Governs the Making of Photocopies Or Other Reproductions of Copyrighted Materials
Warning Concerning Copyright Restrictions
The Copyright Law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted materials. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research. If electronic transmission of reserve material is used for purposes in excess of what constitutes "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright infringement.
RELIGIOUS PERSPE.CTIVES RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVES • VOLUME TWENTY-ONE Planned and Edited by RUTH NANDA ANSHEN WHAT IS CALLED BOARD OF EDITORS
W. H. Auden THIN-KING? K'arl Barth Martin CaD'rcy, S.J. Christopher awson by MARTIN HEIDEGGER / C. . dd Mircea Eliade Muhammad Zafrulla Khan John Macquarrie A Translation of Was Heisst Denken? Jacques Maritain by James Muilenburg Sarvepall, Radhakrishnan Fred_D. Wieck and J. Glenn Gray Alexander Sachs - Gershom Scholem With an Introduction by]. Glenn Gray
r tfj 1817
H~:RPER & ROW, PUBLISHERS
NEW YORK, EVANSTON, AND LONDON LECTURE I ·-·
- t,,J ..... 11'.·· ,A (we come to know what it means to think when we ourselves ('\.' 1i~- ~; =~!i!~~jP' is to be successful, we must be !•·' '.::;):;:,/
As soon as we allow ·ourselves to become involved in such !,_..; ,~(._ 0 learning, we ha.ve admitted that we are n:ot yet capable ,h,~ .•~,· · of thinking. . .r Yet- man is called the being who can think, and rightly so. Man is the rational animal. Reason, ratio, evolves in ---. -- -~oc=- - •....- - ~ J thinking. Bepig the rational animal, man must be capable of thinking if he really wants to. Still, it may be that man · wants to think, but can't. Perhaps he wants i.2.0 much when he wants to think, and so can do too little.t Man can think \ in the sens~ that he possesses the. possibili~y to do -~~ This possibility alone, howeve.!,. is no guarantee to us that we are capable of thinking. F_orlwe are capable of doing only what \I we are inclined to do),_ And again, we truly incline orily toward something that in turn inclines toward us, ·toward our essential being, by appealing to our essential being as the keeper who holds us in our essential being. ·what keeps us in our-essential nature holds us only so long, however, as. we for our part keep holding on to what holds us. And we,_'·: k eep holding on' to it by not letting it out of our memory: .. · • / ✓ Memory is the gather;ing of thought. Thought of what?' V · ·,
5 4 WHAT IS CALLED THINKING? PART I 5 _. Thought of what holds us, in that we give it thought pre are the thinkers par excellence. They are called thinkers . cisely because It remains what. must be thought about. precis;ly because thinking properly takes place in phi Thought has the gif\_2f thinking back, a gift given because losophy. we incline toward id Only when we are so inclined toward Nobody wi~y th~t there is an interest in philosophy wh~t in itself is to be thought about, only then are we capa- today. But · ei;e "1Ilything at all left today in which \ ble of thinkingJ · , · man does no_:vtake an interest, in the sense in which he ,.)" \;'.·~,,.-)"In order to be capable of thinking, we need to learn it understands "interest"? _
·. "-,."'~.. \·"'. :-. 1first. What is learning?\Jv.ran learns when he disposes every 1 0 Interest, int~resse, means to be among aIJ.d in the midst "'1 :S~~:} >< ,i\1lthing he does so that it answers to whatever essentials are of things, or_:to be at the center of a thing and to stay with · \:r-~,_t';1addressed to him at any given m?mentl We learn to think . it. But today's interest accepts as-valid onlywhatisinterest- r) ·::, I-:·.•. I ~y giving our mind to what there is to think about. · -;-g. And interesting is the sort of thing that can fre~ly be \~ \_;_,v,. .. ~Fi~~ What is e~sential in a friend, for example, is what we call regarded as indifferent the next moment, and be displaced , ~~, ·_i...."I "friendly." In the same sense we now call "thought-pro- by something else, which then concerns us just as little as voking" what in itself is to be thought about. Everything what went before. Many people today take the view that t!;~~g.!!