The Place of the Doctrine of Worldview in Philosophical Anthropology of Max Scheler

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 127-138
Author(s):  
A.A. LVOV ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis Dunlop

Max Scheler, usually called a phenomenologist, was probably the best known German philosopher of the 1920s. Always an eclectic thinker, he was a pupil of the neo-idealist Rudolph Eucken, but was also strongly influenced by the life-philosophies of Dilthey and Bergson. While teaching at Jena he regularly met Husserl, the founder of the phenomenological movement, and his mature writings have a strongly phenomenological, as well as a Catholic, stamp. Later he turned towards metaphysics and the philosophical problems raised by modern science. Scheler’s interests were very wide. He tried to do justice to all aspects of experience – ethical, religious, personal, social, scientific, historical – without doing away with the specific nature of each. Above all, he took the emotional foundations of thought seriously. Many of his insights are striking and profound, and sometimes his arguments are very telling, but his power to organize his material consistently and to attend conscientiously to the business of justification is poorly developed. Scheler is best known for his anti-Kantian ethics, based on an a priori emotional grasp of a hierarchy of objective values, which precedes all choice of goods and purposes. He himself describes his ethics as ‘personalist’, and makes personal values supreme, sharply distinguishing the ‘person’ from the ‘ego’, and linking this with his analysis of different types of social interaction. In epistemology he defends a pragmatist approach to science and perception; thus philosophy, as the intuition of essences, requires a preparatory ascetic discipline. His philosophy of religion is an attempt to marry the Augustinian approach through love with the Thomist approach through reason. In his later work, to which his important work on sympathy provides the transition, he defends a dualist philosophical anthropology and metaphysics, interpreting the latter in activist terms as a resolution of the tensions between spiritual love and vital impulse.


2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (132) ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
Thiago Aquino

Resumo: Este artigo analisa a antropologia filosófica de Max Scheler enquanto fenomenologia da distinção humana cuja principal tarefa é a elaboração do conceito essencial do homem, ou seja, a definição do que o separa e o eleva acima da natureza. O artigo divide-se em duas partes: na primeira, apresenta o conceito de antropologia filosófica através da discussão do seu lugar sistemático nas investigações filosóficas; na segunda, desenvolve uma análise da questão da essência humana em correlação com o problema da determinação do seu lugar metafísico no interior da totalidade.  Abstract: This article presents an analysis of the philosophical anthropology of Max Scheler as a phenomenology of human distinction, whose main task is to elaborate the essential concept of the human being, meaning to define what separates humans from Nature and elevates them above Nature. The first part ignoof this article examines the concept of philosophical anthropology through the discussion of its systematic place in philosophical investigation. The second part develops an analysis of the question of human and of the correlated problem of determining the metaphysical place of this essence within the totality.


2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (130) ◽  
pp. 239
Author(s):  
Thiago Aquino

Este artigo analisa a antropologia filosófica de Max Scheler enquanto fenomenologia da distinção humana, cuja principal tarefa é a elaboração do conceito essencial do homem, ou seja, a definição do que o separa e o eleva acima da natureza. O artigo divide-se em duas partes: na primeira, apresenta o conceito de antropologia filosófica através da discussão do seu lugar sistemático nas investigações filosóficas; na segunda, desenvolve uma análise da questão da essência humana em correlação com o problema da determinação do seu lugar metafísico no interior da totalidade.Abstract: This article presents an analysis of the philosophical anthropology of Max Scheler as a phenomenology of human distinction, the main task of which is to elaborate the essential concept of the human being, that is, to define what separates and elevates this being above nature. . In the first part of the article, the concept of philosophical anthropology is presented through the discussion of its systematic place in philosophical investigation. The second part develops an analysis of the question of human essence, co-relating it with the problem of determining the metaphysical place of this essence within the totality.


2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 3-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome Carroll

This article discusses the common ground between William James and the tradition of philosophical anthropology. Recent commentators on this overlap have characterised philosophical anthropology as combining science (in particular biology and medicine) and Kantian teleology, for instance in Kant’s seminal definition of anthropology as being concerned with what the human being makes of itself, as distinct from what attributes it is given by nature. This article registers the tension between Kantian thinking, which reckons to ground experience in a priori categories, and William James’s psychology, which begins and ends with experience. It explores overlap between James’s approach and the characteristic holism of 18th-century philosophical anthropology, which centres on the idea of understanding and analysing the human as a whole, and presents the main anthropological elements of James’s position, namely his antipathy to separation, his concerns about the binomial terms of traditional philosophy, his preference for experience over substances, his sense that this holist doctrine of experience shows a way out of sterile impasses, a preference for description over causation, and scepticism. It then goes on to register the common ground with key ideas in the work of anthropologists from around 1800, along with some references to anthropologists who come in James’s wake, in particular Max Scheler and Arnold Gehlen, in order to reconceptualise the connection between James’s ideas and the tradition of anthropological thinking in German letters since the late 18th-century, beyond its characterisation as a combination of scientific positivism and teleology.


