Max Horkheimer 1939

The Social Function of Philosophy

Written: in English in 1939; Source: Critical Theory. Selected Essays Max Horkheimer, published b !ontinuum 19"#; $ublic %omain: this article is &ree o& cop right; 'ranscribed: b (nd )lunden; $roo&ed: and corrected b !hris, #**9+

WHE, the -ords ph sics, chemistr , medicine, or histor are mentioned in a con.ersation, the participants usuall ha.e something .er de&inite in mind+ Should an di&&erence o& opinion arise, -e could consult an enc clopedia or accepted textbook or turn to one or more outstanding specialists in the &ield in /uestion+ 'he de&inition o& an one o& these sciences deri.es immediatel &rom its place in present0da societ + 'hough these sciences ma make the greatest ad.ances in the &uture, though it is e.en concei.able that se.eral o& them, ph sics and chemistr &or example, ma some da be merged, no one is reall interested in de&ining these concepts in an other -a than b re&erence to the scienti&ic acti.ities no- being carried on under such headings+ 1t is di&&erent -ith philosoph + Suppose -e ask a pro&essor o& philosoph -hat philosoph is+ 1& -e are luck and happen to a specialist -ho is not a.erse to de&initions in general, he -ill gi.e us one+ 1& -e then adopt this de&inition, -e should probabl soon disco.er that it is b no means the uni.ersall accepted meaning o& the -ord+ We might then appeal to other authorities, and pore o.er textbooks, modern and old+ 'he con&usion -ould onl increase+ Man thinkers, accepting $lato and 2ant as their authorities, regard philosoph as an exact science in its o-n right, -ith its o-n &ield and sub3ect matter+ 1n our epoch this conception is chie&l represented b the late Edmund Husserl+ 4ther thinkers, like Ernst Mach, concei.e philosoph as the critical elaboration and s nthesis o& the special sciences to a uni&ied -hole+ )ertrand 5ussell, too, holds that the task o& philosoph is 6that o& logical anal sis, &ollo-ed b logical s nthesis+7 He thus &ull agrees -ith 8+ '+ Hobhouse, -ho declares that 6$hilosoph +++ has a s nthesis o& the sciences as its goal+7 'his conception goes back to (uguste !omte and Herbert Spencer, &or -hom philosoph constituted the total s stem o& human kno-ledge+ $hilosoph , there&ore, is an independent science &or some, a subsidiar or auxiliar discipline &or others+ 1& most -riters o& philosophical -orks agree on the scienti&ic character o& philosoph , a &e-, but b no means the -orst, ha.e emphaticall denied it+ 9or the :erman poet Schiller, -hose philosophical essa s ha.e had an in&luence perhaps e.en more pro&ound than his dramas, the purpose o& philosoph -as to bring aesthetic order into our thoughts and actions+ )eaut -as the criterion o& its results+ 4ther poets, like H;lderlin and ,o.alis, held a similar position, and e.en pure philosophers, Schelling &or instance, came .er close to it in some o& their &ormulations+ Henri )ergson, at an rate, insists that philosoph is closel related to art, and is not a science+ (s i& the di&&erent .ie-s on the general character o& philosoph -ere not enough, -e also &ind the most di.erse notions about its content and its methods+ 'here are still some thinkers -ho hold that philosoph is concerned exclusi.el -ith the highest concepts and la-s o& )eing, and ultimatel -ith the cognition o& :od+ 'his is true o& the (ristotelian and ,eo0'homist schools+ 'hen there is the related .ie- that philosoph deals -ith the so0called a priori+ (lexander describes philosoph as 6the experiential or empirical stud o& the non0empirical or a priori, and o& such /uestions as arise out o& the relation o& the empirical to the a priori7 <space, time and deit =+ 4thers, -ho deri.e &rom the English sensualists and the :erman school o& 9ries and (pelt, concei.e o& it as the science o& inner experience+ (ccording to logical empiricists like !arnap, philosoph is concerned essentiall -ith scienti&ic language; according to the school o& Windelband and 5ickert <another school -ith man (merican &ollo-ers=, it deals -ith uni.ersal .alues, abo.e all -ith truth, beaut , goodness, and holiness+ 9inall , e.er one kno-s that there is no agreement in method+ 'he ,eo02antians all belie.e that the procedure o& philosoph must consist in the anal sis o& concepts and their reduction to the ultimate elements o& cognition+ )ergson and Max Scheler consider intuition <6Wesensschau, Wesenserschauung7= to be the decisi.e philosophical act+ 'he phenomenological method o& Husserl and Heidegger is &latl opposed to the empirio0criticism+ o& Mach and (.enarius+ 'he logistic o& )ertrand 5ussell, Whitehead, and their &ollo-ers, is the a.o-ed enem o& the dialectic o& Hegel+ 'he kind o& philosophi>ing one pre&ers depends, according to William ?ames, on one@s character and experience+

