THE ALIENATED MIND: The the emergence of sociology of knowledge in Germany (1918-33) Volume II David Patrick Frisby / t Submitted in fulfilment the' Department Sociology partial of of for the the Glasgow University awarding requirements of degree Doctor Philosophy October, 1978 of of CHAPTER FOUR KARL MANNHEIM: From the Critique Ideology to the Sociology Knowledge? of of / If 1 CHAPTER FOUR Mannheim Scheler Lukäcs shares with and an early concern for a theory of culture. This is from Mannheim's evident earlier writings such as the 1917 1 es lecture 'Lelek (Soul Kultura' Culture'), his Lukäcs' and review of _. 2 Theory of the Novel (1920), his the interpretation '. essay on of world views 3 (1923), the important 'Über das Eigenart kultur- and unpublished essay 4 Erkenntnis' (1922). soziologischer Indeed the further than similarity goes this. Ästhetikim- Not is Lukäcs' his Heidelberger only work, and especially portant for Mannheim's early formulations of the problems of the sociology of culture, as. Markus has recently shown5 but, as Kettler's study of the relationship between Mannheim and Lukcäs in Hungary has demonstrated, the influence Lukacs I to the Mannheim. of views as a whole was central young In relation to Scheler th? connections are not so close. One may point, for to the Mannheim to Scheler's example, references which makes pre-war in his At level, the writings unpublished essay. a more general early writ- Über ings Mannheim this is true das Eigenart of and again especially of - kultursoziologischer Erkenntnis betray heavy a reliance upon a phenomeno- - logical in least, brings Mannheim standpoint which, some respects at closer to Scheler.. The that Mannheim to however, is phenomenology refers most, that Heidegger Scheler. of and not Of course, Mannheim's phenomenological position is also fused with Dilthey's hermeneutics as well as Lukäcs own early a these two traditions. amalgam of One detect, may also sometimes very ds In 'Lelek clearly as Kultur', the fascination Simmel Is theory which of had for cultural alienation Mannheim, indeed it had for the Lukäcs. as early In direction, the Rickert Lask is another neo-Kantian philosophy of and evi- 2 dent in Mannheim's doctoral thesis 'The Structural Analysis Epistemology' of (1922, Hungarian 1918) is, Lukäcs' original as once again, early writings. However, it would be a mistake to assume that these early formulations of a sociology of culture are concerned only with a theory of culture. On the contrary, they the often contain rudiments of certain central problems which Mannheim later developed into his knowledge. There thus sociology of seems little in the Remmling does, that 'Mannheim point making claim, as made the transition from to in 1925, he his philosophy sociology when published article, "The knowledge". 18 Not had Mann- problem of a sociology of only heim by this time developed but he had already a sociology of culture also developed themes to his knowledge. In a number of central sociology of follows, in the first this what systematic section of chapter, an attempt will be to highlight the themes Mannheim's demon- made major of early work and their for but for strate relevance not merely a sociology of culture also a knowledge. Close -attention be to Mannheim's sociology of will paid un- Kettler in 'to published essay not, as rightly points out, order create-any sort Mannheim. His the time of mystery about published works of were more "professional" therefore in He polished and and more modest aspiration. took intellectual in the for greater risks essays written self-clarification and these are, accordingly, more self-revealing. '9 It is also within Mannheim's earlier work that it is possible to trace the important influence Lukcas which exercised over Mannheim. This from the dis- extends not merely common i in Budapest in the 'Szellemkek' cussions investigated group, which are else- by. Kettler, but to where also Mannheim's his written work and participation in the 'Free School Human Sciences' (Mannheim's of in 1917. lecture 'Soul Culture' belongs. to the lecture and its Lukäcs series given under auspices). 3 himself later indeed many years went so far as to suggest that, in this period 'I in stood a close relationship to Mannheim he he when was a student and was, one might say, my unofficial academic pupil 1.10 Thus the relation- between ship Mannheim Lukäcs be traced back to their and can earlier years in Budapest. It to be to Mannheim remains seen what extent remained con- scious of the need to confront Lukäcs' work, especially Geschichte und Klassenbewusstsein, in his later writings. In the this be focussed the second part of chapter, attention will upon explicit the development confrontation with problems associated with of a sociology knowledge the to knowledge to of and attempts apply such a sociology of Within the the first these belongs specific areas. context of of endeavours 11 (1924), the 'Historismus' 'Das Problem Soziologie des Wis- essay einer 12 (1925), 'Ideologische Interpretation der sens' und soziologische geistigen Gebilde' (1926)13 the important Eine end unpublished essay soziologische (Konjunktives