_~kJE._~?"g~t-1:ts t~ ___th~- But it always gives they-are doing great honor to something by finding it inter-) I that gift just so far as the thought-provoking matter al esting. The truth is that such an opinion has already rele- ) ( ready is intrinsically what must be thought about. From J gated the interesting thing to the ranks of what is indiffer i! \ .,t ) now on, we will call "IJ?-ost thought-pr~\o!,:ing" what re- ent and soon boring. '-·..;:.- . ~ - ---=--~-=-.. _'.,,A I ) niains to be thought aboµt always, because it is at the begin- It is no evidence of any readiness to think that people • I f ! ' ning, before all else/What i;· most thought-provoking? show an interest in philosophy. There is, of course, sei-ious f How do";;-~If in our thought-provoking· time? preoccupation everywhere with philosophy and .its prob (!I 1\ ' ; i'. t lems. The learned world is expending commendable efforts i I l 't.~Most thought-provoking is that we are still not thinkin(J \ 1 : -not even yet, although the state of the world is becoming in the investigation of the history of philosophy. These are l constantly more thought-provoking. True, this course of useful i:i.nd worthy tasks, and only the best talents are good r. events seems to demand rather that man should act, with enough for them, especially when they present to us models out delay, instead of making speeches at conferences and of great thinking. But even if we have devoted many years I I international conventions and never getting beyond pro to the intensive study of the treatises. and writings of the I posing ideas on what ought to be, and how it ought _to be great thinkers, that fact is still no guarantee that we our l I (/ .../ done. What is lacking, then, is action, not thought . selves are thinking, or even are ready to learn thinking. On ; . { i And yet-it could be that prevailing man rurs-forcenturies the contrary-preoccupation with philosophy more than i now acted too much and thought too little. But how dare anything else may give us the stubborn illusion that we \ I anyone assert today that we are still not thinking, today are thinking just because we are incessantly "philoso I when there is everywhere a lively and constantly more . phizing." audible interest in philosophy, when almost everybody .' Even so, it remains strange, and seems presumptuous, to claims to know what philosophy is all about! .Philosophers assert that what is most thought-provoking in our ~hought- n I r 6 WHAT IS CALLED THINKING?, PART I 7 (,: provoking time is that we are still not thinking. Accord- th~~ing is by no means only because man does not yet turn \ ingly, we must prove the assertion. Even more advisable is sufficiently toward that which, by origin and innately, . first to explain it. For it could be that the demand for a wants to be thought about since in its essence its re~ains . proof_collapses as soo~ as enough lig~t is__ ~:~!-~~~ what must be thought about./Rather, that we are still not l 1 l ~~rt10n say,s_._Itxuns_,.______~-- · · , _._ \ : thinking steri!; from the fact that the thing itself that must i '<"'. ~<. ./',.)· M.ost thought-provoking in our thought-pro. vokzng tzme -\J be thought about turns away from man, has turned away t , I" ~: - is that we are still not thinking. _\ I long ago) · · · We will want to know at once when that event took ( f~~ -;::}:~~~~~~~g=~;:::~;::;~!~~:~:::~~!!; -\ place. Even before that, we will ask still more urgently how / gives us to think._ Let us look ~t 1t closely, ~d from the start \ w~ could pos:ibly know of any such event. And finally, the i allow each word its proper weight. Some thmgs are food for I problems :"hich here lie in wait come rushing at us when \ thought in themselves, intrinsically, so .to speak _innately. ' we add still further: that which really gives us food for r \ And some things make an appeal to us to give them thought did not turn away from man at somt:;! time or other ) thought~ to turn toward them in thought: to think them. which can be ~ixed in history-no, ~L!:~~JLJ~ust be \ - What is thought-:-provoking, what gives us to think, is _thoughLk~~P.~.J~:.~l!..J..1.!I.P.gg_away-from-man ·since ~the. b~:- i then not a:r_iythmgt~deteri:.nine, not anything that gtnning.----- ,..