'hese de&initions ha.e been mentioned in order to indicate that the situation in philosoph is not the same as in other intellectual pursuits+ ,o matter ho- man points o& dispute there ma be in those &ields, at least the general line o& their intellectual -ork is uni.ersall recogni>ed+ 'he prominent representati.es more or less agree on sub3ect matter and methods+ 1n philosoph , ho-e.er, re&utation o& one school b another usuall in.ol.es complete re3ection, the negation o& the substance o& its -ork as &undamentall &alse+ 'his attitude is not shared b all schools, o& course+ ( dialectical philosoph , &or example, in keeping -ith its principles, -ill tend to extract the relati.e truths o& the indi.idual points o& .ie- and introduce them in its o-n comprehensi.e theor + 4ther philosophical doctrines, such as modern positi.ism, ha.e less elastic principles, and the simpl exclude &rom the realm o& kno-ledge a .er large part o& the philosophical literature, especiall the great s stems o& the past+ 1n short, it cannot be taken &or granted that an one -ho uses the term 6philosoph 7 shares -ith his audience more than a &e- .er .ague conceptions+ 'he indi.idual sciences appl themsel.es to problems -hich must be treated because the arise out o& the li&e process o& present0da societ + )oth the indi.idual problems and their allotment to speci&ic disciplines deri.e, in the last anal sis, &rom the needs o& mankind in its past and present &orms o& organi>ation+ 'his does not mean that e.er single scienti&ic in.estigation satis&ies some urgent need+ Man scienti&ic undertakings produced results that mankind could easil do -ithout+ Science is no exception to that misapplication o& energ -hich -e obser.e in e.er sphere o& cultural li&e+ 'he de.elopment o& branches o& science -hich ha.e onl a dubious practical .alue &or the immediate present is, ho-e.er, part o& that expenditure o& human labor -hich is one o& the necessar conditions o& scienti&ic and technological progress+ We should remember that certain branches o& mathematics, -hich appeared to be mere pla things at &irst, later turned out to be extraordinaril use&ul+ 'hus, though there are scienti&ic undertakings -hich can lead to no immediate use, all o& them ha.e some potential applicabilit -ithin the gi.en social realit , remote and .ague as it ma be+ ) its .er nature, the -ork o& the scientist is capable o& enriching li&e in its present &orm+ His &ields o& acti.it are there&ore largel marked out &or him, and the attempts to alter the boundaries bet-een the se.eral domains o& science, to de.elop ne- disciplines, as -ell as continuousl to di&&erentiate and integrate them, are al-a s guided b social need, -hether consciousl or not+ 'his need is also operati.e, though indirectl , in the laboratories and lecture halls o& the uni.ersit , not to mention the chemical laboratories and statistical departments o& large industrial enterprises and in the hospitals+ $hilosoph has no such guide+ ,aturall , man desires pla upon it; it is expected to &ind solutions &or problems -hich the sciences either do not deal -ith or treat unsatis&actoril + )ut the practice o& social li&e o&&ers no criterion &or philosoph ; philosoph can point to no successes+ 1nso&ar as indi.idual philosophers occasionall do o&&er something in this respect, it is a matter o& ser.ices -hich are not speci&icall philosophical+ We ha.e, &or example, the mathematical disco.eries o& %escartes and 8eibni>, the ps chological researches o& Hume, the ph sical theories o& Ernst Mach, and so &orth+ 'he opponents o& philosoph also sa that inso&ar as it has .alue, it is not philosoph but positi.e science+ E.er thing else in philosophical s stems is mere talk, the claim, occasionall stimulating, but usuall boring and al-a s useless+ $hilosophers, on the other hand, sho- a certain obstinate disregard &or the .erdict o& the outside -orld+ E.er since the trial o& Socrates, it has been clear that the ha.e a strained relationship -ith realit as it is, and especiall -ith the communit in -hich the li.e+ 'he tension sometimes takes the &orm o& open persecution; at other times merel &ailure to understand their language+ 'he must li.e in hiding, ph sicall or intellectuall + Scientists, too, ha.e come into con&lict -ith the societies o& their time+ )ut here -e must resume the distinction bet-een the philosophical and the scienti&ic elements o& -hich -e ha.e alread spoken, and re.erse the picture, because the reasons &or the persecution usuall la in the philosophical .ie-s o& these thinkers, not in their scienti&ic theories+ :alileo@s bitter persecutors among the ?esuits admitted that he -ould ha.e been &ree to publish his heliocentric theor i& he had placed it in the proper philosophical and theological context+ (lbertus Magnus himsel& discussed the heliocentric theor in his Summa, and he -as ne.er attacked &or it+ 9urthermore, the con&lict bet-een scientists and

societ , at least in modern times, is not connected -ith &undamentals but onl -ith indi.idual doctrines, not tolerated b this or that authorit in one countr at one time, tolerated and e.en celebrated in some other countr at the same time or soon a&ter-ards+ 'he opposition o& philosoph to realit arises &rom its principles+ $hilosoph insists that the actions and aims o& man must not be the product o& blind necessit + ,either the concepts o& science nor the &orm o& social li&e, neither the pre.ailing -a o& thinking nor the pre.ailing mores should be accepted b custom and practiced uncriticall + $hilosoph has set itsel& against mere tradition and resignation in the decisi.e problems o& existence, and it has shouldered the unpleasant task o& thro-ing the light o& consciousness e.en upon those human relations and modes o& reaction -hich ha.e become so deepl rooted that the seem natural, immutable, and eternal+ 4ne could repl that the sciences, too, and particularl their in.entions and technological