Johann Gottfried Herder's Concept of Humanity

JohannGottfriedHerder's ConceptofHumanity HANSADLER 1.Herder—AnIrrationalist? IT1OronehundredfiftyyearsJohannGottfriedHerder(1744-1803)was perceivedasthegreat"stimulator"ofGermanliteraryandintellectual history:"father"ofStormandStress(togetherwithJohannGeorg Hamann),renewerofGermanliterarycriticismandoffolkpoetry,precursorofhistoricism (oftheoldhistoricism),precursorofRomanticism, philosopherofhumanity. Thepresumedpositiveaspectsoftheserolesasfather,stimulator,and precursor,however,seemedconfoundedbyapparentcontradictionsin hiswork.Asisoftenthecase,iftheinterpreterofaworkdoesnothave themeanstoexplaincontradictionswithinit,thenhetendstotransfer thesecontradictionstotheextratextualreality—inourcasetotheperson oftheauthor.Itisnotamatterofcreatingmeaningfulrelationships betweentextandcontext,forexamplebyembeddingideasinthehistori- calcontextinthebroadestsenseorbyconnectingthemtotraditions,but ratherofashaky"explanation"ofatextbasedonthe"character"ofits author.ThusolderscholarshipoftencharacterizedHerderasa"rhapso- dist,"asaneternal"fragmentist,"orasastubbornmoralistwhodidnot havethestrengtheithertobringhisworktoasystematicconclusionorto followthenewdevelopmentsofhistime.Psychological-biographical speculationeasilyreplacedthecriticalinvestigationofprerequisitesfor anoriginalanalysis;or,statedinmoremodernterms,thepeculiarchar- 55 56 / ADLER acteristicsoftheobjectofinvestigationwereadjustedtotheparadigm biasoftheonedoingtheanalysisandthuswereatleastpartiallyobliterated . ThosewhoareconcernedwithJohannGottfriedHerderdonotgetfar withoutaprofoundknowledgeoftheGermanandEuropeanEnlighten- ment.Thissoundsself-evidentwhencontemplatinganauthorwiththe encyclopedicknowledgeofaHerder.However,itisbynomeansself- evident,becausetheterm"enlightenment"itselfwasnotandisnotself- evident,ifonedoesnotwanttoreduceit(fortheGerman-language realm)tothepolesofrationalismandtranscendentalphilosophy,aswas longdoneandisstilldone.Accordingtothisconceptof"enlighten- ment,"whoeverdoesnotsubmittotheparadigmsofrationalism(inthe generalfashionoftheWolffianschool)andoftranscendentalphilosophy (aboveall,ofcourse,oftheKantianmold),isadaydreamer,an irrationalist,apersonpermanentlyofthepast,orevenapathological case.Fromtheendoftheeighteenthuntilthemiddleofthetwentieth centuryHerderwasclassifiedinjustthisway.Theonewhoprovidedthe cuesforthisinterpretationwasnolessafigurethanHerder'steacher from1762until1764,ImmanuelKant.Inhisreviewofthefirsttwo volumesofHerder'sgreatphilosophyofhistory,IdeenzurPhilosophie derGeschichtederMenschheit,KantturnedHerderintoadaydreamer, anirrationalist,apersonpermanentlyofthepast,andfinallyapatholog- icalcase.Whenthecelebratedfounderoftranscendentalphilosophy crushedthe"poeticphilosopher"Herderwiththeforceofhisauthority, therewasnoplaceleftforhimintheguildofphilosopherswhoaretobe takenseriously.1Butmore;Kantdeniedhimanyreliability,statingaslate as1799that"intentionaldeception[was]Herder'shallmark."2ThehistoryofphilosophyhasclearlyshownthatKantwasthewinner .Noone willseriouslywanttodenythathisCritiqueswereepoch-makingorthat theyhadalastinginfluenceevenbeyondGermanphilosophy.Undoubt- edlyHerder,whosteppedforthasanopponentofWolffianrationalism aswellasofKantiancriticism,wastheloser.Butwhosaysthattheloser iswrong? Historyconsistsofdata(fromtheLatin:"datum"—thatwhichis given),whichinhistoricaldiscoursebecomefacts(fromtheLatin: "factum"—thatwhichismade).Andboth"history"andhistoricaldis- coursearesubjecttohistoricalchange.Decisivemovementdoesnot necessarilycomeintothehumanitieswhennewdataarefound,but ratherwhenthediscourseofhistorychangesitsperspectives,itsmethod, and/oritsintention.ThomasKuhn'sconceptofparadigmshiftstill seemstomewellsuitedforunderstandingthesephenomenaofthedis- continuityofthehistory.Itiscertainlynoaccidentthatwithinthecon- Herder'sConceptofHumanity / 57 textoftherecentdiscussionofthe"postmodern,"Herderscholarshiphas receivedanewandverystrongimpetus.ThelasttwochaptersofJean FrançoisLyotard'sbookLaConditionPostmoderne:Rapportsurle savoir,1publishedin1979,bearthetitles,"Lasciencepostmoderne commerecherchedesinstabilités"and"Lalégitimationparlaparalogie." Thetextcloseswiththeauspiciousstatement:"Unepolitiquesedessine danslaquelleserontégalementrespectésledésirdejusticeetceluid'in- connu." Theessentialresultofthepostmoderndiscussionseemstometobethe regainingandenhancingofoursensibilityforthenon-dominant;atten- tiontothatwhichisimportantforhumanityasawhole,withouthaving beenrecognizedbythemajority;apleaforthepermanentbirthofthe avant-garde;asensitivityforthe"counterrational,"theperipheral,ata momentwheninnovationstillseemstobemeredeviation,ifnotsimply "wrong."Thispositionincludesnecessarilyapleaforananti-total approach—withatleastoneexception.Prerequisiteforthepostmodern claimisanassumptionwhichmayseparatemefrommanypostmodern combatants:Icannotseehowthehistoryofhumanitycanbeimagined andshapedwithoutthebasicassumptionthateachhumanbeingis allowedtodevelophiscapabilities(ίντίλίχαα).Thereisa"masternarra- tive";itishumanity'sown.Evenifproclaimed"humanity"mayturnout defactotobedeeplyscornfulofmankind—whichpolitician,which philosopherwouldwanttoobligatehimselftoamodelof"inhumanity"? But"humanity"isnotobligatedtoalinearprogression.Itisratheran explosionofcapabilitiesintoskillswhichdetermineculture,politics, science,economics,andecology. ThefactthatHerderscholarshiphastakenaconsiderableupswingin thecontextofthepostmodern,doesnotmeanthatitpresentsitself explicitlyas"postmodern."RatherIseeaconnectionbetweenthepostmoderntrendandHerderscholarshipintheircommonsensibilityforthe non-dominatingwhichisrecognizedfromanewangleasimportant.The "loser"Herderisreevaluatedasanadvocateofit>Tt\t\tiaofthehuman. OnecouldbrieflycharacterizetheneweffortsinHerder'sbehalfas examinationsofhisworkfromanon-Kantianandnon-orthodox- rationalisticperspectivetodetermineitscoherence,validity,andhistori- calmeaning.ItisunderstoodthatIamnotspeakingoftheadmirersof Herder's"irrationalism,"butratherofthosewhounderstandHerder's "irrationalism"fromanewperspectiveasatypeofrationalismwhichis tobetakenseriously;whichfellsacrificetoahistorical,scientific- politicalconstellation,butdidnotsimplysuccumbbecauseofitsargu- mentativeinvalidity.TogetherwithotherrecentHerderscholars,Iclaim 58 / ADLER thatthisnewviewofJohannGottfriedHerderandtheEnlightenmentis worthsomeeffort. Inthelastthirtyyearscarefullyandthoroughlyannotatednewedi- tionsofHerder'sworkhaveappearedinGermanandinEnglish.4Tobe suretheycannotreplaceBernhardSuphan'sstandardedition,5butthey considerablyfacilitateaccesstoHerder'swork.Whatislackingisanew historical-criticaleditionwhichalsotakesintoaccountthestillunpub- lishedmaterial.6Thisdesideratumhasbeenaroundforalongtime,butit iseasiertostateitthantodoit. TheformulationofanewimageofHerderisalsoattributedtothe cooperativeeffortsofscholars.Since1971the"BückeburgerGespräche überJohannGottfriedHerder"havetakenplaceatirregularintervals. TheyaresupportedbytheEvangelical-LutheranStateChurchof Schaumburg-Lippeundertheprofessionalorganizationalleadershipof HansDietrichIrmscherwhoiscurrently,togetherwithUlrichGaier,one ofthemostinfluentialHerderscholars.In1978,ontheoccasionofthe 175thanniversaryofHerder'sdeath,aHerderconferencetookplacein Weimarandin1984thefirstinternationalWest-GermanHerderconfer- encemetinSaarbrücken.7Inparticularthelatter,whichwasorganized bytheDeutscheGesellschaftfürdieErforschungdesachtzehnten Jahrhunderts(DGE18J),theGermanequivalentofASECS,gavenew impulsetothemostrecentHerderscholarshipbecauseofthehighlevel ofthecontributions. TwoyearsbeforetheconferenceinSaarbrückenavolumeappeared containingcontributionsbyAmericanandCanadianscholarswhichwas theresultoftheirlooseassociationthroughacommoninterestinHerder. In1985thefirstHerdersymposiumtookplaceinMonterey,whereitwas resolvedtoestablishthefirstInternationalHerderSociety(IHS).This newsocietyturnedouttobeveryfruitful.ConferencesoftheIHSat Stanfordin1987andinCharlottesvillein1990,8demonstratedthegreat interestinthisauthorandmadeitapparentthatleavingbehindtheimage ofthe"contradictory"Herderanddevelopingnewperspectiveswasno dream.Ratheraproductive,integrativeaccesstoHerderwasmadepos- sible.TheconferenceinBochum,Germanyin1992likewiseshowed promisingstepsinthisdirection. RecentmonographsbyEvaKnodt,UlrichGaier,ChristophFasel, GebhardFürst,MichaelMorton,RobertNorton,MarionHeinz,and HansAdler,togetherwithaconsiderablenumberofessaysconcerning Herder,9confirmtheimpressionthatthereisincreasinginterestinthis figurewhowasacontemporaryoftheEnlightenment,StormandStress, classicism,andearlyRomanticism.Acomprehensiveoverviewwhich Herder'sConceptofHumanity / 59 couldreplacethoseofRudolfHaym,RobertClark,andEmilAdleris stilllacking.10Butin1992aHerderYearbookwasinitiated." ThemoreorlessexpressedcommoninterestofrecentHerderscholar- shipcanprobablybestbeformulatedintwoquestions. First:IfHerder's"irrationality"isunderstoodasapolemicattribute whichwasascribedtohimbyagroupof"rationalists"historically definedassuperior(includingKant),thenthis"irrationality"isfirstofall nothingotherthanahistoricalcounter-positiontoacertain"rationality" thatisalsoanhistoricalconstruct.Thefirstquestionthereforereads:Is therearationalitytoHerder's"irrationality"?Or,formulatedmoreprag- matically:WhatdidHerder'sirrationalityachievethatcouldnotbe achievedbythedominating"rationality"?Behindthisstandsnotthe understandingofanepochwhichequates"rationality"with"enlighten- ment,"butrathertheinsightthatthe"rational"hasitsownhistoryandis indebtedtogroup-constitutiveparadigms.12Stateddifferently:inthe courseofhistory,typesofrationalitycompetewitheachother,are immunizedagainstanargumentativedebatewithoneanotherandthereforepolemizeagainsteachotherbymeansofnon -argumentativemecha- nisms.Kant'schapterconcerningtranscendentalmethodologyinhisCri- tiqueofPureReasonisveryrevealinginthisconnection.13 Second:ItisknownthatHerderwrote"unsystematically"and"frag- mentarily,"thathelikedtoreworkratherthanto"complete,"andthathe walkedtheborderlinebetweenphilosophicalandliterarydiscourse.Here lietherootsforHerder'sexploitationasa"stimulator."Ifbyasystematic statementweunderstandthekindofstatementwhich,onthebasisofan epistemologicaldecisionwithalimitednumberofwelldefinedconcepts andrulesconcerningtheirconnection(syntax),iscapableofdescribinga setofcircumstancesexhaustively,thensuchatextcanclaimconsistency foritself.Forareceiverthismeansthathecannottransferarbitrarily partsfromthetextintoothercontexts,sincetheelementsconnotethe systeminwhichtheywerevalid.Thesecondquestionthereforereads: Whatdoeswritingwhichis"fragmentary,""unsystematic,"and discourse-bridgingmeaninthecaseofHerder?Thisquestioncanonlybe answerediftheappropriatenessoftheepistemologicalchoiceandthe methodofpresentationisalsoconsidered.Thecriteriumofappropriate- ness,however,referstothebasicepistemologicaloptionaswellastothe relationshipbetweenthatwhichissignifyingandthatwhichissignified. Herderdoesnotwrite"systematically,"etc.,forthereasonthathetakes ashispointofdeparturetheunavoidableontologicalbasicassumption ofbeing,whichisaccessibleonlytomuteexperience,thatis,isnot presentable,althoughitmustbepresupposed.Hedoesnotstartout,like Kant,fromassumptionswhichprecedeallexperience,andhedoesnot 60 / ADLER startout,liketherationalisticmetaphysicians,fromthespeculativegen- eratingofbeingfromthenegationofnothingassomethingwhichis impossible.14FormulatedinaShakespeareanapparentparadox:the unsystematicseemswithHerdertohaveasystem.Consequently,even withatraditionalunderstandingof"systematic,"Herderwouldno longerbeatourdisposalforthearbitraryappropriationofquotations foreveryoccasion.Thatsaid,Iamnotexcludingthepossibilityof contradictionsinHerder'swork,evenifwithnewinvestigationsmuch thatseemedtobe"contradictory"hasalreadybeenresolved. 2.The"genetic"clarificationof"Humanity" Asiswellknown,themostelaboratesourcesforHerder'sconceptof "humanity"("Humanität")arehisWeimarphilosophyofhistory,Ideen zurPhilosophiederGeschichtederMenschheit,andhisBriefezuBeför- derungderHumanität.15Herderhasbeenpraisedfromnearlyallsidesas thephilosopherofhumanityintheGermanhistoryofideas.Theques- tioniswhetherHerder'sconceptiswhatonemeanswhenemployingthe term"humanity,"orwhetheroneisonlymakinguseofthereputationof both—oftheconceptitselfandofHerderasthephilosopherbehindthe concept—inordertopursueinterestswhichserveothergoals.When askingthis,oneisnotnecessarilyinsinuatingaconsciousmanipulation ofthesource.Thecomplaintabouttheobscureandself-contradictory Herderis,afterall,atoposwhichhasaccompaniedHerderstudiesso stubbornlythatonewondersattimeswhythereisanyesteemforthis author.Withthesequestionsthedilemmaisnotinthe"nutsandbolts," butratherinthegeneral;forselectivereceptionsubsistsonthefadingout ofthegeneral,thustendingtobecomeafake.Thisfakecomesintobeing whentheconcept"humanity"isreducedtoonlyoneofitsaspects, althoughitexhibitsanumberofaspectsandlevelswithHerder.My thesisisthatHerder'sconceptofhumanityismulti-layeredbutnot imprecise.Thatmeansthattheconcept"humanity"designatessetsof circumstanceswhichlieonvariouslevels,wherebytheselevelsstandina certain,describablerelationshipofsubstantiationtoeachother.This relationshipofsubstantiationisspecificforHerder's"genetic" procedure—aprocedurewhichalwaysassumesknowledgetobehistori- calknowledge,andtriestounderstandtheprocessofhistoryinsteadof classifyinghistorical"cases"orexplaininghistorybydeducingitfrom genericcategories.Herder'sprocedureembracesfoursteps: (1)What"humanity"iscanconsequentlybedescribedfromthemulti- tudeofthingswhichwereformedandwhichhavebeencausedbyhuman beingsinhistory(induction).(2)Fromthethingswhichhavehappenedin Herder'sConceptofHumanity / 61 historyHerderthenconcludeswithLeibnizthatthereisapowerwhich liesbackofthatwhichcanbeexperienced.(3)Rulescanbesetupwhich describetheconnectionbetweenthispowerandthephenomenawhich emanatefromit.(4)Ifarulecanbegiven,thenabasisisalsogivenfor speculationsordoctrinesconcerningthatwhichisnotyethistory—the future—andthatwhichisandwillbeappropriateforthepersonwhohas partinthis"power"—aregulative. Thefirstthreestepscanbeunderstoodcompletelyasprocedureswhich areknownfromtheempiricalnaturalsciences.ThusintheIdeenHerder alsodoesnottireofstressingthathisprocedureinthephilosophyof historyisanalogoustothenaturalsciences.ForHerderunderstands creationtobeatotalitywhosemanifestedmultiplicityinallrealmscan bedescribedasorder—asinnature,soalsoinhistory.Intheprefaceto theIdeenHerderexpressesitasfollows: TheGodwhoarrangedeverythinginnatureaccordingtomeasure, number,andweight,whoaccordinglyestablishedtheessenceofthings, theirformandconnection,theircourseandtheirpreservation,sothat fromthegreatuniversetotheparticleofdust,fromtheforcewhich supportstheearthsandthesunstothethreadofaspiderweb,onlyone wisdom,goodness,andpowerrules,He,whoalsointhehumanbody andinthefacultiesofthehumansoulconsideredeverythinginsucha wonderfulandgodlywaythatwhenwemerelydarefromafartofollow thethoughtoftheonlywiseone,weloseourselvesinanabyssofhis thoughts;how,Isaidtomyself,shouldthisGodrefrainfromhis wisdomandgraceinthedeterminationandestablishmentofourhuman raceasawholeandherehavenoplan?(Ideen,SWS,13:7) Andatthebeginningofthe15thbookhestates: Ifthereis...aGodinnature:thenHeisalsoinhistory:forthehuman beingisalsoapartofthecreationandmustinhiswildestaberrations andpassionsfollowlawswhicharenotlessbeautifulandexcellentthan thoseaccordingtowhichallcelestialandterrestrialbodiesmove. However,sinceIamconvincedthatwhatmanmustknowhebothcan andmayknow:thereforeIalsogoforthfromtheturmoilofthescenes ...withconfidenceandfreelytowardthegreatandbeautifullawsof nature,whichtheyalsofollow.(Ideen,SWS,14:207...