Abstract
This chapter deals with the basic outlines of Schelling’s conception of living nature. It had a profound influence on the development of biology, particulary in Germany, and many of its parts are highly inspirational to this day. The first part presents Schelling’s general approach to explaining phenomena from living nature. His goal was to find a middle way between materialism, which tends to reduce life to mechanical and chemical processes, and vitalism, a position that assumes special principles and forces applying solely to living organisms. Schelling’s position on this subject could be thought of as dynamic monism, according to which organic and inorganic nature are in effect different stages of development of one and the same principle. In the second part of this chapter, we have a look at what is, in Schelling’s view, specific to the living stage of nature. We focus mainly on his theory of organism as an autopoietic, internally organised, self-sustaining whole characterised by relative autonomy and independence of its environment. The third and final part of this chapter is dedicated to Schelling’s concept of evolution: he was the first thinker to use this term, which originated in the context of embryology, in the new context of evolution of species.
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.
- 2.
Only the first part of this work exists in an English translation.
- 3.
[Entire System of Philosophy and of Philosophy of Nature in Particular] This treatise is not available in an English translation.
- 4.
- 5.
Schelling adopts the term ‘formative drive’ (Bildungstrieb) from Blumenbach (1799), who used it to explain the reproduction of living beings in the sense of regeneration of damaged parts and propagation. Schelling generalises this conception and concludes that this force acts not only in the living nature. Cf. Richards (2002: 219).
- 6.
- 7.
For the moment being, let us leave aside the question whether Schelling understood these degrees as merely ideal types or rather as degrees of gradual development in time. We shall address this issue in the last part of this chapter.
- 8.
Cf. also System der gesammten Philosophie (SW VI 387f.).
- 9.
Cf., for instance, ‘… desire, which determines the ground of every particular natural being …’ (Schelling 2006: 43 = SW VII 376).
- 10.
An overview of contemporary theories and disputes regarding irritability and sensibility is presented in Richards (2002: 313–321).
- 11.
Schelling also uses the term germ (Keim), without, however, implying some miniaturised pre-existing forms of organs.
- 12.
Relevance of this consideration for current discussions about relations between a genotype, phenotype, and environmental triggering is discussed by Casetta (2020).
- 13.
For more on Kielmeyer, see Richards (2002: 244–248).
- 14.
Schelling himself notes that he adopts this idea from Kielmeyer (First Outline 141 = SW III 195). For more on this, see again Richards (2002: 243ff.).
- 15.
Cf. also Schelling’s claim that ‘Nature must have begun all over again with a totally new natural predisposition for each product that appears fixed to us.’ (First Outline 49 = SW III 63)
- 16.
Cf. also First Outline 218 = SW III 307.
- 17.
According to Richards, the most concrete object of Schelling’s criticism was the theory of Erasmus Darwin (grandfather of Charles Darwin); see Richards (2002: 300ff.).
- 18.
Even C. S. Peirce, one of the main inspirational sources of biosemiotics, was directly influenced by Schelling in his ontology (Ibri, 2022: 223f.).
References
Beiser, F. (2002). German idealism: The struggle against subjectivism, 1781–1801. Harvard University Press.
Blumenbach, J. F. (1799). Handbuch der Naturgeschichte. Dieterich’schen Buchhandlung.
Casetta, E. (2020). Preformation vs. Epigenesis: Inspiration and haunting within and outside contemporary philosophy of biology. In C. Emilo, I. Corriero, & G. Hamilton (Eds.), Rethinking Schelling. Nature, myth, realism (Vol. 74, pp. 119–138). Rivista di Estetica.
Engelhardt, D. (1984). Schellings Philosophische Grundlegung der Medizin. In H. J. Sandkühler (Ed.), Natur und Geschichtlicher Prozess: Studien zur Naturphilosphie F. W. J. Schellings (pp. 305–325). Suhrkamp Verlag.
Galvani, L. (1791). De viribus electricitatis in motu musculari commentarius. Ex Typographia Instituti Scientiarium.
Gare, A. (2013). Overcoming the Newtonian paradigm: The unfinished project of theoretical biology from a Schellingian perspective. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, 113, 5–24.
Haller, A. (1771). Primae Lineae Physiologiae in usum Praelectionum Academicarum. Grasset et Socios.
Ibri, I. A. (2022). Semiotics and pragmatism: Theoretical interfaces. Springer.
Kabeshkin, A. (2017). Schelling on understanding organisms. British Journal for History of Philosophy, 25(6), 1180–1201.
Kant, I. (2000). Critique of power of judgement (P. Guyer & E. Matthews Trans.). Cambridge University Press.
Kauffman, S. A. (1993). The origin of order. Self-organization and selection in evolution. Oxford University Press.
Kielmeyer, C. F. (1993). Über die Verhältnisse der organischen Kräfte. Basilisken-Presse.
Küppers, B.-O. (1992). Natur als Organismus. Schellings frühe Naturphilosophie und ihre Bedeutung für die moderne Biologie. Vittorio Klostermann.
Maturana, H., & Varela, F. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition. The realization of the living. D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Michelini, F. (2020). The paradox of living: Jonas and Schelling on the Organism’s autonomy. In C. Emilo, I. Corriero, & G. Hamilton (Eds.), Rethinking Schelling. Natue, myth, realism (Vol. 74, pp. 139–157). Rivista di Estetica.
Richards, R. J. (2002). The romantic conception of life: Science and philosophy in the age of Goethe. The University of Chicago Press.
Schelling, F. W. J. (1799). Von der Weltseele. In K. F. A. Schelling (Ed.), (1857). F. W. J. Schelling Sämtliche Werke 2 (pp. 345–583). J. G. Cotta.
Schelling, F. W. J. (1804). System der gesammten Philosophie und der Naturphilosophie insbesondere. In K. F. A. Schelling (Ed.), (1860). F. W. J. Schelling Sämtliche Werke 6 (pp. 131–576). J. G. Cotta.
Schelling, F. W. J. (1988). Ideas for a philosophy of nature (E. E. Harris & P. Heath Trans.). Cambridge University Press.
Schelling, F. W. J. (2004). First outline of a system of the philosophy of nature (K. R. Peterson Trans.). State University of New York Press.
Schelling, F. W. J. (2006). Philosophical investigations into the essence of human freedom (J. Love & J. Schmidt Trans.). State University of New York Press.
Schelling, F. W. J. (2010). On the world soul (I. H. Grant Trans.). In R. Mackay (Ed.), Collapse Vol. VI: Geo/Philosophy (pp. 66–95). Urbanomic.
Zammito, J. H. (2018). The gestation of German biology. Philosophy and physiology from Stahl to Schelling. The University of Chicago Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Vrabec, M. (2024). Schelling’s Philosophy of Nature. In: Švorcová, J. (eds) Organismal Agency. Biosemiotics, vol 28. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53626-7_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53626-7_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-53625-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-53626-7
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)