changes, sa.e mankind &rom the deep0-orn groo.es o& habit+ When -e compare present0da li&e -ith that thirt , &i&t , or a hundred ears ago, -e cannot truth&ull accept the notion that the sciences ha.e not disturbed human habits and customs+ ,ot onl industr and transportation, but e.en art, has been rationali>ed+ ( single illustration -ill su&&ice+ 1n &ormer ears a pla -right -ould -ork out his indi.idual conception o& human problems in the seclusion o& his personal li&e+ When his -ork &inall reached the public, he thereb exposed his -orld o& ideas to con&lict -ith the existing -orld and thus contributed to the de.elopment o& his o-n mind and o& the social mind as -ell+ )ut toda both the production and reception o& -orks o& art on the screen and the radio ha.e been completel rationali>ed+ Mo.ies are not prepared in a /uiet studio; a -hole sta&& o& experts is engaged+ (nd &rom the outset the goal is not harmon -ith some idea, but harmon -ith the current .ie-s o& the public, -ith the general taste, care&ull examined and calculated be&orehand b these experts+ 1&, sometimes, the pattern o& an artistic product does not harmoni>e -ith public opinion, the &ault usuall does not lie in an intrinsic disagreement, but in an incorrect estimate b the producers o& the reaction o& public and press+ 'his much is certain: no sphere o& industr , either material or intellectual, is e.er in a state o& complete stabilit ; customs ha.e no time in -hich to settle do-n+ 'he &oundations o& present0da societ are constantl shi&ting through the inter.ention o& science+ 'here is hardl an acti.it in business or in go.ernment -hich thought is not constantl engaged in simpli& ing and impro.ing+ )ut i& -e probe a little deeper, -e disco.er that despite all these mani&estations, man@s -a o& thinking and acting is not progressing as much as one might be led to belie.e+ 4n the contrar , the principles nounderl ing the actions o& men, at least in a large portion o& the -orld, are certainl more mechanical than in other periods -hen the -ere grounded in li.ing consciousness and con.iction+ 'echnological progress has helped to make it e.en easier to cement old illusions more &irml , and to introduce ne- ones into the minds o& men -ithout inter&erence &rom reason+ 1t is the .er di&&usion and industriali>ation o& cultural institutions -hich cause signi&icant &actors o& intellectual gro-th to decline and e.en disappear, because o& shallo-ness o& content, dullness o& the intellectual organs, and elimination o& some o& man@s indi.idualistic creati.e po-ers+ 1n recent decades, this dual aspect o& the triumphal procession o& science and technolog has been repeatedl noted b both romantic and progressi.e thinkers+ 'he 9rench -riter $aul AalBr has recentl &ormulated the situation -ith particular cogenc + He relates ho- he -as taken to the theater as a child to see a &antas in -hich a oung man -as pursued b an e.il spirit -ho used e.er sort o& de.ilish de.ice to &righten him and make him do his bidding+ When he la in bed at night, the e.il spirit surrounded him -ith hellish &iends and &lames; suddenl his room -ould become an ocean and the bedspread a sail+ ,o sooner did one ghost disappear, than a ne- one arri.ed+ (&ter a -hile these horrors ceased to a&&ect the little bo , and &inall , -hen a ne- one began, he exclaimed: Voil les btises qui recommencent! <Here comes some more o& that nonsenseC= Some da , AalBr concludes, mankind might react in the same -a to the disco.eries o& science and the mar.els o& technolog + ,ot all philosophers, and -e least o& all, share $aul AalBr @s pessimistic conception o& scienti&ic progress+ )ut it is true that neither the achie.ements o& science b themsel.es, nor the ad.ance in industrial method,

are immediatel identical -ith the real progress o& mankind+ 1t is ob.ious that man ma be materiall , emotionall , and intellectuall impo.erished at decisi.e points despite the progress o& science and industr + Science and technolog are onl elements in an existing social totalit , and it is /uite possible that, despite all their achie.ements, other &actors, e.en the totalit itsel&, could be mo.ing back-ards, that man could become increasingl stunted and unhapp , that the indi.idual could be ruined and nations headed to-ard disaster+ We are &ortunate that -e li.e in a countr -hich has done a-a -ith national boundaries and -ar situations o.er hal& a continent+ )ut in Europe, -hile the means o& communication became more rapid and complete, -hile distances decreased, -hile the habits o& li&e became more and more alike, tari&& -alls gre- higher and higher, nations &e.erishl piled up armaments, and both &oreign relations and internal political conditions approached and e.entuall arri.ed at a state o& -ar+ 'his antagonistic situation asserts itsel& in other parts o& the -orld, too, and -ho kno-s -hether, and &or holong, the remainder o& the -orld -ill be able to protect itsel& against the conse/uences in all their intensit + 5ationalism in details can readil go -ith a general irrationalism+ (ctions o& indi.iduals, correctl regarded as reasonable and use&ul in dail li&e, ma spell -aste and e.en destruction &or societ + 'hat is -h in periods like ours, -e must remember that the best -ill to create something use&ul ma result in its opposite, simpl because it is blind to -hat lies be ond the limits o& its scienti&ic specialt or pro&ession, because it &ocuses on -hat is nearest at hand and misconstrues its true nature, &or the latter can be re.ealed onl in the larger context+ 1n the ,e- 'estament, 6'he kno- not -hat the do7 re&ers onl to e.ildoers+ 1& these -ords are not to appl to all mankind, thought must not be merel con&ined -ithin the special sciences and to the practical learning o& the pro&essions, thought -hich in.estigates the material and intellectual presuppositions that are usuall taken &or granted, thought -hich impregnates -ith human purpose those relationships o& dail li&e that are almost blindl created and maintained+ When it -as said that the tension bet-een philosoph and realit is &undamental, unlike the occasional di&&iculties against -hich science must struggle in social li&e, this re&erred to the tendenc embodied in philosoph , not to put an end to thought, and to exercise particular control o.er all those &actors o& li&e -hich are generall held to be &ixed, uncon/uerable &orces or eternal la-s+ 'his -as precisel the issue in the trial o& Socrates+ (gainst the demand &or submission to the customs protected b the gods and un/uestioning adaptation to the traditional &orms o& li&e, Socrates asserted the principle that man should kno- -hat he does, and shape his o-n destin + His god d-ells -ithin him, that is to sa , in his o-n reason and -ill+ 'oda the con&licts in philosoph no longer appear as struggles o.er gods, but the situation o& the -orld is no less critical+ We should indeed be accepting the present situation i& -e -ere to maintain that reason and realit ha.e been reconciled, and that man@s autonom -as assured -ithin this societ + 'he original &unction o& philosoph is still .er rele.ant+ 1t ma not be incorrect to suppose that these are the reasons -h discussions -ithin philosoph , and e.en discussions about the concept o& philosoph , are so much more radical and unconciliator than discussions in the sciences+ Dnlike an other pursuit, philosoph does not ha.e a &ield o& action marked out &or it -ithin the gi.en order+ 'his order o& li&e, -ith its hierarch o& .alues, is itsel& a problem &or philosoph + While science is still able to re&er to gi.en data -hich point the -a &or it, philosoph must &all back upon itsel&, upon its o-n theoretical acti.it + 'he determination o& its ob3ect &alls -ithin its o-n program much more than is the case -ith the special sciences, e.en toda -hen the latter are so deepl engrossed -ith problems o& theor and methodolog + 4ur anal sis also gi.es us an insight into the reason -h philosoph has recei.ed so much more attention in European li&e than in (merica+ 'he geographical expansion and historical de.elopment ha.e made it possible &or certain social con&licts, -hich ha.e &lared up repeatedl and sharpl in Europe because o& the existing relationships, to decline in signi&icance in this continent under the strain o& opening up the countr and o& per&orming the dail tasks+ 'he basic problems o& societal li&e &ound a temporar practical solution, and so the tensions -hich gi.e rise to theoretical thought in speci&ic historical situations, ne.er became so important+ 1n this countr , theoretical thought usuall lags &ar behind the determination and accumulation o& &acts+ Whether that kind o& acti.it still satis&ies the

demands -hich are 3ustl made upon kno-ledge in this countr too, is a problem -hich -e do not ha.e the time to discuss no-+ 1t is true that the de&initions o& man modern authors, some o& -hich ha.e alread been cited, hardl re.eal that character o& philosoph -hich distinguishes it &rom all the special sciences+ Man philosophers thro- en.ious glances at their colleagues in other &aculties -ho are much better o&& because the ha.e a -ell0marked &ield o& -ork -hose &ruit&ulness &or societ cannot be /uestioned+ 'hese authors struggle to 6sell7 philosoph as a particular kind o& science, or at least, to pro.e that it is .er use&ul &or the special sciences+ $resented in this -a , philosoph is no longer the critic, but the ser.ant o& science and the social &orms in general+ Such an attitude is a con&ession that thought -hich transcends the pre.ailing &orms o& scienti&ic acti.it , and thus transcends the hori>on o& contemporar societ , is impossible+ 'hought should rather be content to accept the tasks set &or it b the e.er rene-ed needs o& go.ernment and industr , and to deal -ith these tasks in the &orm in -hich the are recei.ed+ 'he extent to -hich the &orm and content o& these tasks are the correct ones &or mankind at the present historical moment, the /uestion -hether the social organi>ation in -hich the arise is still suitable &or mankind E such problems are neither scienti&ic nor philosophical in the e es o& those humble philosophers; the are matters &or personal decision, &or sub3ecti.e e.aluation b the indi.idual -ho has surrendered to his taste and temper+ 'he onl philosophical position -hich can be recogni>ed in such a conception is the negati.e doctrine that there reall is no philosoph , that s stematic thought must retire at the decisi.e moments o& li&e, in short, philosophical skepticism and nihilism+ )e&ore proceeding &urther, it is necessar to distinguish the conception o& the social &unction o& philosoph presented here &rom another .ie-, best represented in se.eral branches o& modern sociolog , -hich identi&ies philosoph -ith one general social &unction, namel ideolog + 'his .ie- maintains that philosophical thought, or, more correctl , thought as such, is merel the expression o& a speci&ic social situation+ E.er social group E the :erman ?unkers, &or example E de.elops a conceptual apparatus, certain methods o& thought and a speci&ic st le o& thought adapted to its social position+ 9or centuries the li&e o& the ?unkers has been associated -ith a speci&ic order o& succession; their relationship to the princel d nast upon -hich the -ere dependent and to their o-n ser.ants had patriarchal &eatures+ !onse/uentl , the tended to base their -hole thought on the &orms o& the organic, the ordered succession o& generations, on biological gro-th+ E.er thing appeared under the aspect o& the organism and natural ties+ 8iberal bourgeoisie, on the other hand, -hose happiness and unhappiness depend upon business success, -hose experience has taught them that e.er thing must be reduced to the common denominator o& mone , ha.e de.eloped a more abstract, more mechanistic -a o& thinking+ ,ot hierarchical but le.eling tendencies are characteristic o& their intellectual st le, o& their philosoph + 'he same approach applies to other groups, past and present+ With the philosoph o& %escartes, &or example, -e must ask -hether his notions corresponded to the aristocratic and ?esuit groups o& the court, or to the noblesse de robe, or to the lo-er bourgeoisie and the masses+ E.er pattern o& thought, e.er philosophical or other cultural -ork, belongs to a speci&ic social group, -ith -hich it originates and -ith -hose existence it is bound up+ E.er pattern o& thought is 6ideolog +7 'here can be no doubt that there is some truth in this attitude+ Man ideas pre.alent toda are re.ealed to be mere illusions -hen -e consider them &rom the point o& .ie- o& their social basis+ )ut it is not enough merel to correlate these ideas -ith some one social group, as that sociological school does+ We must penetrate deeper and de.elop them out o& the decisi.e historical process &rom -hich the social groups themsel.es are to be explained+ 8et us take an example+ 1n %escartes@ philosoph , mechanistic thinking, particularl mathematics, pla s an important part+ We can e.en sa that this -hole philosoph is the uni.ersali>ation o& mathematical thought+ 4& course, -e can no- tr to &ind some group in societ -hose character is correlati.e -ith this .ie-point, and -e shall probabl &ind some such de&inite group in the

societ o& %escartes@ time+ )ut a more complicated, et more ade/uate, approach is to stud the producti.e s stem o& those da s and to sho- ho- a member o& the rising middle class, b &orce o& his .er acti.it in commerce and manu&acture, -as induced to make precise calculations i& he -ished to preser.e and increase his po-er in the ne-l de.eloped competiti.e market, and the same holds true o& his agents, so to speak, in science and technolog -hose in.entions and other scienti&ic -ork pla ed so large a part in the constant struggle bet-een indi.iduals, cities, and nations in the modern era+ 9or all these sub3ects, the gi.en approach to the -orld -as its consideration in mathematical terms+ )ecause this class, through the de.elopment o& societ , became characteristic o& the -hole o& societ , that approach -as -idel di&&used &ar be ond the middle class itsel&+ Sociolog is not su&&icient+ We must ha.e a comprehensi.e theor o& histor i& -e -ish to a.oid serious errors+ 4ther-ise -e run the risk o& relating important philosophical theories to accidental, or at an rate, not decisi.e groups, and o& misconstruing the signi&icance o& the speci&ic group in the -hole o& societ , and, there&ore, o& misconstruing the culture pattern in /uestion+ )ut this is not the chie& ob3ection+ 'he stereot ped application o& the concept o& ideolog to e.er pattern o& thought is, in the last anal sis, based on the notion that there is no philosophical truth, in &act no truth at all &or humanit , and that all thought is seinsgebunden <situationall determined=+ 1n its methods and results it belongs onl to a speci&ic stratum o& mankind and is .alid onl &or this stratum+ 'he attitude to be taken to philosophical ideas does not comprise ob3ecti.e testing and practical application, but a more or less complicated correlation to a social group+ (nd the claims o& philosoph are thus satis&ied+ We easil recogni>e that this tendenc , the &inal conse/uence o& -hich is the resolution o& philosoph into a special science, into sociolog , merel repeats the skeptical .ie- -hich -e ha.e alread critici>ed 1t is not calculated to explain the social &unction o& philosoph , but rather to per&orm one itsel&, namel , to discourage thought &rom its practical tendenc o& pointing to the &uture+ 'he real social &unction o& philosoph lies in its criticism o& -hat is pre.alent+ 'hat does not mean super&icial &ault0&inding -ith indi.idual ideas or conditions, as though a philosopher -ere a crank+ ,or does it mean that the philosopher complains about this or that isolated condition and suggests remedies+ 'he chie& aim o& such criticism is to pre.ent mankind &rom losing itsel& in those ideas and acti.ities -hich the existing organi>ation o& societ instills into its members+ Man must be made to see the relationship bet-een his acti.ities