\ only vve'-~~e iIIstituting,_ only we, _ij.I.l'Lpr.o.posing. According r·. On the othe~ hand, in our era man has always thought f to our assertion, what of itself gives us most to think about, m some way; m fact, man has thought the profoundest / what is most thought-provoking, is this-tha~ we are still. thoughts, and entrusted them to memory. By. thinking in ( not thinking. · that wa~he did and does remain related to what must b~ I This now means : We have still not come face to face, ~ thought.}~yet man is not capable of really thinking__as· _\ 7 \ have ·not yet come under the sway of what intrinsically ~o~ as that ~~!.£.J:i Ill_ust be thought ~bout, withdraws_J · )f~-- , desires to:·be .thought about in. an essenti~l sense. Presum.:. If we, as we are here and now, will not be taken in by ably the reason is that we human beings do not yet" suffi empty talk, we must retort that everything said so far is an! .'::~ \ ciently reach out and turn toward what desires to be thought. /A unbroken chain of hollow assertions, and state besides that$;~:- ;r If so, the fact that we are still not thinking would merely be ';hat has been ~resented here has nothing to do w.ith scien-),'.: --: a slowness, a delay in thinking or, at most, a neglect on tific kn?wledge. f,~ ; ~- _,__,.,;,1,1,, .. ,d ,.;, '/ J.,., '"'.,.;.'{ . ,i,. ~ch ,:-t. _ L . _f 7 man's part. Such human tardiness could then be cured in It ':111 be well to _;'?ainta,_i11 as long as possible such a - . human· ways by the appropriate measures. Human neglect We said: man still does not think, and this because what o~cas10nally. someone who points. No: drawn' into what , \ must be thought about turns away' from him; by no means ~thdraws, drawing toward it and thus pointing into the :Si{ ~ only bec:ause man does not sufficiently reach out and turn withdrawal, man first is rnan. His essential nature lies in l_ to what is to be thought. bein_g such a pointer. Something which in itself, by its es 1 What must be thought about, !urns away from man. It sential nature, is pointing, we call a sign. As he draws to withdraws from him. Buif how can we have the least knowl ~:rd. wlia_t _wj,tgg.raw.s, ~,3.~.~f2:.g?- But·;{:;;_~~- this sign edge of something that. withdraws from the beginning, P nts toward what draws away, it points, not so much at v 10 WHAT IS CALLED THINKING? PART I 11 what draws away as into the withdrawal. The sign stays . Mn_emo_s~daughter of Heaven and Earth, bride of ) ) without interpretation. ~~-~=ne_n!~~t:becomes the mo~~he n:rue--Muses~ , In a draft to one of his hymns, Hoelderlin writes : Drama and711usic, i:lance and poetry are oftfiewombof Mnemosyne, Dame Memory. It is plain that the word "We are a sign that is not read." ~eans S?meth~1:g else t~~n merely the psychologically de He continues with these two lines : .:, monstrable abihty to retain a mental representation an idea "We feel :ho pain, we almost have 'iJ1'J. of_ something w~ich ~s past. Me~C?EY.--:::-f:r:2-:rgJ.,_~_1j;:.lQ:~7J7:QL:~ f!1~ful-,,--chas m mmd sometlimg that is in the mind-> r. ., Lost our tongue in foreign lands." S 0 1 1 ){, ➔ thought. But when it is the name of the Mother of th; P- ,'Pc\ The several drafts of that hymn-besides bearing such M_uses, "Memory" does not mean just any thought of any- titles as "The Serpent," "The Sign," "The Nymph"-also thmg that can be thought. Memory is the gathering and include the title "Mnemosyne." This Greek word may be convergence of thought upon what everywhere demands translated: Memory. And since the Greek word is femi to be thoug_ht abo1:t f~rst of all. ~ory is the gatp,ering nine, we break no rules if we translate "~yl' __ 9f recollect10n, thmkmg back. It safciykeep---5 ·-a·nd keeps For Hoelderlin uses the Greek word Mnemosyne as the ✓ -~=.concea1eu _witrnn it that to which at each given time thought name of a Titaness. AcZo~dingt;-ihe ~yth;-she-is the ~ust be gi:en before all else, in everything that essentially daughter of Heaven and Earth. My!__~ __rp.eans the telling is, ev~ryth_u;ig that appeals to us as what has being and has wo_r:4-. For the Greeks, to tell is to laybare- ab.d-~ake-appear been rn bemg. Memory, Mother of the Muses-the think .;.::_both the appearance and that which has its essence in ing back to ';h~t is· to be tho_ught is the source and ground the appearance, its epiphany. }1:l!}!:..o_~ is what has its essence of poesy. This is why poesy is the w'ater that at times flows in its telling-what is apparent in the unconcealedness of backward towar_d the source, toward thinking as a thinking its appeal. The mythos is that appeal of foremost and radical bac~, a_recollect10n. Surely, as long as we take the view that concern to all human beings which makes man think of what logic gives us any information about what thinking is we appears, what is in being. fogos -~aysJ:-1},~t§a:!lle; mythos and sh'.111 ~ever be able to think how mud?- all poesy rests ~pon logos are not, as our current 'hi~to;i~s of phifosophy claim~ 1:hmkmg back, recollection. Poetry wells up only from de placed into opposition by philosophy as such; on the con voted thought thinking back, recollecting. trary, the early Greek thinkers (Pa~__!p.i
