWRONSKY

only with the help of certain mental images, symbolic forms,

and the

task of philosophy consists in the understanding of those mental and psychical functions which determine the structure of these symbolic forms. A queer image of primitive totemism may be vastly different from the modern conception of four-

dimentional space, yet they both show a definite regularity of inward structure, they both can be reduced to some fundamental functions of the human mind. Even the spiritual world of lunatics reveals to an attentive analysis some definite regularities which find their expression in queer but still understandable

symbolic forms and their study proved to be helpful for the diagnosis and treatment of certain mental diseases. The whole of human culture is reflected in our mind in an

row of symbolic forms, and Cassirer now embarked the titanic task of first trying to analyze the structure of upon these forms in general, and, secondly, to show what special kind of symbolic forms underlie the different realms of human lifeendlessreligion, art, science, social activities.

For many years the

external conditions of his life were greatly favorable to this

immensefurt,

task:

during

founded in Germany, one

World War I two new universities were in Hamburg and the other in Frank-

both quite progressive and democratic, and the first thing they both did was to offer Cassirer a full professorship in philosophy. Cassirer decided to accept the offer of the Uni-

Hamburg because it showed an exceptionally great for securing his services. never regretted his eagerness choice in Hamburg he found everything he could desire: aversity of

He

and most interested audience for his lectures, and the famous private "Warburg Library" with a rich collection of materials which Cassirer needed for his researches into symbolic forms. Many times Cassirer expressed his positive amazement at the fact that the selection of the materials and the whole inward structure of this library suggested the idea that its founder must have more or less anticipated his theory oflarge

symbolic forms as a system of fundamental functions of the

human mind underlyingand explaining the

all basic tendencies of

human

culture

particular nature of

any one of them.

CASSIRER: HIS LIFE

AND

HIS

WORK

27

der symbolischen

In the years 1923-1929 the three volumes of his Philosophie Formen were composed and published. Basedvast historical

upon

and systematical material, the work gives

a penetrating analysis of Cassirer's general theory of symbolic forms and of its application to the problems of language, of myths, and of knowledge. Almost incredible is the wealth ofconcrete facts and original ideas by means of which Cassirer shows the fruitfulness of his theory. Almost the entire world's literascience

ture on language and myths, almost all the realms of human had been closely explored by him and the particular

kinds of symbolic forms in those different realms shown in bold and broad relief. Yet, even this immense job did not take all of

time and energy. During the same years, while working out and writing down his Philoso'phie der symbolischen Formeny he finished the third volume of his Erkenntnityroblemy he wrote a book on Einstein's theory of relativity and pubCassirer's

lished literally scores of philosophical and literary articles. Besides, he eagerly performed his duties as academic teacher, gave

weekly several lectures and seminars, and was most accessible to any student who desired his help on philosophical problems. Despite this immense amount of intellectual work whichCassirer performed day after day, there was nothing of the

ivory tower pedant in him; he spent almost every evening in the circle of his family and of his friends, and he showed a livelyinterest in all world-events. It

was able

was amazing to what a degree he to keep abreast of so many things which had no relation whatsoever to his scientific work he was a thorough connoisseur of classical music, and in the classical operas he knew notonly every single melody, but also every word of the text, often even in several different languages. He knew a great deal about

many fields

of sport and was able to discuss some intricate problems of passiance or skat. He was even interested in the most impersonal manner in stock exchange prices and tried to understand what was hidden behind their seemingly grotesque and unpredictable movements. Yet, there was only one game which he really cherished: chess. Only on rare occasions did he have the time and opportunity to play a game of chess or to

28

DIMITRY GAWRONSKY

analyze the game of an outstanding master; but when he did take the time for such it absorbed him to such a degree that as long as he busied himself with chess he did not hear or see anything that was going on around him. This great versatility proved to be a real blessing to Cassirer when, in 1930, he was elected rector of the University of Ham-

he had to represent the University at the various academic functions and to make speeches on literally every type of subject one day he spoke on the development of modern another day on the breeding of hogs, then again on the traffic, importance of athletic sports. And the most amazing part of it was that the scope of his understanding and the wealth of his knowledge were so vast that whatever subject he touched upon he was able to illuminate its different aspects and to show its true place in the whole of cultural life. Fourteen most prolific years of his life Cassirer spent in Hamburg; into this period fell also two large research works on the history of philosophy, one concerning the time of theburg.

Now

Reformation, the other dealing with the development of Platonism in England. This latter work, published in 1932, was the last one he ever published in Germany. Meanwhile heavy storm clouds darkened the skies over Germany, the Hitler

movement was onto take over the

the verge of

its first

decisive victory, ready

Reich government. Already years before Cassirer had recognized the great danger of this movement; he never listened to the speeches of Hitler or his henchmen, he never read their books and pamphlets; yet he seemed to know with uncanny foresight what Nazism was about to do to

Germany and

to the rest of the world.is

When

their notorious

what serves our Fuehrer" first came up, and slogan: