Book: Rudolph Eucken

A >> Abel J. Jones >> Rudolph Eucken



RUDOLF EUCKEN

A Philosophy of Life

by

ABEL J. JONES, M.A., B.Sc., Ph.D.

Formerly Member of the University of Jena, Scholar of Clare
College, Cambridge, and Assistant Lecturer at the University
College, Cardiff

London: T. C. & E. C. Jack
67 Long Acre, W.C., and Edinburgh
New York: Dodge Publishing Co.







[Illustration]




PREFACE


The name of Eucken has become a familiar one in philosophical and
religious circles. Until recent years the reading of his books was
confined to those possessing a knowledge of German, but of late several
have been translated into the English language, and now the students of
philosophy and religion are agog with accounts of a new philosopher who
is at once a great ethical teacher and an optimistic prophet. There is
no doubt that Eucken has a great message, and those who cannot find time
to make a thorough study of his works should not fail to know something
of the man and his teachings. The aim of this volume is to give a brief
and clear account of his philosophical ideas, and to inspire the reader
to study for himself Eucken's great works.

Professor Rudolf Eucken was born in 1846, at Aurich in Frisia. He
attended school in his native town, and then proceeded to study at the
Universities of Goettingen and Berlin. In 1874 he was invited to the
Professorship of Philosophy at the University of Jena, and here he has
laboured for thirty-eight years; during this period he has been listened
to and admired by many of the more advanced students of philosophy of
all countries and continents.

His earliest writings were historical in character, and consisted mainly
of learned essays upon the classical and German philosophers.

Following upon these appeared valuable studies in the history of
philosophy, which brought out, too, to some extent, Eucken's own
philosophical ideas.

His latest works have been more definitely constructive. In _Life's
Basis and Life's Ideal_, and _The Truth of Religion_, he gives
respectively a full account of his philosophical system, and of his
ideas concerning religion.

Several smaller works contain his ideas in briefer and more popular
form.

As a lecturer he is charming and inspiring. He is not always easy to
understand; his sentences are often long, florid, and complex.
Sometimes, indeed, he is quite beyond the comprehension of his
students--but when they do not understand, they admire, and feel they
are in the presence of greatness. His writings contain many of the
faults of his lectures. They are often laboured and obscure, diffuse and
verbose.

But these faults are minor in character, compared with the greatness of
his work. There is no doubt that his is one of the noblest attempts ever
made to solve the great question of life. Never was a philosophy more
imbued with the spirit of battle against the evil and sordid, and with
the desire to find in life the highest and greatest that can be found in
it.

I have to thank Professor Eucken for the inspiration of his lectures and
books, various writers, translators, and friends for suggestions, and
especially my wife, whose help in various ways has been invaluable.

Passages are quoted from several of the works mentioned in the
Bibliography, especially from Eucken's "The Truth of Religion," with the
kind permission of Messrs. Williams & Norgate--the publishers.

ABEL J. JONES.

CARDIFF.




CONTENTS


CHAPTER

I. THE PROBLEM OF LIFE

II. HAS THE PROBLEM BEEN SOLVED?

III. ANOTHER SEARCH FOR TRUTH

IV. THE PAST, PRESENT, AND THE ETERNAL

V. THE "HIGH" AND THE "LOW"

VI. THE ASCENT TO FREEDOM AND PERSONALITY

VII. THE PERSONAL AND THE UNIVERSAL

VIII. RELIGION: HISTORICAL AND ABSOLUTE

IX. CONCLUSION: CRITICISM AND APPRECIATION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

INDEX





CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM OF LIFE


Before we proceed to outline Eucken's philosophical position, it will be
well if we can first be clear as to the special problem with which he
concerns himself. Philosophers have at some time or other considered all
the problems of heaven and earth to be within their province, especially
the difficult problems for which a simple solution is impossible. Hence
it is, perhaps, that philosophy has been in disrepute, especially in
English-speaking countries, the study of the subject has been very
largely limited to a small class of students, and the philosopher has
been regarded as a dreamy, theorising, and unpractical individual.