_, . --.;,. , 16 WHAT IS CALLED THINKING? PART I 17 most thought-provoking matter which gives us to think. est, hJ!ndiwork, if it would be accomplished at its We must keep our eyes fixed firmly on the true relation time. 1 • , · between teacher and taught-if indeed learning is to arise We must learn thinking because our being able to think .in the course of these lectures. and even gifted for it, is still no guarantee that we ar; We are trying to learn thinking. Perhaps thinking, too, capable of thinking. To be capable, we must before all else is just something like building a cabinet. At ~riy rate, it is a :incline toward what addresses itself to thought-and that craft, a "handicraft." "Craft':literally means the strength is that which of itself gives food for thought. What gives us ').:, and skill in our hands. ~nd is a peculiar thing. In the ~his gift, the gift of what must properly be thought about, common view, the hand is part of our bodily organism. 1s what we call most thought-provoking. . But the hand's essence can never be determined, or ex ~ur an~wer t? the question what the most thought-pro plained, by its being an organ which can grasp. Ape:5, too, vo~ng thmg nnght be is the assertion: niost thought-pro have organs that can grasp, but they do not have hands. vokmg for our thought-provdking time is that we are still The hand is infinitely different from all grasping organs- not thinking. , _ \ paws, claws, or fangs-different by an abyss of essence. The reason is never exclusively or primarily that we men:·1 \ 'Only a being who can speak, that is, think, can have hands d~ not sufficiently reach out and turn toward what properly l '. and can be handy in achieving works_of handicraft! , gives f~od fo~ thought; the reason is that this most thought- __s,1,,,,::" But the craft of the hand is richer than we commonly provokmg thmg turns away from us, in fact has long since ( T imagine. The hand does not only grasp and catch, or push turned away from man. . and pull. The hand reaches and extends, receives and wel.:. ~ in such a manner, keeps ~vel- \ comes-.and not just things: the hand extends itself, and ()p~ ~ts own, mcomparal5le nearness. · / receives its own welcome in the hands of others. The hand Once we are so related and drawn to what withdraws we · holds. The hand carries. The hand designs and signs, are drawing into what withdraws, into the enigmatic 'and presumably because man is a sign. Two hands fold into one, ~herefore mutable nearness of its appeal. Whenever man ' 1 / a gesture meant to carry nian into the great oneness. The Is proper1 y ~rawing that way, he is thinking-even though ..,,.,-~!£-,.. hand is all this, and this is the true handicraft. Everything he may still be far away from what withdraws even ')//\ is rooted here that is commonly known as handicraft, and though the withdrawal may remain as veiled as ev~r. All commonly we go no further. But the hand's gestures run through his life and right into his death Socrates did everywhere through language, in their most perfect purity nothing else than place himself into this d~aft, this cur- precisely when man speaks by being silent~ ~E-i.Qg!Y. "VYh.tn rent, and maintain himself in it. This is why he is the; ~p.e11J~.& does he_ think:-not the other way around, as purest thinker of the West. This is why he wrote nothing.> .j For an h b . . \ , . metaphysics still believes. Every motion of the hand in every ~~:1~~=-~ _egms to wnte out of thoughtfulness . ~)-:-:-:- 1 one of its works carries itself through the element of think ~~t mev1tab-1y EeJ1k~_!_~9~pe~ple who run to seek refuge/ ' · ing, every bearing of the hand bears itself in that element. ~~-~ny _~raft to~ s_t_i:?n~J:_~_:_!hel:1: An as yet hidden history) . All the work of the hand is rooted in thinking-.\Therefore, S 1 keeps the secret why all great Western thinkers after' (\ · thinking itself is man's simplest, and for that reason hard- ocrates, with all their ,greatness, had to be such fugitives. '.:. 1_ ;',...... ~- ~------~---- _-,-- ' I / .,....
