Skip to main content

Reading from _An Essay on Man_(Cassirer) 003

_An Essay on Man_, Cassirer. Bantam Books, NY, January 1970.

Part I: What is Man?
Chapter I: The Crisis in Man's Knowledge of Himself.
Section 3, pp. 14 – 18.

After Pascal's reformulation of the old and persistent conflict between classical metaphysics and Christian theology, the question of man starts to be approached from an entirely new direction. The element of a providential and hierarchical order that is common to the systems of classical reason and revelation, and which places man at the center of the universe, is displaced by empirical observation and logical interpretation. Copernican heliocentrism and other scientific developments reveal a cosmos that is indifferent to man, his culture, and his moral concerns, and this indifference is understood as the starting point of all knowledge, including that which man has of himself. Here we see the plausibility of extending scientific vision to the whole of life. If humanity is understood as just a small and vanishing part of a vast, impersonal universe, then all genuine knowledge can be expected to reflect this absence of interest or focus on man. Scientific knowledge begins to claim a certain objectivity that ”puts man into his place” by relentlessly minimizing his subjectivity (sounds like early Protestant asceticism!). The problem arises when this minimization/elimination (note the correspondence to the idea of approaching zero in calculus; note also the reformulation of the meaningful/non-meaning (sacred/profane) distinction implicit in calculus (the significant quantity of, for example, the volume of a sphere is approached, but never reached, by minimizing the heights of the cylinders that can be contained within the sphere (correspondence of this approach to the volume of a sphere and the approach, by Puritans, to knowledge and certainty of their future status through the accumulation of wealth?) and the modern understanding of humanity's relation to the universe) is understood and applied absolutely, and “objectivity” and “reality” are considered to be distorted and contaminated by any hint of subjectivity. With regard to history in particular, Cassirer will later make the point that the elimination of the subjective actually eliminates the object of some forms of knowledge. Thus, the momentous recognition of humanity's insignificance relative (materially?) to the universe progressively becomes utilized as the basis for lending the semblance of scientific objectivity and validity to realms of knowledge that are actually anthropocentric modes of cultural determination. I believe this instrumentalization of the modern sense of the cosmos is especially true of our economics – the impersonal Market, for example, is an application of this methodological minimization of the human rather than an empirical description of what actually happens in commerce. The experience of this displacement of man from the center of all things was agonizing even for the most sophisticated thinkers. Man is being being stripped of the complacency implicit in his tendency to take his immediate life and experience as the order of the universe. Again, there is at least some correspondence here to the Protestant denial of the relief of absolution and the puritanical rejection of repose in the certainty of one's future state. The human capacities for judgment and thought are held to be vanities unless they acknowledge the infinitesimal significance of their powers. This apparent negation of human reason, like the criticism of the ancient Skeptics, ultimately becomes a reformulation of thought and judgment and a reaffirmation of their validity. Bruno in particular overcomes the complete submersion of humanity within reality by regarding the infinite character of the universe not as a limitation and negation of thought (per the classical view of infinity), but as a measure of the unlimited scope of the human intellect. This inversion of the negation of reason into into an affirmation of reason seems to be another point of contact between the religious developments taking place alongside those in science in the early modern period. Specifically, Luther was troubled by the socially articulated distinction between the sacred and the profane that gave the Church possession of cultural meaning while consigning those outside of its hierarchy to live basically empty of meaning. He too seeks to find the positive significance in the ways of life that had been increasingly denigrated as The Church became ever more materialistic and corrupt. Subsequent philosophical and scientific work centered around the determination and exercise of this newly liberated human intellect, most significantly in mathematical theory and the concept of the lawful operation of the cosmos. Spinoza takes the final step in establishing a rationalistic anthropology that corrects the errors of mere anthropocentric thought by founding a mathematical system of ethics, and thereby demonstrating the mathematical unity of humanity with external reality. Here, again, is the philosophical anticipation of the scientism that seems to dominate our culture today. Many people expect the world and their lives to function with something like mathematical and scientific precision, and this expectation tends to become a demand that is imposed on the less powerful. Thus, and contrary to their insistence otherwise, those who have formulated and continue to maintain orthodox economic theory rarely live lives that are as thoroughly and rigorously disciplined by the market as those who live on wages.

Comments