CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHICAL ALTERNATIVES AND THE CRISIS OF THE TRUTH CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHICAL AL TERNA TIVES AND THE CRISIS OF TRUTH A CRITICAL STUDY OF POSITIVISM, EXISTENTIALISM AND MARXISM by G. A. RAUCHE University College 0/ Durban • MARTINUS NIJHOFF / THE HAGUE / 1970 © I970 by Martinus Nijhofl, The Hague, Netherlands All rights reserved, including the right to translate 01' to reproduce this book 01' parts thereof in any form ISBN-13: 978-90-247-5017-7 e-ISBN-I3: 978-94-010-2980-3 001: 10.1007/978-94-010-2980-3 LIST OF CONTENTS Introduction VII The Nature of the present Crisis I The Functionalistic Alternative or the Alternative of the Status ~ D The Existential Alternative 34 The Dialectical Alternative 54 Philosophy as a Representation of the Nature of Truth 89 1. General Observations 89 2. The Historical Nature of Philosophy 90 3. The Anthropological Character of Philosophical Projects 97 4. The Systematic Aspect of the History of Philosophy as the Mirror of Human Truth 99 A. The Logic of the History of Philosophy 99 B. The Epistemology of the History of Philosophy 101 C. The Metaphysics of the History of Philosophy 106 D. The Ethics of the History of Philosophy II6 The Existential Character of Philosophy and the Problem of Authentic Existence 125 Conclusion 136 Bibliography 145 INTRODUCTION The function of philosophy may be circumscribed as consisting in ma king a keen analysis of the peculiar nature of the crisis-situation, as it has existed among men throughout the centuries of human history, and as it manifested itself in definite ways at the various stages of this his tory. That is to say, philosophy may be regarded as the discipline which, again and again, will have to determine the authenticity of man's ex istence in the light of the changing conditions of life, i.e., man's chang ing needs and interests. Fundamentally, these needs may be regarded as being of a material, an intellectual, an aesthetical and a spiritual kind. On the grounds of the crisis, which inevitably exists among men on ac count of the controversial nature of their various truth-perspectives, as they are postulated on a personal level, in the sciences, in history, in the fine arts and in theology, man creates and re-creates the goods of civilization and the cultural values. The task of philosophy consists then in making an ever new assessment of man's changing needs, in terests and aspirations on the basis of the specific conflicts and prob lems with which man wrestles at a certain historical stage. It is in this way that the important philosophical systems were constructed, which we still admire to-day. It is on this account that new philosophical con cepts were formed and that a re-assessment of the basic human values, notably ethical ones, took place. Acting in this manner, philosophy was able to determine the authenticity of man's existence, as an existence that was in line with the call of the times, or the Zeitgeist. Philosophy may thus be called an open science, which finds it impossible to give a conclusive answer to its permanent question about truth. This is so because any answer it gives to this basic question on the part of man is only a truth-perspective, which is developed under particular histo rical circumstances and in the particular existential situation in which man happens to find himself at the time. The answer is always given VIII INTRODUCTION in reaction to some other philosophical project, which is already in ex istence and which the new system somehow calls in question, thereby entering into a controversial relation with it, and, in so doing, develo ping a truth-perspective in its own turn, which often takes man a step further. It is by the constant change of the situation as a result of the formulation of ever new philosophical alternatives for coping with the constant crisis of truth that ever new dimensions of truth are discovered by man and that the process of human thinking unfolds as a continual historical process. It is thus impossible to conceive philosophy as a ho mogeneous science with only one method. It is a science of many methods and approaches, one rising out of the other in its permanent quest for truth, which it has to keep up in the light of the permanent crisis of truth. This crisis occurs as a result of the questionable character of its methodologically constituted truth-perspectives or alternatives for coping with the crisis of truth. Since these truth-perspectives, at the same time, represent man's self-projection into the world from the particular situation in which he finds himself, it follows that these alternatives for coping with the cri sis of truth are of existential significance. Through them, man takes possession of the world in a rational manner and arranges his surroun dings in a rational way. And if his particular philosophical project is called in question by someone else, his existence is undermined. He feels insecure and fears the collapse of his rationally constituted uni verse. This explains the tenacity and obduracy with which philosophers have clung to their systems and have defended them against all cri ticism and attack. But in spite of this, life went on. By their claim to totality and universality, the philosophers concerned invited their own downfall. The very rational character of the philosophical systems con cerned, their very methodological nature, pointed beyond themselves, in that they opened the way for other means of rationalizing the world. And every time the world was reorganized, the authentic nature of man's existence was redetermined in connection with the moral values that were implicit in the new system or approach. It was by the inevitable controversial relation that obtained among philosophical