Many people, when they hear of Eucken, will put him out of mind as an
ordinary member of a body of cranks. From Eucken's point of view this is
the most unfortunate thing that can happen, for his message is not
directed to a limited number of advanced students of philosophy, but is
meant for all thinking members of the human race.

The problem he endeavours to solve is far from being one of mere
theoretical interest; on the contrary it has to do with matters of
immediate practical concern to the life of the individual and of the
community. To ignore him will be to fail to take account of one of the
most rousing philosophies of modern times.

The apathy that exists in regard to the subject of philosophy is not
easy to explain. It is not that philosophising is only possible to the
greatest intellects; it is indeed natural for the normal mind to do so.
In a quiet hour, when the world with its rush and din leaves us to
ourselves and the universe, we begin to ask ourselves "Why" and "How,"
and then almost unconsciously we philosophise. Nothing is more natural
to the human mind than to wonder, and to wonder is to begin to
philosophise.

Perhaps philosophers have been largely to blame for the indifference
shown; their terms have often been needlessly difficult, their language
obscure, and their ideas abstruse. Too often, too, their abstract
speculations have caused them to ignore or forget the actual experience
of mankind.

Those who have quarrelled with philosophy for these or other reasons
will do well to lay their prejudices aside when they start a study of
Eucken, for though he has some of the faults of his class, he has many
striking and exceptional excellences.

Philosophers in general set out to solve the riddle of the universe.
They differ in their statement of the problem, in the purpose of the
attempt, and in their methods of attempting the solution. Some will
wonder how this marvellous universe ever came into existence, and will
consider the question of the existence of things to be the problem of
philosophy. Others in observing the diversity of things in the universe
wonder what is behind it all; they seek to go beyond mere appearances,
and to investigate the nature of that behind the appearances, which they
call the reality. In their attempts to solve one or both of these
problems, thinkers are led to marvel how it is that we get to know
things at all; they are tempted to investigate the possibility of
knowledge, and are in this way side-tracked from the main problem.
Others in their investigations are struck with amazement at the
intricate organisation of the human mind; they leave the riddle of the
universe to study the processes of human thought, and examine as far as
they are able the phenomena of consciousness. Then thought itself claims
the attention of other philosophers; they seek to find what are the laws
of valid thought, what rules must be followed in order that through
reasoning we may arrive at correct conclusions. Others become attracted
to an investigation of the good in the universe, and their question
changes from "What is?" to "What ought to be?" Others interest
themselves in the problem of the beautiful, and endeavour to determine
the essence of the beautiful and of its appreciation. In this way the
subject of philosophy separates out into a number of branches. The study
of the beautiful is called AEsthetics; of the good, Ethics; of the laws
of thought, Logic; of the mind processes, Psychology; of the possibility
of knowledge, the Theory of knowledge; while the deeper problems of the
existence of things, of reality and unity in the universe, are generally
included under Metaphysics.

It need hardly be pointed out that all these branches are very closely
related, and that a discussion of any one of them involves to some
extent a reference to the others. One cannot, for example, attempt to
solve the great question of reality without touching upon the
possibility of knowledge, without some reference to the processes of the
human mind, and the standards of the validity of thought, of the good,
and of the beautiful.

It is however essential, if one is to appreciate a philosopher, to
understand clearly what his main problem is. Therein lies frequently the
differences among philosophers--that is, in the special emphasis laid on
one problem, and the attention to, or neglect of other aspects. To fail
to be clear on this matter frequently means to misunderstand a
philosopher.

And it would seem that many critics have failed to appreciate the work
of Eucken to the extent they should, because they have expected him to
deal in detail with problems which it is not his intention to discuss,
and have failed to appreciate what special problem it is that he
attempts to solve.