WHAT IS CALLED THINKING? 18i.,' Thro.king has entered into literature; and literature has decided the fate of Western science which, by way of the doctrina of the Middle Ages, became the scientia of niodem times. In this form all the sciences have leapt from the ~omb of philp~gphy, in a twofoid ma~ner. ~e sciences come out of philosophyJ:lecause theyha-v:e to part with her. LECTURE And now that they are so apart they c~ never ·agam,~by their own power as sciences, make the leap back into the .. II source from whence they have sprung. Henceforth they ·. are r~manded to a realm of beirig where only thinking ca:n ·-· find them, provided thi:p.king is capable of doing what is its own to do. ~ _,...... ---·---···-~-;;;~-: , · When man is drawing in!JL wl.!.[Lwithdraws,~._p.Q!!ltS How shall we ever be able to think about the oft-named re ( ~-) 'into~ithdrawZAs we are drawiiig"tliat-w-ay we.are a lation between thought and poesy, so long as we do not :JL,_ ~;i~n~--~-po~te;:73{;:i we are pointing t~en at something kn~w what is called thinking and what calls for thinking, . A which has not, not yet, been transposed mto the language and therefore cannot think about what poesy is? We mod of our speech. We are a sign that is not read. ern men p~esumably have not the slightest notion how In his draft for the hymn "Mnemosyne" (Memory), tho~ghtfully the Greeks experienced their lofty poetry, Hoelderlin says : their works of art-no, not experienced, but let them stand . there in the presence of their radiant appearance. r" "We are a sign that is not read, Yet this much might be clear to us right now: we are We feel no pain, we almost have . Lost our tongue iri "foreign lands." not draggi_ng Hoelderlin's words into our lecture merely as_ a quo_tatlon from th~ re~lm of :~~-et~~ s~at_eJll~pt which · And so, on ow ·~ay toward thinking, we hear a word of will enhven and beautify the dry progress of thinking. To poesy. But the question to what end and with what right, do so. would be to de.J:ia.se. the poetic . word. Its statemeht,~ rests / upon what ground and within what limits, our ~ttempt to m.,1ts o"':1 truth. 1'.~_,:rut~-~!.3!~#-b~-~Y- Beauty is a / think allows itself to get involved in a dialogue with poesy, fateful gift of the essence of truth and here truth means • ,,j· ,: . : ·let alone with the poetry of th1s poet-this question, which . , ~--~is~!_os~~-?!-~~.at ke_~P,~~~.:!!. c~nc~aj_~~- 1T~ifiil~ · \nescapable, we can discuss only after we ourselves have 15 15 &, not what pleases, but what falls within that fateful 'gift .. ,- · taken the path of thinking. · f .....:: ..._\' · • of truth which comes to be when that which is eternally :'fJ,:.' \,•" . ; non-apparent and therefore invisible attains its most radi- ' '.! antl! apparent appearance:=! We are compelled to let the-~ ' poetic word stand in its truth, in beauty. And that does not exclude but on the contrary includes that we think the poetic word.