and -hat is achie.ed thereb , bet-een his particular existence and the general li&e o& societ , bet-een his e.er da pro3ects and the great ideas -hich he ackno-ledges+ $hilosoph exposes the contradiction in -hich man is entangled in so &ar as he must attach himsel& to isolated ideas and concepts in e.er da li&e+ M point can easil be seen &rom the &ollo-ing+ 'he aim o& Western philosoph in its &irst complete &orm, in $lato, -as to cancel and negate onesidedness in a more comprehensi.e s stem o& thought, in a s stem more &lexible and better adapted to realit + 1n the course o& some o& the dialogues, the teacher demonstrates ho- his interlocutor is ine.itabl in.ol.ed in contradictions i& he maintains his position too onesidedl + 'he teacher sho-s that it is necessar to ad.ance &rom this one idea to another, &or each idea recei.es its proper meaning onl -ithin the -hole s stem o& ideas+ !onsider, &or example, the discussion o& the nature o& courage in the Laches. When the interlocutor clings to his de&inition that courage means not running a-a &rom the battle&ield, he is made to reali>e that in certain situations, such beha.ior -ould not be a .irtue but &oolhardiness, as -hen the -hole arm is retreating and a single indi.idual attempts to -in the battle all b himsel&+ 'he same applies to the idea o& So hrosyne, inade/uatel translated as temperance or moderation+ So hrosyne is certainl a .irtue, but it becomes dubious i& it is made the sole end o& action and is not grounded in kno-ledge o& all the other .irtues+ So hrosyne is concei.able onl as a moment o& correct conduct -ithin the -hole+ ,or is the case less true &or 3ustice+ :ood -ill, the -ill to be 3ust, is a beauti&ul thing+ )ut this sub3ecti.e stri.ing is not enough+ 'he title o& 3ustice does not accrue to actions -hich -ere good in intention but &ailed in execution+ 'his applies to pri.ate li&e as -ell as to State acti.it + E.er measure, regardless o& the good intentions o& its author, ma become harm&ul unless it is based on comprehensi.e kno-ledge and is appropriate &or the situation+ Summum !us, sa s Hegel in a similar context, ma become summa in!uria. We ma recall the comparison dra-n in the :orgias+ 'he trades o& the baker, the cook, and the tailor are in themsel.es .er

use&ul+ )ut the ma lead to in3ur unless h gienic considerations determine their place in the li.es o& the indi.idual and o& mankind+ Harbors, ship ards, &orti&ications, and taxes are good in the same sense+ )ut i& the happiness o& the communit is &orgotten, these &actors o& securit and prosperit become instruments o& destruction+ 'hus, in Europe, in the last decades be&ore the outbreak o& the present -ar, -e &ind the chaotic gro-th o& indi.idual elements o& social li&e: giant economic enterprises, crushing taxes, an enormous increase in armies and armaments, coerci.e discipline, one0sided culti.ation o& the natural sciences, and so on+ 1nstead o& rational organi>ation o& domestic and international relations, there -as the rapid spread o& certain portions o& ci.ili>ation at the expense o& the -hole+ 4ne stood against the other, and mankind as a -hole -as destro ed thereb + $lato@s demand that the state should be ruled b philosophers does not mean that these rulers should be selected &rom among the authors o& textbooks on logic+ 1n business li&e, the "achgeist, the spirit o& the specialist, kno-s onl pro&it, in militar li&e po-er, and e.en in science onl success in a special discipline+ When this spirit is le&t unchecked, it t pi&ies an anarchic state o& societ + 9or $lato, philosoph meant the tendenc to bring and maintain the .arious energies and branches o& kno-ledge in a unit -hich -ould trans&orm these partiall destructi.e elements into producti.e ones in the &ullest sense+ 'his is the meaning o& his demand that the philosophers should rule+ 1t means lack o& &aith in the pre.ailing popular thought+ Dnlike the latter, reason ne.er loses itsel& in a single idea, though that idea might be the correct one at an gi.en moment+ 5eason exists in the -hole s stem o& ideas, in the progression &rom one idea to another, so that e.er idea is understood and applied in its true meaning, that is to sa , in its meaning -ithin the -hole o& kno-ledge+ 4nl such thought is rational thought+ 'his dialectical conception has been applied to the concrete problems o& li&e b the great philosophers; indeed, the rational organi>ation o& human existence is the real goal o& their philosophies+ %ialectical clari&ication and re&inement o& the conceptual -orld -hich -e meet in dail and scienti&ic li&e, education o& the indi.idual &or right thinking and acting, has as its goal the reali>ation o& the good, and, during the &lourishing periods o& philosoph at least, that meant the rational organi>ation o& human societ + 'hough (ristotle, in his #eta hysics, regards the sel&0contemplation o& the mind, theoretical acti.it , as the greatest happiness, he expressl states that this happiness is possible onl on a speci&ic material basis, that is, under certain social and economic conditions+ $lato and (ristotle did not belie.e -ith (ntisthenes and the ! nics that reason could &ore.er continue to de.elop in people -ho literall led a dog@s li&e, nor that -isdom could go hand in hand -ith miser + (n e/uitable state o& a&&airs -as &or them the necessar condition &or the un&olding