Friedrich Stadler, Leslie Topp, Chair: William Johnston
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 Workshop VIENNA 1900: CURRENT DISCOURSES ON FIN-DE-SIECLE VIENNA International Center, University of New Orleans (UNO), October 24-25, 2016 SLIDE 1 Roundtable IV: Interdisciplinary Models Friedrich Stadler, Leslie Topp, Chair: William Johnston Friedrich Stadler (University of Vienna): “The Sciences and Humanities as Culture” SLIDE 2 INTRODUCTION Based on William Johnston’s path breaking trilogy of books on Austrian-Hungarian intellectual history I will focus mainly on the role of philosophy, the sciences and humanities from a trans- and interdisciplinary point of view. (Of course, the publications of Carl Schorske, Allan Janik/Stephen Toulmin, Edward Timms, David Luft, and Steven Beller and many others are to be mentioned as essential background knowledge). SLIDES 3-4: Constructive Unrest. Austrian Conference on Contemporary History Graz 2016 According to the new model of the “Long 20th Century” in Austrian history (from Habsburg Monarchy to the Republic) in general, and as applied to the history of the University of Vienna, specifically, I make a plea for this conception more or less also regarding Vienna 1900 / Fin-de-Siécle Vienna. This can be illustrated by a short report on a panel dealing with the “Paradigmenwechsel zum langen 20. Jahrhundert” (paradigm shift on the long 20th century) at the last “Österreichischer Zeitgeschichtetag” (ÖZT) in Graz, June 2016. SLIDE 5: “Wissenschaft als Kultur” (Frankfurt 1995) Following this perspective, I will argue for the need to cover all sciences (including humanities) under the umbrella of (Austro-Hungarian) culture, which seems to me the main deficit in the related historiography. Instead, the image of all sciences as an essential part of culture (Wissenschaft als Kultur) is leading up to transgressing disciplinary boundaries. (cf. Arnold Keyserling, Der Wiener Denkstil. Mach-Carnap-Wittgenstein (1965)) Therefore, it is desirable to specify the role and function of science and research in Austrian intellectual history, as well as in contemporary history in general from the 19th to the 20th centuries. In this regard the marginalization of the history and philosophy of science can be overcome by introducing thematic patterns of intellectual life. 2 SLIDE 6 One viable model seems to me the extension of Gerald Holton’s Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought (Thematische Analyse der Wissenschaft 1973/1978) to the humanities and the intellectual history, thereby bridging the gap between two or three science cultures since C.P. Snow. Topics like “republic of scholars” (intellectual circles), “coffee house science”, and thematic elements like “Deutsche Wissenschaft”, “crisis and construction”, “plan vs. market”, “mind vs. soul”, “parts and wholes”, “unity and plurality”, “ornament and Neue Sachlichkeit / new objectivity” may serve as heuristic elements and “macro-contexts” (W. Johnston) for an overarching investigation of the academic and non-academic “Geistesgeschichte”, with the historical-critical and comparative method as an integral part of historiography. FOUR CASE STUDIES My proposal will be exemplified shortly with 4 case studies: SLIDE 7: Jenseits von Kunst, Beyond Art 1.Weibel Peter Weibel’s exhibition catalogue Jenseits von Kunst in Austria and Hungary on the interaction of (mainly formal) philosophy, science and the arts, specified by a focus on “The Vienna Circle in Hungary” with reference to chapter 7 of William Johnston’s recent book. a) Weibel: Austrian-Hungarian scholars: mainly analytic with formal methods (Formalkünste, Weibel: Formalwissenschaften), science as art, art as science (from Riegl to Feyerabend): “Scientia sine arte nihil est; ars sine scientia nihil est” (Jean Vignot 1392). The “read thread” from Austro-Hungarian avant-garde to the Cultural Exodus from Austria. SLIDE 8 The Vienna Circle (VC) in Hungary, Egon Brunswik b) Reidei/Stadler: problem of language, Brentano on Géza Révész; Mach in Hungary: Karl and Michael Polányi and the “Galileo Circle” (1908-1919) with Julius Pikler, Karl Mannheim and Georg Lukacs (Lenin vs. Mach!), continuation with the “Verein Ernst Mach” in Vienna (K. Polanyi/I. Duczynska, K. Popper) and in British exile; topics: meth. nominalism and individualism vs. universalism and fascism (O. Spann); VC: Eugen Lukacs, John von Neumann and the “Mathematical Colloquium” (K. Menger), cont. in the US with George Pólya and O. Morgenstern/J.v. Neumann, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (1944); after 1945 discontinuity (the case of I. Lakatos), but: John Harsany (János Harsányi) and his Nobel Prize (Game theory 1994) and his fate because of his Jewish descent (Australia, USA); Egon Brunswik, (Lajos Kardos) and the Bühler-school in (Gestalt) psychology; R.v.Mises and Theodore von Kármán; “Third Vienna Circle” around V. Kraft and Bela Juhos: with I. Lakatos and P. Feyerabend; Summary: before 1914: strong reception in philosophy and psychology (Brentano and Mach); after 1918: emigration to the West (Vienna, Berlin, US); between 1918 and 1934: mutual contacts (VC/LE); cont. in exile (UK, US); after 1945: Lakatos, Popper etc., exception: Anton Fischer in Hungary (as an “unclassifiable”!). 