Abstract
In contemporary debates around human nature and its relation to technology and to other animals, the philosophical approaches of early 20th-century philosophical anthropology and personalism are often dismissed as embracing a problematic traditional stance, including on issues such as anthropocentrism or a binary perception of the human world. This chapter argues that these objections can be effectively overcome since philosophical anthropology can be grounded on phenomenology and is closely involved with both the natural and the social sciences (especially biology, but also psychology and sociology), and as such offers a promising basis for exploring questions on human nature and personhood. Loosely drawing on the thought of Max Scheler, this chapter shows that the Schelerian Philosophical Anthropology and personalism can help remove the strong dichotomies between the human and other animals, without losing what is distinctly human in the process. Likewise, the chapter argues that an extended concept of personhood is one key to dismantling problematic divisions, to (re)integrating humans with other forms of life and the individual with the social, and to overcoming the biologist bias with respect to gender and the use of technology, all the while underscoring the importance of aliveness in the investigations of human nature.
The questions: ‘What is man?’, and ‘What is man’s place in the nature of things?’ have occupied me more deeply than any other philosophical question since the first awakening of my philosophical consciousness.
Max Scheler [1, p. 9; Eng. trans. p. 3]
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This is not the place to discuss in detail the causes of this decline. However, the concept of the person was often understood to defy precise definitions, and the fact that it relied on presuppositions that required acceptance at face value not only increased its vagueness but possibly also contributed to the decline of personalism as such.
- 2.
Die Stellung des Menschen im Kosmos was the title of Scheler’s work on Philosophical Anthropology published in 1928, shortly before his death.
- 3.
Scheler’s theory of knowledge includes a sophisticated reflection on different types of knowledge, the respective sciences, and their interrelations. As I have pointed out recently: “For example, Scheler makes clear that the positive sciences play an eminent role for metaphysics by more and more delineating (eingrenzen) the area (Fragegebiet) of metaphysics, thus not replacing metaphysics but rather liberate it, akin to physics and chemistry ‘liberating’ the biological questions. While there can be linear progress in a number of the positive sciences this is not the case for, e.g., philosophy. Yet, as seen with the example of metaphysics and the positive sciences, the latter have an impact on the former even in terms of identifying the appropriate questions” [6, p. 4, fn 13]. See also [7, p. 234].
- 4.
Scheler described phenomenology as a new philosophical attitude rather than a science, a “new technē of the seeing (schauend) consciousness rather than a method of thinking” [8, p. 309].
- 5.
This chapter is partly based on an earlier paper that specifically focused on how the Schelerian approach can be employed to investigate the cyborg and was presented at Crossing the Border of Humanity: Cyborgs in Ethics, Law, and Art [3]. The quote from the title “The Universe of the Person is the Universe of Man” from Emmanuael Mournier's Personalism (1950) perfectly encapsulates what probably unites most “Western” approaches to personalism [2, p. XV]. I owe thanks to David O Brien, who first pointed out to me the potential of engaging with Max Scheler’s Philosophical Anthropology (in doing which, I follow Joachim Fischer’s suggestion to interpret the projects of Philosophical Anthropology developed by thinkers such as Max Scheler, Helmuth Plessner, and Arnold Gehlen as a paradigm rather than as a philosophical subject and thus use capitalization to distinguish the former form the latter). For Fischer’s approach, see [4]. I would also like to express my gratitude to Patrycja Poniatowska and Monika Michałowska for their helpful comments and suggestions, and to Karen McComb for her kindness in providing me with the image below.
- 6.
Scheler argues that we first grasp the reality of something undefined before we perceive its nature or essence with our senses or through thinking: “Wir erfassen das Realsein eines unbestimmten Etwas […] bevor wir sein Sosein [italics original] sinnlich wahrnehmen oder denken” [11, pp. 372–373]. It also means that, for Scheler, reality is trans-intelligible: “nur das Was des Daseins, nicht das Dasein des Was ist intelligibel” [11, p. 204]. The emphasis is Scheler’s.
- 7.
It does not help that the traditional translation of Geist as “spirit” has all the wrong connotations in English, including religious and esoteric ones. For this reason, I tend to use the German term.
- 8.