Eucken's special problem is that of the reality in the universe, of the
unity there exists in the diversity of things. In so far as he makes
this his problem, he is at one with other philosophers in investigating
what may perhaps be considered to be the most profound problem that the
human mind has ever conceived. The fact that distinguishes Eucken from a
large number of other thinkers is that he starts where they leave off.
At a rule, philosophers begin their investigation with a consideration
of matter, and proceed by slow degrees to attempt to explain the reality
at the basis of it. Some never get further, and dispense with the
question of human life and thought as mere aspects or manifestations of
the material world. But the problem of life is for Eucken the one
problem--he seeks to find the reality beneath the superficialities of
human existence, and he has little to say concerning the world of
matter. And, after all, it is the problem of life that urgently calls
for solution, for upon the solution that is accepted, the life of the
individual is to a large extent based. It is, of course, very
interesting to meditate and speculate upon the material world, its
origin and evolution, but the question is very largely one of mere
theoretical interest--a kind of game or puzzle for studious minds. It is
the question of life itself that is ultimately of practical interest to
every human soul. And this is the problem that Eucken would solve. Hence
those who expect to find a closely reasoned philosophy on matter and its
manifestations must look elsewhere, for Eucken has little for them.
Eucken's philosophy is a philosophy of life, and he only touches
incidentally those aspects of philosophy that are not immediately
concerned with his special problem. He refuses to be allured from the
main problem by subsidiary investigations, and perhaps rightly so, for
one problem of such magnitude would seem to be enough for one human mind
to attempt. Eucken is a philosopher who lays foundations and deals with
broad outlines and principles; it must be left to his many disciples to
fill in any gaps that exist on this account, by attempting to solve the
subsidiary problems with which Eucken cannot for the present concern
himself.

If Eucken's problem differs fundamentally from that of most other
philosophers, perhaps the purpose of his investigations is still a more
striking characteristic. He is anxious to solve the riddle of the
universe in order that there may be drawn from the solution an
inspiration which shall help the human race to concentrate its energies
upon the highest ideals of life. The desire to find a meaning which will
explain, and at the same time infuse zest and gladness into every
department of life has become a passion with him, and in finding that
meaning, his great endeavour is to prove the truth of human freedom and
personality. He wishes to solve the riddle in order that man may become
a better man, the world a better world. His aim is definitely an
ethical aim, and his purpose a practical one of the noblest order, and
not one of mere intellectual interest.

There is much, too, that is original in his methods--this will become
evident in the chapters that follow. He begins with an inquiry into the
solutions that have been offered. After careful investigation he finds
they all fail to satisfy the conditions which a solution should satisfy.
His discussions of these theories are most illuminating, and those who
do not agree with his conclusions cannot fail to admire his masterly
treatment.

Having arrived at this conclusion, he searches the story of the past,
studies the conditions of the present, and gazes into the maze of the
future, and finds revealed in them all an eternal something, unaffected
by time, which was, is, and ever shall be--the eternal, universal,
spiritual his, which then must be the great reality.

Upon this basis he builds a system of philosophy, which he considers to
be more satisfactory than the solutions already offered; with which
contention, there is little doubt, the majority of his readers will be
inclined to agree.

After the brief statement of Eucken's special problem, of the purpose
and methods of his investigation, we can proceed to outline his theories
in greater detail, beginning in the next chapter with his discussion of
the solutions that have in the past been offered and accepted.




CHAPTER II

HAS THE PROBLEM BEEN SOLVED?


What is the meaning, the value, and purpose of life, and what is the
highest and the eternal in life--the great reality? This is the question
that Eucken would solve. Before attempting a solution of his own, he
examines those that have already been offered. His discussion of these
theories is remarkable for the fairness, breadth of view, sympathy,
insight, and accurate knowledge that is shown. There is no superficial
criticism, neither does he concern himself with the inessential details
of the theories.

Jest-books tell us of a defendant against whom a claim for compensation
was made by a complainant who alleged that the former's dog had bitten
him. The defence was, first, that the dog was lame, blind, and
toothless; second, that it had died a week before; and third, that the
defendant never possessed a dog. A sensible judge would wish to be
satisfied in regard to the third statement before wasting time
discussing the others; if it proved to be true, then the case would be
at an end. The defences of philosophical systems are often similar, and
the critic is tempted to waste time discussing details when he should go
to the root of the matter. Eucken does not fall into this error. His
special method is to seek the idea or ideas which lie at the root of the
proposed solution; if these are unsatisfactory, then he does not
consider it necessary to discuss them further. Hence his work is free
from the flippant and superficial argument so common to-day; he makes a
fair and serious endeavour to find out the truth (if any) that is at the
basis of the proposed solutions, and does not hesitate to give them
their due meed of praise even though he considers them to be ultimately
unsatisfactory.