3 SLIDE 9 Festschrift 1-4, Vol.1 2. The Festschrift The 4 volumes of the history of the University of Vienna (650 Jahre Universität Wien – Aufbruch ins neue Jahrhundert), esp. volume 1 Universität – Forschung – Lehre, which applies some of the above mentioned features and criteria on the development from 1848 to 2000. (e.g., from Kant’s Streit der Fakultäten (The Conflict of the Faculties) up to Bourdieu’s Homo Academicus, the history and theory of knowledge societies, Humboldt’s ideal type of university, the interplay of self-organization/autonomy and external intervention). SLIDES 10-12 General conception: paradigm for a new historiography of universities and integrated HPS as part of general history beyond a history of disciplines, institutions and university chairs. “Long 20th Century” (ca. 1848-2000). Problems and questions, esp. perspectives on the history of the University of Vienna in a comparative and interdisciplinary way, but work in progress. 4 Volumes: Research volumes 1-3, Self-presentation vol. 4. 650 Jahre Universität Wien – Aufbruch ins neue Jahrhundert. Vol. 1: Universität – Forschung – Lehre. Themen und Perspektiven im langen 20. Jhdt. Fields, institutions, disciplines of research (teachers and students) mainly from an epistemic perspective aiming at possible “cognitive identities”; Relation of the sciences and humanities exemplified with the “Streit der Fakultäten” since Kant up to Bourdieu’s Homo Academicus; History and Theory of the Knowledge Societies since the Middle Ages/Modern History; Re- evaluation of Humboldt’s ideal between pure and applied sciences with the central notion of Bildung; The tension between autonomy, self-organization and state planning/intervention; problematization of an ideal-typical “idea of the university” against any master-narrative as ex post “whig history”. Development and dissolution of the classical 4 Faculties since 1848. - Nemeth/Stadler: Kant (1789), followed by Bourdieu (1960), who showed, that Kant’s analysis can be applied to (post)modern universities, too (esp. in the social sciences) instead of the “Humboldt University”; Kant’s claim: external expectations towards the universities are legitimate as a sort of compromise between the interests of the society and the reflexive and autonomous reason; modern dichotomies (Bildung-Ausbildung, pure and applied science, autonomous thinking – economical instrumentalization) are according to Kant to be discussed between the higher faculties (theology, law, medicine) and the lower one (philosophy). Bourdieu: all Faculties and disciplines are concerned with this unresolved dichotomy. - Dahms/Stadler: Since 1365 “Artistenfakultät”, since 1848 Faculty of Philosophy: professionalization with doctoral studies (1872) and Habilitation; differentiation of philosophy: pedagogy, psychology; tension between philosophy and the sciences; linkages to the political and societal environment with continuing breaks. (1848, 1867, 1918, 1933/34, 1938, 1945, … 2002). Generally: philosophy lost its dominant role as the “queen of the sciences”, latest by the abolishment of the Philosophicum. - Stadler/Stoppelkamp: the concept of knowledge society is usually related to an economization, utilization and contextualization of science and knowledge. Through this, the traditional role of university with the ideals of free and pure research and education seems to be called into question. This is critically discussed from two different points of view: Firstly, the function of European university as an agent in a competitive trans-institutional knowledge market since early modern times will be reassessed, with two main conclusions. The 4 knowledge society is not an exclusive phenomenon of the 2nd half of the 20th Century but was rather a continuous aspect of the evolvement of modern science. The same applies to the alleged monopoly position of academic knowledge. Secondly, referring to key concepts of the knowledge society and with the view to historical episodes of the Vienna University the still dominating academic self image as “Humboldt University” will be criticized. Academic principles and values as scientific unity and autonomy resulted from historical and instrumental conditions, which were not only different from the common Humboldtian narrative but also quite similar to our experiences with the present conditions of knowledge society. Vol.2: Universität – Politik – Gesellschaft.