Of course, the nature of things is an object of a debate of its own, which cannot be part of this paper. At this point, two things will suffice: (1) that the nature of things may simply mean what makes a thing a thing in such a way that we recognize it as this and not any other thing (e.g., a tree, a pen, a chair, etc., and also pain—an example Scheler himself used—pleasure, and so on); (2) that even if this perception proves mistaken, it can still be a strong motivation to act in different ways. For example, one may belief to have grasped something of the nature of the divine and thus be motivated to iconoclastic acts or to act in in an compassionate manner. The same would be true for believing to have recognised the nature of other, not necessarily religious “objects” of our enquiry. What we believe the nature of certain animals to be, to use another example, would impact on how we treat them. Likewise, if we change our beliefs on the nature of a thing, it will very likely effect the way we act with regard to it or even beyond.
- 9.
Of course, in the early twentieth century, a time when research into animal psychology began, thinkers such as Scheler were very much aware that animal used tools. Nevertheless, Scheler argued that the animal-tool relationship differed from the human-tool relationship. This issue lies beyond my argument in this chapter.
- 10.
There is no reason why other forms of life should not be able to be transformed into cyborgs. At this point, however, such a transformation would take a human intervention.
- 11.
This, of course, raises the interesting follow up question of how to identify what hinders and what fosters life and Geist, respectively. Without going into details, my first assumption would be that what fosters life and Geist could be phenomenologically identified based on an increased feeling of aliveness, both physically and spiritually (including health) and also both physical and mental performance.
- 12.
In his writings on ressentiment, Scheler makes the point that asceticism and ascetic practices in modern times have been misunderstood as being hostile to life by, for example, suppressing the drives or even eradicating them altogether. Scheler speaks of both freedom from oppression by the drives and enhancing life (and personhood), which is unfolding, growth (Wachstum an Fülle), and development [29, pp. 75, 114; Eng. trans. pp. 34, 64]. Because life gives energy to Geist (an idea that only becomes really prominent in Scheler’s later work), the growth of life means more energy for Geist.
- 13.
We do not have room to develop Scheler’s approach to this question at this point which forms part of his axiology and theory of empathy, a part of his value theory left undiscussed here.
References
Scheler M (1995) Die Stellung des Menschen im Kosmos. In: Frings MS (ed) Späte Schriften (GW 9), Bouvier, Bonn, pp 9−71 [Eng. trans. Scheler M (1970) Man’s place in nature, trans. and intr. by Meyerhoff H. The Noonday Press, New York]
Mounier E (2004) Personalism. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN
Michałowska M (ed) (2022) Crossing the border of humanity: cyborgs in ethics, law, and art. In: Proceedings of the international online conference 14–15 Dec, 2021, Medical University of Łódź, Łódź. https://figshare.com/articles/book/Crossing_the_Border_of_Humanity_Cyborgs_in_Ethics_Law_and_Art_Proceedings_of_The_International_Online_Conference_December_14_15_2021_ed_M_Micha_owska_pdf/18093383/1. Accessed 1 July 2022
Fischer J (2009) Exploring the core identity of philosophical anthropology through the works of Max Scheler, Helmuth Plessner, and Arnold Gehlen, trans. by Harrison C, Iris 1(1):153–170. http://www.fupress.net/index.php/iris/article/view/2860/2992. Accessed 16 Dec 2021
Guccinelli R (2022) The world as representation. In: Gottlöber S (ed) Max Scheler in dialogue. Springer, Cham, pp 63–100
Gottlöber S (2022) Introduction: reviving the dialogue with Max Scheler. In: Gottlöber S (ed) Max Scheler in dialogue. Springer, Cham, pp 1–13
Scheler M (1980) Die Wissenformen und die Gesellschaft (GW 8), ed. Frings MS. Francke, Bern/ München
Scheler M (1973) Die deutsche Philosophie der Gegenwart. In: Frings MS (ed) Wesen und Formen der Sympathie—Die deutsche Philosophie der Gegenwart (GW 7), Francke, Bern, pp 259–326
Scheler M (1972) Zur Idee des Menschen. In: Frings MS (ed) Vom Umsturz der Werte (GW 3), Francke, Bern, München, pp 171−195 [Eng. trans. Scheler M (1978) On the idea of man (1915), trans. by Nabe C. J British Soc Phenomenol 9(3):184−198]
Scheler M (1978) Altern und Tod (Vorlesung 1923/24: Das Wesen des Todes). In: Frings MS (ed) Schriften aus dem Nachlaß 3: Philosophische Anthropologie (GW 12), Bouvier, Bonn, pp 251–327