Before a solution can be regarded as a satisfactory one, Eucken holds
that it should satisfy certain conditions. It should offer an
explanation for life which can be a firm basis for life, it must admit
of the possibility of human freedom, and must release the human being
from sordid motives--unless it satisfy these conditions, then it cannot
be accepted as final.

The solutions of the problem of life that have been offered he considers
to be five--Religion and Immanental Idealism, Naturalism, Socialism and
Individualism, the first two regarding the invisible world as the
reality in life, the others laying emphasis on man's life in the present
world. The reader will perhaps wonder how his choice has fallen upon
these systems of thought and these alone. The explanation is a simple
one: he considers it necessary to deal only with those theories which
can form, and have formed, bases for a whole system of life. Mere
theoretical ideas of life, especially negative ideas such as those of
agnosticism and scepticism, do not form such a basis, but the five
chosen for discussion can, and have to some extent, posed as complete
theories of life, upon which a system of life can be built.

Has _Religion_ solved the question? If it has, then it must have done so
in that which must be considered its highest form--in Christianity.
Christianity has attempted the solution by placing stress upon a higher
invisible world, a world in sharp contrast with the mere world of sense,
and far superior to it. It unites life to a supernatural world, and
raises mankind above the level of the natural world. It has brought out
with great clearness the contrast between the higher world and the world
of sin, and has shown the need for a break with the evil in the world.
It has given to man a belief in freedom, and in the necessity for a
complete change of heart. It has proved a source of deliverance from the
feeling, of guilt, and a comfort in suffering. Indeed, considering all
the facts, there seems to be no doubt that, of all the solutions
offered, religion has been the most powerful factor in the history of
mankind.

Its influence would continue for the present and future, were it not
that doubt has been cast upon its very foundations, and had not
circumstances arisen to take men's minds away from thoughts of a higher
and invisible world, and to concentrate them to a greater extent than
formerly upon the world of sense. The progress of the natural sciences
has done much to bring about the change. Christianity made man the
centre of the universe, for whom all things existed, but the sciences
have insisted upon a broader view of the universe, and have deposed man
from his throne, and given him a much humbler position. Then as the
conception of law became more prominent, and scientists became more and
more inclined to explain all things as the result of natural laws, the
idea of a personal God in constant communion with, and supervision over
mankind, fell into disfavour.

And the study of history has caused questions to be raised. Some
historians have endeavoured to show that the idea of an overworld is
merely the characteristic of a certain stage in the evolution of
mankind, and that the ideas of religion are, after all, little more than
the mental construction of a God upon the image of man's own self.
History has attacked the doctrinal form of religion, and has endeavoured
to show that religions have been very largely coloured and influenced by
the prevailing ideas of the time; and the question naturally arises as
to whether there is anything more in religion than these temporary
elements.

And this is not all. In the present age the current of human activity is
strong. Man is beginning to accomplish things in the material world, and
is becoming anxious to accomplish more. His railways cover the lands,
his ships sail the seas, and his aeroplanes fly through the air. He has
acquired a taste for this world, a zest for the conquest and the
utilising for his own pleasure and benefit of the world of nature. And
when this occurs, the overworld sinks into the background--he is
satisfied with the present, and feels no need, except under special
circumstances, of a higher world. The sense world at present makes a
strong appeal--and the stronger it becomes, the less he listens to the
call of an overworld.

The sciences, history, and the special phases of human activity have
drawn attention from a higher, invisible world, and have cast doubts
upon its very existence.

As a result of this, "Religion (in the traditional form), despite all it
has effected, is for the man of to-day a question rather than an answer.
It is itself too much of a problem to interpret to us the meaning of our
life, and make us feel that it is worth the living."