Theorie der Kultur ihrer Erkennbarkeit. kommunikatives und und 14- Denken) but, from the 1924 undated references cited, probably or slightly later. The to the knowledge in this attempts apply sociology of period com- (written Mannheim's Habilitationsschrift 'Das Konservative Denken' prise 15 1925, 1927), 'Die Bedeutung der Konkurrenz im Gsbiete des published 16 Geistigen' (paper delivered in 1928, 1929) 'Das Problem published and 17 der Generationen' (published 1928). The these is examination of essays intended to imply'that Mannheim had turned his not now attention exclusively 4 towards knowledge since a sociology of the continued significance of problems with a sociology in Rather, associated of culture are still much evidence. taking the explicit up of a sociology knowledge his of grows out of earlier con- develops themes. cerns and new 4 Such interests lead to is must necessarily a re-examination of what usually acknowledged to be Mannheim's German Ideologie Utopie, major work und in 1929.18 This is, in different book published many respects, a very from Ideology Utopia introduced to the English and which was speaking world in 1936.19 The had impact German earlier version which a major on social - thought three 'Ideologie was much shorter, comprising only chapters: und - Utopie', 'Ist Politik Wissenschaft ' 'Das als möglich? and utopische Bewusstsein'. The hope to original was, as' we show, much more concerned the that in Lukäcs' Geschichte Klassen- with some of problems appear und bewusstsein than the later translation A interest in this suggests. central the therefore be the between Mann- section of present chapter will relationship heim's theory ideology the and critique of and establishment of a sociology knowledge. Only by detailed Ideologie Utopie it of a analysis of und will be to for the impact this in Germany, impact possible account of work an hardly be by the English translation. which can comprehended a study of Whatever the judgment Ideologie Utopie, it is upon und certainly apparent that Mannheim in his 1929 that, he post writings assumed along with others, had the knowledge successfully established sociology of as a recognised discipline. The the knowledge role of sociology of within sociology and the is theme both his dictionary social sciences as a whole a major of con- (published tribution, 'Wissenssoziologie' 1931 five both and now chapter of the English translation Ideologie Utopie the post-war German of und and 20 edition), and his lecture, Die Gegenwartsaufgaben der Soziologie (deliver- 21 in 1932). (i. ed and published It is in this 1928-32) period e. roughly that Mannheim intended also publication of not only a substantial study of Max Weber's sociology but also a collection of essays Soziologie des Geistes 5 (outline 1930), briefer written as well as a study of contemporary social thought Weber, Troeltsch, Scheler the title Zur Denklage der Gegen- under - - 22 In fact, wart. none of these volumes appeared in Germany, though three the of essays which were to comprise Soziologie des Geistes were subsequent- ly in published a much altered form as Essays on the Sociology of Culture in 1956.23 Not did Mannheim himself 'a only make number of major revisions in the draft' but 'in to the import the ideas original order make meaning and of in idiom to the different comprehensible another and readers of a generation in different tradition, the had to the raised a national editors rethink original 24 text distorting the intentions'. It is therefore without author's unfortunate- ly to to these in their translated form belonging not possible refer essays as to this period. However, do have to is the what we access considerable number of reviews highlight the that Ideologie Utopie in Germany. which reception und received It logically follow from the the that dis- would outline of present chapter some this Mannheim's be the cussion of reception of work should part of present But there chapter. since are a substantial number of contemporary reviews Ideologie Utopie, it is fitting that they form the of und perhaps more part of the debates the knowledge in succeeding chapter on surrounding sociology of 25 Germany. 4 Kettler's investigation the between Mannheim Lukäcs of relationship and In Budapest to in prior and, during the Hungarian Revolution has part, shown that Mannheim was very much under the influence of Lukäcs in this period. 