o& man@s intellectual po-ers, and this idea lies at the basis o& all o& Western humanism+ (n one -ho studies modern philosoph , not merel in the standard compendia, but through his o-n historical researches, -ill percei.e the social problem to be a .er decisi.e moti.e+ 1 need onl mention Hobbes and Spino>a+ 'he Tractatus Theologico$%oliticus o& Spino>a -as the onl ma3or -ork -hich he published during his li&etime+ With other thinkers, 8eibni> and 2ant &or instance, a more penetrating anal sis re.eals the existence o& social and historical categories in the &oundations o& the most abstract chapters o& their -orks, their metaph sical and transcendental doctrines+ Without those categories, it is impossible to understand or sol.e their problems+ ( basic anal sis o& the content o& purel theoretical philosophical doctrines is there&ore one o& the most interesting tasks o& modern research in the histor o& philosoph + )ut this task has little in common -ith the super&icial correlation to -hich re&erence has alread been made+ 'he historian o& art or literature has corresponding tasks+ %espite the important part pla ed in philosoph b the examination o& social problems, expressed or unexpressed, conscious or unconscious, let us again emphasi>e that the social &unction o& philosoph is not to be &ound 3ust there, but rather in the de.elopment o& critical and dialectical thought+ $hilosoph is the methodical and stead&ast attempt to bring reason into the -orld+ 1ts precarious and contro.ersial

position results &rom this+ $hilosoph is incon.enient, obstinate, and -ith all that, o& no immediate use E in &act it is a source o& anno ance+ $hilosoph lacks criteria and compelling proo&s+ 1n.estigation o& &acts is strenuous, too, but one at least kno-s -hat to go b + Man is naturall /uite reluctant to occup himsel& -ith the con&usion and entanglements o& his pri.ate and public li&e: he &eels insecure and on dangerous ground+ 1n our present di.ision o& labor, those problems are assigned to the philosopher or theologian+ 4r, man consoles himsel& -ith the thought that the discords are merel transient and that &undamentall e.er thing is all right+ 1n the past centur o& European histor , it has been sho-n conclusi.el that, despite a semblance o& securit , man has not been able to arrange his li&e in accordance -ith his conceptions o& humanit + 'here is a gul& bet-een the ideas b -hich men 3udge themsel.es and the -orld on the one hand, and the social realit -hich the reproduce through their actions on the other hand+ )ecause o& this circumstance, all their conceptions and 3udgments are t-o0sided and &alsi&ied+ ,o- man sees himsel& heading &or disaster or alread engul&ed in it, and in man countries he is so paral >ed b approaching barbarism that he is almost completel unable to react and protect himsel&+ He is the rabbit be&ore the hungr stoat+ 'here are times perhaps -hen one can get along -ithout theor , but his de&icienc lo-ers man and renders him helpless against &orce+ 'he &act that theor ma rise into the rare&ied atmosphere o& a hollo- and bloodless idealism or sink into tiresome and empt phrasemongering, does not mean that these &orms are its true &orms+ (s &ar as tedium and banalit are concerned, philosoph o&ten &inds its match in the so0called in.estigation o& &acts+ 'oda , at an e.ent, the -hole historical d namic has placed philosoph in the center o& social actualit , and social actualit in the center o& philosoph + (ttention should be dra-n to a particularl important change -hich has taken place along these lines since classical anti/uit + $lato held that Eros enables the sage to kno- the ideas+ He linked kno-ledge -ith a moral or ps chological state, Eros, -hich in principle ma exist at e.er historical moment+ 9or this reason, his proposed State appeared to him as an eternal ideal o& reason, not bound up -ith an historical condition+ 'he dialogue on the 8a-s, then, -as a compromise, accepted as a preliminar step -hich did not a&&ect the eternal ideal+ $lato@s State is a Dtopia, like those pro3ected at the beginning o& the modern era and e.en in our o-n da s+ )ut Dtopia is no longer the proper philosophic &orm &or dealing -ith the problem o& societ + 1t has been recogni>ed that the contradictions in thought cannot be resol.ed b purel theoretical re&lection+ 'hat re/uires an historical de.elopment be ond -hich -e cannot leap in thought+ 2no-ledge is bound up not onl -ith ps chological and moral conditions, but also -ith social conditions+ 'he enunciation and description o& per&ect political and social &orms out o& pure ideas is neither meaning&ul nor ade/uate+ Dtopia as the cro-n o& philosophical s stems is there&ore replaced b a scienti&ic description o& concrete relationships and tendencies, -hich can lead to an impro.ement o& human li&e+ 'his change has the most &ar0reaching conse/uences &or the structure and meaning o& philosophical theor + modern philosoph shares -ith the ancients their high opinion o& the potentialities o& the human race, their optimism o.er man@s potential achie.ements+ 'he proposition that man is b nature incapable o& li.ing a good li&e or o& achie.ing the highest le.els o& social organi>ation, has been re3ected b the greatest thinkers+ 8et us recall 2ant@s &amous remarks about $lato@s Dtopia: 6'he $latonic 5epublic has been supposed to be