In these words Eucken states his conviction that Christianity in its
orthodox forms cannot solve the problem of the present. This, however,
is not all he has to say concerning religion. He is, in truth, a great
believer in religion, and as will be seen, he believes that later it
will again step forth in a changed form as "the fact of facts" to wield
a power perhaps greater than ever before.

As in the case of religion, _Immanent Idealism_ is a theory that gives
life an invisible basis, but the invisible has been regarded as that
which lies at the root of the present world, and not as a separate
higher world outside our own. The Divine it considers not as a personal
being apart from the world, but as a power existing in and permeating
it, that indeed which gives to the world its truth and depth. Man
belongs to the visible world, but inwardly he is alive to the presence
of a deeper reality, and his ambition must be to become himself a part
of this deeper whole. If by turning from his superficial life he can set
himself in the depths of reality, then a magnificent life, with the
widest prospects, opens out before him. "He may win the whole of
infinity for his own, and set himself free from the triviality of the
merely human without losing himself in an alien world." And if he does
so, he is led to place greater emphasis upon the high ideals of life
than upon material progress. He learns to value the beautiful far above
the merely useful; the inner life above mere existence, a genuine
spiritual culture above the mere perfecting of natural and social
conditions. There is brought into view a new and deeper life in which
the emphasis is placed upon the good, the beautiful, and the true. In
this way idealism has inspired many men to put forth their energies for
the highest aims, has lifted the individual above the narrowness of a
life devoted to himself alone, and has produced characters of
exceptional beauty and strength. It claims, indeed, to be able to shape
the world of man more satisfactorily than religion can, for it has no
need for doctrines of the Divine, the Divine being immediately present
in the world. But despite its great influence in the past, its power
has of late been considerably weakened.

The question of the existence of a deeper invisible reality in the world
has become as problematic as the doctrines of religion.

To be a whole-hearted believer in the older forms of idealism it is
necessary that the universe be regarded as ultimately reasonable and
harmonious, and there must be a belief in the possibilities of great
development on the part of the human being. But a serious study of
things reveals to us the fact that the universe is not entirely
reasonable and harmonious. If it were, then man's effort towards the
ideal would be helped by the whole universe, but that is far from being
the case; progress means fight, and difficult fight; there is definite
opposition to the efforts of man to raise himself. Moreover, there is
evil in the world, let pantheists and others say what they will. Eucken
refuses to close his eyes to, or to explain away, opposition, pain, and
evil--the world is far from being wholly reasonable and harmonious, and
idealists must acknowledge this fact. The natural sciences, too, by
emphasising the reign of law, tend to limit more and more the
possibilities of the human being, ultimately robbing him of all
freedom--hence of all possibility of creation. And how can one be an
enthusiastic devotee of idealism if he is led to doubt man's power to
aim at, fight towards, or even choose the highest?

Idealism was at its height in those red-letter days when a high state of
culture had been attained, and great personalities produced masterpieces
in art, music, and literature. The progress of the sciences and of man's
natural activity has directed the spirit of the age towards material
progress; the ideals of mankind tend to become external and
superficial, and the interest in the invisible world falls to a minimum.

To some extent, too, idealism breathes of aristocracy--a most unpopular
characteristic in a democratic age. Experience shows that man is raised
above himself only in rare cases, and that the great things in the
realms of art, music, and literature are very largely the monopoly of
the few, and these mainly of the leisured classes. Hence the appeal of
idealism to certain types of men and women must necessarily be a feeble
one.

Then, again, there is the general indifference of mankind to lofty aims;
this militates against the power of idealism even more than in the case
of religion, for while in the latter there is the idea of a personal God
who is pleased or displeased urging men to renewed effort, the teachings
of idealism may appear to be mere abstractions, and can, as such,
possess little driving-power for the ordinary mind.

Idealism, too, seems to be a mere compromise between religion and a life
devoted to sense experience, and like most compromises it lacks the
enthusing power of the original ideas.

Copyright (c) 2007. knowncrafts.net. All rights reserved.