6 Mannheim took in the discussions the Szellemkek part regular weekly of group by Lukäcs between 1915 1918. This i i- organised and others and group of ntel from the the ectuals, cutt off contact with mass of population, were con- the Hungarian As the founders cerned with cultural renewal of society. one of this of group relates, 'Amongst its founder belonged the intimate members friends Georg Lukäcs: Bela Baläzs, Lajos Fülep of Anna Lesznai Those and who also come along ... the ("the Bela were younger people children"), Fogarasi, Karl Mannheim Arnold Hauser and ... Generally, these Sunday discussions were organ- ised dominated by Lukäcs; he forward some and put topic for discussion be thoroughly dis- which would by the Typically it cussed group. was concerned literary in with a moral and/or problem which one con- Dostojevski German centrated especially upon and One like Eckart. mystics could crudely character- ize the leanings the "left political of group as however, it is to orientated"; more accurate poi nt - out how unpolitical they all were. In fact the had in group more common with g religious gather- ' ing than with a political club. discussions these The unpolitical and, one might add, unsociological nature of . intellectual development is to Mannheim's also confirmed which were crucial that Arnold Hauser by the who suggests reminiscences of in 'In 1917 Karl Mannheim was uninterested politics the the The as were all members of group. main for this lay Lukäcs with who was con- responsibility Lask, Weber Jaspers interested and and cerned with he had in philosophy and religion ever since returned from Heidelberg kind We as a of mystic ... discussed but literature, never politics rather At that time philosophy and religion. no one was 27 interested in ' sociology. yet In too, Mannhei had in Lukäcs. In other respects, m much common with 1912 Mannheim in Berlin for by Simmel studied a year and attended courses later Freiburg Heidelberg before to Buda- as well as studying at and returning before the First World War. As have Lukdcs' pest shortly we seen, -early a considerable debt to Simmel's theory writings exhibit of cultural alien- V- 7 This is true the first ation. also of published work of Mannheim, 'Lelek es Kultura' . In 1917, again probably under Lukäcs' stimulus, members of the Sunday dis- cus0ion group, Szellemkek, founded 'Free School for the Geisteswissen- a schaften to the which was propagate cultural-philosophical world-view of those capitalism in Lukäcs' 'an to in the who, words, constituted opposition name of idealist philosophy. What they had in common was the negation of 28 positivism. Again, it be that this 'opposition to should emphasized capital- ism' but lay in its idealistic, was not always of an overt political nature rather Amongst those lectures in this often spiritualistic rejection. who gave 'school' Lukäcs, Mannheim, Fogarasi, Szabo*, Hauser, Kodäly, were and Bartok. From the text Mannheim's lecture learn that Erwin of we only Szabo directly lecture: 'On the Basic Questions Marx- offered a political of ism'. Lukäcs lectured Fogarasi the on aesthetics, on methods ofintellect- history, Hauser dilettantism in Kodäly the Hungarian folk ual on art, on Bartok folk song and on and modern music. Mannheim's lecture 'Soul Culture' delivered in the and autumn of 1917 - and published in 1918 was intended as a programmatic statement of the - Intentions. Its tenor, group's general as Markus comments 'originates in Si l in Lukäcs' that is in the Philosophie der Kunst mme and essays, con- ceived in the spirit of these essays, although the Lebensphilosophie ten- 4 dencies in Mannheim emerge than in the Lukäcs significantly more strongly 1912-141.29 manuscripts of The Lukäcs to here by Märkus works referred his then are part of unpublished writings on aesthetics completed between 30 1912 1916 and and are often referred to by Mannheim in his later writings. 8 However, Mannheim have been much may acquainted Simm9I's with work through Lukacs' it though Mannheim himself Simmel's reception of attended - lectures in 1912-13 it remains true that the central theme his lecture is - of undoubtedly drawn from Simmel. As in Lukäcs' from this writings period, Mannheim the conceives of contemporary crisis as a cultural one. He argues that 'the danger in is that it beyond greatest contemporary culture grows our 31 grasp and to it increasingly Mannheim makes our relationship precarious' . develops this theme in Simmel Is theory a manner which mirrors of cultural alienation and the opposition between subjective and objective culture. For Mannheim, 'It is the dependency mutual of objective and impossible subjective culture which makes the the the Object- existence of one'or other. I like independent lev- ve culture envelops us an iathan, it to develop yet cannot continue and its the maintain own existence without assist- individuals. On the ance and co-operation of hand, the individual denies his ful- other own f ilment if he fails to'regenerate the objective 32 it. ' culture and constantly appropriate In the the lecture,, Mannheim this course of expands upon growing separation the framework theory of objective and subjective culture, again within of a is that Simmel. Mannheim of culture which reminiscent of of maintains that is objective culture 'the totality the of objectivations of mind which, In their historical development, have become a human legacy. They comprise religion, science, the forms life. In art, state and of contrast, we Simmel speak of subjective culture when as - correctly observed the for fulfil- soul strives - through itself, through inward ment not an move- but indirectly ment through these cultural object- 33 I vations, that is, through their ' appropriation. develops this theory Mannheim to the of cultural estrangement with reference though having work of art which, its origin in its creator, becomes separated