systems and the permanent crisis of human truth that philosophy, in a continual historical process, yielded ever new concepts and approaches, thus re organizing the world in an ever new fashion and, in so doing, creating ever new problems and changing the situation. This in turn forced man to repeat the question about truth, the nature of the universe, the mea ning and purpose of life and the authentic nature of human existence. INTRODUCTION IX We can also formulate it in this way: Man asked a total question to which, on account of his finiteness and limitation, he could give only a limited answer. It is this state of affairs that renders philosophy finite, contingent and existential. The existential circle works like this: Driven by a ba sic need for certainty and security, man asks the question about truth. The answer to this question creates fresh problems and conflicts, which again he seeks to overcome. It is this interplay between universal ques tion and finite answer that keeps him going. It would be like the work of Sisyphus, except that it seems that the whole process is not mean ingless; for it appears as though this is the way in which man seems to realize himself as a creative being of culture and civilization. Also, he has thereby improved his methodological and functional skill and has progressively civilized the world. The question is, however, how much has man gained and how much has he lost? We hope that the answer to this question will emerge in the course of our discussion of the pro cess of human thinking as it occurs in philosophy. One thing is certain, however, if we wish to understand the nature of man, we must turn to philosophy. Through it, man's existential struggle becomes mani fest in its manifold aspects. But to gain this understanding, we must not become preoccupied with one or two philosophical approaches in isolation from their historical foundation. If we wish to understand man's true nature, we must look at the philosophical alternatives for coping with the crisis of truth in their historical succession and in the light of the historical circumstances under which they were conceived. We must realize that the crisis of truth, as it is experienced by man, is an existential crisis, which has compelled him to project himself in to the world in an ever new manner. It is in this way that man's thin king has unfolded and ever new dimensions of truth have been disco vered, none of which stands isolated but every one of which is linked to another one in controversy and contradiction. In this way, one per spective of truth, as it were, stands on the shoulder of the other, so that, in spite of their controversial relationship, human thinking is one irreversible process, which must be seen in its continuity and en tirety. In this connection, a few outstanding examples will shed more light on what has been said: Plato may be said to have been confronted with the task of determining the authenticity of human existence in the face of the prevailing conflict of his time, namely, that between democratic and aristocratic thinking. This conflict split the inhabitants x INTRODUCTION of the Athenian polis into two groups. Plato may be said to have sol ved the task of overcoming this conflict by the conception of a new social order and a new state under the principle oj identity. This means that the ethical order of the cosmos, i.e., its rationality, reality, beauty and justice, as it emerges from the harmony of the opposites in the world thus pointing to its goodness, is reflected in the human soul. Lead ing an authentic existence, therefore, means, for Plato, building a so ciety and a state in conformity with the structure of the human soul and, for this reason, also with that of the cosmos. The balance that is kept among the three social classes, the productive class of the mer chants and agriculturists, the defending class of the warriors (phyla kes) and the ruling class (archontes) corresponds to the balance that should be kept among the three parts of the human soul. These parts correspond to the three social classes and should each be governed by its respective virtue. The part that consists of the natural appeti tes of the soul should be ruled by the virtue of sophrosyne or self-control; the part that is designated by the noble affects of the soul should be dominated by the virtue of andreia or fortitude, strength of mind and of body; the rational part of the soul should be determined by the virtue of sophia or wisdom. If reason rules and keeps these parts in balance, then perfect harmony is achieved and dikaiosyne prevails. By the principle of identity, therefore, i.e., if the structure of the soul and that of society correspond to the structure of the cosmos, truth as the highest good has been realized. In this event, man's needs are satisfied in that they have been brought into line with the different natural capacities of different men. In this way, all men are able to lead an authentic existence, i.e., an existence in conformity with their natural capacity and thus with their true nature. By linking up with Plato, Aristotle postulates an alternative to Pla to's attempt to overcome the basic conflict of his age. In order to cope with the existing corruption and injustice in the polis of his time, and in order to coordinate the interests of the citizens as far as this was possible and to meet their needs, Aristotle entered into controversy with Plato and conceived an alternative that called in question the system of Plato. In conformity with his more realistic world-view, namely, that the universal was to be found in the particular itself (instead of existing in a transcendent world of forms, as was held by Plato) and came into existence by the process of the actualization of matter as potential form, Aristotle