Scheler M (1995) Idealismus—Realismus. In: Frings MS (ed) Späte Schriften (GW 9), Bouvier, Bonn, pp 183−241 [Eng. trans. Scheler M (1973) Idealism and realism. In: Selected philosophical essays, transl. by Lachterman DR. Northwestern University Press, Evanston, pp 288–356]
Gottlöber S (2022) The problem of reality. Scheler’s critique of Husserl in Idealismus—Realismus. In: Parker R (ed) The idealism—realism debate among Edmund Husserl’s early followers and critics. Springer, Cham, pp 119–133
Young S (2005) Designer evolution: a transhumanist manifesto. Prometheus Books Amherst, New York
O Brien D (2022) The human being as an engineering problem: post-biological evolution, transhumanism, and philosophical anthropology. Technoetic Arts 20(1):79–94
Scheler M (1987) Evolution: Polygenese und Transformation der Menschwerdung. In: Frings MS (ed) Schriften aus dem Nachlaß 3: Philosophische Anthropologie (GW 12), Bouvier, Bonn, pp 81−117
Cassirer E (1944) An essay on man. An introduction to a philosophy of human culture. Yale University Press, New Haven
List of animals that have passed the mirror test. https://www.animalcognition.org/2015/04/15/list-of-animals-that-have-passed-the-mirror-test/. Accessed 30 June 2022
McComb K, Baker L, Moss C (2006) African elephants show high levels of interest in the skulls and ivory of their own species. Biol Let 2(1):26–28
Everett DL (2016) Dark matter of the mind: the culturally articulated unconscious. Chicago University Press, Chicago
Kapp E (2018) Elements of a philosophy of technology: on the evolutionary history of culture. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis
Scheler M (1997) Probleme, Methode, Einteilung I und II. In: Frings FS (ed) Schriften aus dem Nachlaß 3: Philosophische Anthropologie (GW 12), Bouvier, Bonn, pp 16–26
Scheler M (1990) Grundlagen der Geschichtswissenschaft. In: Frings MS (ed) Schriften aus dem Nachlaß 4: Philosophie und Geschichte (GW 13), Bouvier, Bonn, pp 167–238
Clark A (2003) Natural-born cyborg: minds, technologies, and the future of human intelligence. Oxford University Press, New York
Scheler M (1986) Vorbilder und Führer. In: Frings MS (ed) Schriften aus dem Nachlaß 1: Zur Ethik und Erkenntnislehre (GW 10), Bouvier, Bonn, pp 255–344 [Eng. trans. Scheler M (1987) Exemplars and leaders. In: Person and self-value. Three essays, trans. and intr. by Frings MS. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/Lancaster, pp 125–198]
Gottlöber S (2022) A new type of person? A Schelerian perspective on the cyborg. In: Michałowska M (ed) Crossing the border of humanity: cyborgs in ethics, law, and art. Proceedings of the International Online Conference December 14−15, 2021, Medical University of Łódź, Łódź, pp 26−32
Scheler M (1980) Der Formalismus in der Ethik und die materiale Wertethik. Neuer Versuch der Grundlegung eines ethischen Personalismus (GW 2), ed. Frings MS, Francke, Bern, München [Eng. trans. Scheler M (1973) Formalism in ethics and non-formal ethics of values. A new attempt toward the foundation of an ethical personalism, trans. and intr. by Frings MS, Funk RL. Northwestern University Press, Evanston]
Henckmann W (1998) Max Scheler. C.H. Beck, München
Singer P (1993) Practical ethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Scheler M (1972) Das Ressentiment im Aufbau des Moralen. In: Frings MS (ed) Vom Umsturz der Werte (GW 3), Francke, Bern/ München, pp 33–147 München [Eng. trans. Scheler M (1994) Ressentiment, trans. by Coser LA. Marquette University Press, Milwaukee]
Nagel T (1974) What is it like to be a bat. Philos Rev 83(4):435–450
Scheler M (1995) Philosophische Weltanschauung. In: Frings MS (ed) Späte Schriften (GW 9), Bouvier, Bonn, pp 73−182 [Eng. trans. Scheler M (1958) Philosophical perspectives, transl. by Haac OA. Beacon Press, Boston]
Scheler M (1979) Manuskripte zur Lehre vom Grund aller Dinge. In: Frings MS (ed) Schriften aus dem Nachlaß 2: Erkenntnislehre und Metaphysik (GW 11), Bouvier, Bonn, pp 185–222
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gottlöber, S. (2023). “The Universe of the Person is the Universe of Man?” Expanding the Schelerian Concepts of Philosophical Anthropology and Personhood into the Twenty-First Century. In: Michałowska, M. (eds) Humanity In-Between and Beyond. Integrated Science, vol 16. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-27945-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-27945-4_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-27944-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-27945-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)