a striking example o& purel imaginar per&ection+ 1t has become a b -ord, as something that could exist in the brain o& an idle thinker onl , and )ruckner thinks it ridiculous that $lato could ha.e said that no prince could e.er go.ern -ell, unless he participated in the ideas+ We should do better, ho-e.er, to &ollo- up this thought and endea.or <-here that excellent philosopher lea.es us -ithout his guidance= to place it in a clearer light b our o-n e&&orts, rather than to thro- it aside as useless, under the miserable and .er dangerous pretext o& its impracticabilit + 9or nothing can be more mischie.ous and more un-orth a philosopher than the .ulgar appeal to -hat is called ad.erse experience, -hich possibl might ne.er ha.e existed, i& at the proper time institutions had been &ramed according to those ideas, and not according to crude concepts, -hich, because the -ere deri.ed &rom experience onl , ha.e marred all good intentions+7

Since $lato, philosoph has ne.er deserted the true idealism that it is possible to introduce reason among indi.iduals and among nations+ 1t has onl discarded the &alse idealism that it is su&&icient to set up the picture o& per&ection -ith no regard &or the -a in -hich it is to be attained+ 1n modern times, lo alt to the highest ideas has been linked, in a -orld opposed to them, -ith the sober desire to kno- ho- these ideas can be reali>ed on earth+ )e&ore concluding, let us return once more to a misunderstanding -hich has alread been mentioned+ 1n philosoph , unlike business and politics, criticism does not mean the condemnation o& a thing, grumbling about some measure or other, or mere negation and repudiation+ Dnder certain conditions, criticism ma actuall take this destructi.e turn; there are examples in the Hellenistic age+ ) criticism, -e mean that intellectual, and e.entuall practical, e&&ort -hich is not satis&ied to accept the pre.ailing ideas, actions, and social conditions unthinkingl and &rom mere habit; e&&ort -hich aims to coordinate the indi.idual sides o& social li&e -ith each other and -ith the general ideas and aims o& the epoch, to deduce them geneticall , to distinguish the appearance &rom the essence, to examine the &oundations o& things, in short, reall to kno- them+ Hegel, the philosopher to -hom -e are most indebted in man respects, -as so &ar remo.ed &rom an /uerulous repudiation o& speci&ic conditions, that the 2ing o& $russia called him to )erlin to inculcate the students -ith the proper lo alt and to immuni>e them against political opposition+ Hegel did his best in that direction, and declared the $russian state to be the embodiment o& the di.ine 1dea on earth+ )ut thought is a peculiar &actor+ 'o 3usti& the $russian state, Hegel had to teach man to o.ercome the onesidedness and limitations o& ordinar human understanding and to see the interrelationship bet-een all conceptual and real relations+ 9urther, he had to teach man to construe human histor in its complex and contradictor structure, to search out the ideas o& &reedom and 3ustice in the li.es o& nations, to kno- ho- nations perish -hen their principle pro.es inade/uate and the time is ripe &or ne- social &orms+ 'he &act that Hegel thus had to train his students in theoretical thought, had highl e/ui.ocal conse/uences &or the $russian state+ 1n the long run, Hegel@s -ork did more serious harm to that reactionar institution than all the use the latter could deri.e &rom his &ormal glori&ication+ 5eason is a poor all o& reaction+ ( little less than ten ears a&ter Hegel@s death <his chair remained unoccupied that long=, the 2ing appointed a successor to &ight the 6dragon@s teeth o& Hegelian pantheism,7 and the 6arrogance and &anaticism o& his school+7 We cannot sa that, in the histor o& philosoph , the thinkers -ho had the most progressi.e e&&ect -ere those -ho &ound most to critici>e or -ho -ere al-a s on hand -ith so0called practical programs+ 'hings are not that simple+ ( philosophical doctrine has man sides, and each side ma ha.e the most di.erse historical e&&ects+ 4nl in exceptional historical periods, such as the 9rench Enlightenment, does philosoph itsel& become politics+ 1n that period, the -ord philosoph did not call to mind logic and epistemolog so much as attacks on the !hurch hierarch and on an inhuman 3udicial s stem+ 'he remo.al o& certain preconceptions -as .irtuall e/ui.alent to opening the gates o& the ne- -orld+ 'radition and &aith -ere t-o o& the most po-er&ul bul-arks o& the old regime, and the philosophical attacks constituted an immediate historical action+ 'oda , ho-e.er, it is not a matter o& eliminating a creed, &or in the totalitarian states, -here the noisiest appeal is made to heroism and a lo&t Weltanschauung, neither &aith nor Weltanshauung rule, but onl dull indi&&erence and the apath o& the indi.idual to-ards destin and to -hat comes &rom abo.e+ 'oda our task is rather to ensure that, in the &uture, the capacit &or theor and &or action -hich deri.es &rom theor -ill ne.er again disappear, e.en in some coming period o& peace -hen the dail routine ma tend to allo- the -hole problem to be &orgotten once more+ 4ur task is continuall to struggle, lest mankind become completel disheartened b the &right&ul happenings o& the present, lest man@s belie& in a -orth , peace&ul and happ direction o& societ perish &rom the earth+