based his ethics on the realization of man's rational self. For this reason he included in his ethics that which INTRODUCTION XI Plato had tried to overcome by the stratification of society, namely, the senses. The realization of man's rational nature, therefore, meant the observance of the golden mean by sophrosyne or self-control. If every one acted in this manner, husband and wife, brother and sister, citizens of the polis, eudaimonia, i.e., happiness would be achieved, and this achievement would have been made by rational insight into one's true nature and natural capacity. Aristotle's state, too, like that of Plato, had an educational function to perform and possessed a distinct moral character. The difference was that, with Aristotle, the leading of an authentic existence did not mean the pursuit of truth for the sake of truth, as it did with Plato, but it meant the striving for eudaimonia through the reasonable act, i.e., practising moderation or temperance (practical virtues) in wisdom or prudence (dianoetic virtues). By virtue of this broad aim, Aristotle was able to contrast with one another several 'good' forms of state with several 'bad' ones. Patriarchal monarchy, responsible aristocracy, moderate democracy based on the communal sense of the brotherhood of its citizens, all of whom subor dinated their individual private interests to the interests of the commu nity, were judged to be good. Tyranny, as the selfish rule of one man, oligarchy, as the rule of the wealthy and theil' selfish interests, and ochlocracy, as the rule of the mob, were held to be bad. If we pursue the course of the history of philosophy any further, we shall find that, after the collapse of the Greek polis and the inevitable failure of Greek philosophy to comprehend the truth (arche, first prin ciple, first cause)1 through man's own rational effort, a re-interpreta tion of basic values and the development of new concepts became im perative. Roughly speaking, this was at first done by Alexandrian phi losophy in the face of great turmoil and upheaval. In those tempestuous times of growing unrest, uncertainty and anxiety, when empires fell and new ones came into existence, the need for cel tainty and the desire for happiness were raising the question again as to the authenticity of man's existence. Especially the problem of the nature of death assumed gl'eat importance.2 Already the Stoics, Epicureans and the Sceptics battled with these problems. Neo-Platonism and Gnosticism made an attempt to determine man's destiny by clothing Eastern ideas in a 1 This failure becomes apparent from the contradictory answers that were given by Greek philosophy to the question of truth. • This problem became very acute again in our contemporary crisis. Especially the German poet-philosopher Rainer Maria Rilke and the philosopher Martin Heidegger are preoccupied with this problem. Sometimes the answers that are given to this problem by them bear much resemblance to the answers that were given to it earlier, especially by the Stoics. XII INTRODUCTION Greek methodologIcal form. In the West, however, it was the new Chris tian concept of faith that finally proved victorious in the fierce battle of philosophical and religious views that was raging within the Roman Empire. Faith had the advantage over reason in that it offered abso lute certainty to the believer, and, in addition, led him to the experience of highest bliss and beatitude. Thus, eventually, the relation between reason and faith came to be investigated by Christian thinkus, and in the course of this investigation the theocentric scholastic method was developed with the help of Greek philosophy. The authenticity of man's existence was derived from God as the greatest good, no matter whether God was seen as highest wisdom (Thomas Aquinas) or as absolute will (Duns Scotus and William Occam). In the interest of the Oneness of truth (i.e., the unity of reason and faith), which was called in question by the penetration into western thinking of A verroistic ideas in the 13th century (Siger of Brabant), a Christian cosmos came to be built, notably by Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas and Bonaventura. This cosmos comprised reason and faith in one. Its hieraFchical structure (the realm of faith, reason and sensual experience) was reflected in the feudal structure of medieval society (clergy and nobility, bourgeoisie and peasants). This whole outlook was changed again by the rising of the middle class as a result of new discoveries and new inventions and the growth and increasing wealth and prosperity of the towns that followed in their wake. The middle class was by nature the negation of feudalist society. It is thus only natural that the middle class posited its truth in accor dance with its specific needs and interests as they aFose from its parti cular existential situation. It is not surprising, therefore, that the con flict between reason and faith, philosophy and theology, knowledge and belief, which scholastic thought sought to bridge by the subordi nation of reason to faith, was eventually resolved in favour of reason, philosophy and knowledge. For it was this that would promote the in teFests of the new historical class, the "bourgeoisie." As a result of all this bustling human activity in the 14th and the 15th centuries, by which the horizons of his knowledge were consider ably widened and his insight into nature and into himself was consi derably increased, man, at first, shifted his interest towards himself. His curiosity about the ancient classical thinkers and writers was arou sed again, and he began to read and to see them in the light of his own situation. In Renaissance thought, therefore, the theocentricity of me dieval scholasticism was gradually superseded by an anthropocentric