Author(s):  
Beth Cykowski

This chapter embarks upon a critical dialogue with The Fundamental Concepts of Metaphysics, focusing on Heidegger’s use of the concept of ‘spirit’. As it is one half of the crucially important life/spirit divide, one would assume that Heidegger would pay as much attention to spirit as he does to life, and, in this vein, analyse anthropology as thoroughly as he does biology. However, Heidegger restricts his comments concerning anthropology to the few cursory remarks in Part One, in which he denounces the discipline as a problematic form of Darstellung. The chapter argues that with these remarks Heidegger ignores the body of work, spearheaded by Max Scheler during the 1920s, known as ‘philosophical anthropology’. Moreover, despite the fact that Heidegger critiques what he sees as deep delusions implicit in anthropology, this German tradition contains insights that resonate with his own project in The Fundamental Concepts of Metaphysics.


1993 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
James H. Olthuis

Fifty-eight years ago Max Scheler, one of the founders of modern philosophical anthropology, wrote: “Man is more of a problem to himself at the present time than ever before in all recorded history. ... the increasing multiplicity of the special sciences that deal with man, valuable as they are, tend to hide his nature more than they reveal it.”1 In 1944, some sixteen years later, Ernst Cassirer comments that even though “no former age was ever in such a favorable position with regard to the sources of our knowledge of human nature,” we are still looking for a clue which will provide “real insight into the general character of human culture.”2 In his famous 1958 book, Irrational Man,3 William Barrett looked to existentialism to recover the whole and integral, suffering and dying human being from the abstract image of humankind as logical operators dominant in modern philosophy. However, in a new book William Barrett concludes that the concrete human self was not in fact recovered in existentialism and laments its disappearance in modern thought. He talks of the Death of the Soul.4 I would add: and Elimination of the Body.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 60-77
Author(s):  
Ilya V. Presnyakov

The author reveals the concept of “ressentiment” in the works of Max Scheler. It is highlighted that this concept is the continuation and development of Sheler’s axiological doctrine, it forms the foundation of his sociology of knowledge and philosophical anthropology. Analysis of Scheler’s ideas about “ressentiment” in the works of foreign and domestic authors made it possible to determine the areas of possible application of this concept in various fields of research. The author comes to the conclusion that studying Sheler’s heritage can not only philosophically deepen the sociological study of society, but also outline the current search directions in various branches of social and humanitarian knowledge. The author demonstrates the theoretical and methodological potential of applying the concept of “ressentiment”, based on the example of analyzing changes in the modern perception of human corporeality in general and the beauty of the human body in particular. The concept of “bodily ressentiment” is introduced, while revealing features of the “coup in values” mechanism, which manifests itself in the desire to practically change one’s own body. People with copious tattooing have become the object of preliminary observation within the context of the sociological study of the mass perception of human corporeality. Interpreting the results of in-depth interviews allowed for identifying the possibilities of empirically applying M. Scheler’s concept of “ressentiment”. Although the mental and psychological characteristics associated with ressentiment were not noticed in everyone who applies a large number of tattoos on his or her body, it is possible, regardless, to establish a connection between experiencing ressentiment and one’s propensity to constantly apply tattoos. It should be noted that the author of this study was not out to determine the prevalence of “bodily ressentiment”. His goal was to detect external signs and to reveal states of consciousness which most likely would indicate towards an emerging and developing ressentiment connected with one’s body.


Author(s):  
Adriana Veríssimo Serrão ◽  

In this didactic article several perspectives of the philosophical anthropology are presented, showing at the same time the difficulties in delimiting “the question of Man” as an autonomous discipline. Starting from the ambivalence contained in the expression “philosophical anthropology”, we present some data about the history of the word “anthropology”. Next, the typologies elaborated by Max Scheler and Ernst Cassirer illustrate large explanatory models of what “human-being” means, concluding at the same time by the failure of a historical path leading to uncertainty. Finally, the identification of philosophy with anthropology is referred in Kant and in Ludwig Feuerbach.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document