19 20 WHAT IS CALLED THINKING? PART I 21 When we appropriate Hoelderlin's word specifically for in thinking. Curious rationalism which bases love on think the realm of thought, we must of cour:se be'careful not to ing! And an unpleasant kind of thinking which is about to equate unthinkingly Hoelderli11'-s···f6eti_c statement with become sentimental! But there is no trace of any of this in what we are startin~ oµ,t t~ think about_ and call "most that line. What the line tells we can fathom only when we thought-provoking."' What 1s stated poetically, and what are capable of thinking. And that is why we ask: What is \ is stated in thought, are never identical; but there are times called thinking-and what does call for it?_ I when they are the same-·-those times when the gulf sep We shall never learn what "is called" swimming, for \\ arating poesy and thinking is a clean and decisive cleft.} example, or what it "calls for," by reading a treatise on TJris_can-occur_vv.h~1.1:..P.9~§y:,_i~J.9f.ty, __ 1!.l1c;l_th}nking..Eof9u~. swimming. Only the leap into the river tells us what is r Hoelderlin understood the matter well, as we gather from called swimming. The question "What is called thinking?" the two stanzas of the poem entitled can never be answered by proposing a definition of the con cept thinking, and then diligently explaining what is con Socrates and Alcibiades tained in that definition. w~what_J.9J!£Y\:~,~,-w_e.~Shi.!ll_;p.pJ __ ~ ~.Y?:~;_qbgut.whatJJ!i~king is. We remain outside that mere "Why, holy Socrates, must you always adore reflection which makestli1:nlring its object. Great thinkers, This young man? Is there nothing greater than he? first Kant and then Hegel, have understood the fruitlessness Why do you look on him of such reflection. That is why they had to attempt to reflect / ! Lovingly, as on a god?" their way out of such reflection. How far they got, and (The second stanza gives the answer:) where it took them, are questions that will give us much to think about at the proper juncture along our way. In the "Who has most deeply thought, loves what is most alive, '7Y.est, thought about thinking h2:s.. f!Q.1:l:!'.!S_hed __ as .. '_'log1-c~'', Who has looked at the world, understands youth at its ~ . ..----..,_..,~-~ .,. .. - -·-----...... -.- Logic lias gathered speciaf k'nowledge <;:_cmcerniIIg ~ __ special , height, kind of thin~g. This knowledge concerning logic has been And wise men in the end made scientifically fruitful only quite recently, in a special Often incline to beauty.'' science that calls itself "logistics." It is the most specialized We are concerned here with the line "Who has most deeply of all specialized sciences. In many places, above all in the thought, loves what is most alive." It is all too easy in this Anglo-Saxon countries, logistics is today considered the line to overlook the truly telling and thus sustaining words, only possible form of strict philosophy, because its result 'the verbs. To notice the verb, we now stress the line in a and procedures yield an assured profit for the construction different way that will sound unfamiliar to the common of the technological universe. In America and elsewhere, hearer: logistics as the only proper philosophy of the future is thus beginning today to seize power over the spirit. Now that "Who has most deeply thought, loves what is most alive." logistics is in some suitable way joining forces with modern Standing in the closest·vi"cinity, the two verbs "thoug4f~ psychology and psychoanalysis, and with sociology, the and "loves" form thecenter of the line. Inclination reposes power-structure of future philosophy is reaching perfec- 22 WHAT IS CALLED THINKING? PART I· 25 tion. But this conformation is in no way of man's making, silent about technology. It now turns out that the demands or within his power. Rather, these disciplines are in fateful made here on you, the students, have been excessive for the· submission to a power which co~es from far away, and for beginning of our journey. We have called thinking the -1/ which the Greek w_ords 7TOL'!J
,'~. I '
: 1-'; 24 WHAT IS CALLED THINKING? PART I 25 shop. But the l~ver and buttons in the manipulations of the industrial worker belong to a machine. And where does the the still unthought nature of the way in which anything machine, such as a power generator, belong? ~o~ern te~h that is under the dominion of ~UQlogY--,ha.s any being at ) nology is not constituted by, and does :110t consist_ m? them all. And · that such matters have remained unthought is < stallation of electric motors and turbmes and srmilar ma indeed first of all due to the fact that the will to action, ,- which here means thewillt~~iia:--b~-~~ffectfv~-lias I chinery; that sort of thing can on the contrary be erected ~verriizj:a:g
. t~ally easier f ~r yo~rselves if you ~1-1 ri4_ yo_ur~elY;Els i~ mg else b~t t~mk~ng? Hpvveyer; 0 tQ_.reflect on-thi;nkil!g, and ( time o~h.J!b1:t,_wh1ch I shall call 'qp}~::trJ!_<;\.. ~l~.;!-,.1!,!~~g.' "'~, ~~ ~r~~e t~~~11g m thought, are perhaps not altogether the· The dominion of this manner of perception is so vast today ~ ~?.Jlle. W'_ e :r:rius! giffthoughffo.what refledi'oii means. .. -· . . - . "·". . l \ that our eyes can barely encompass it. The expression "one- } track" has been chose_n on purpose. 1:rack has to do with , rails, ... e~1- rails with technology. we ~ocld ..-li~tmaiung matters tc;oeasy-for -·oµrselves "if we simply took the view that the dominion of one-track thinking has grown out of human laz'iiiess:-·fh:fs--cin-e:-frack thinking, which is becom ing ever more widespread_-in various shapes, is one of those unsuspected ·and inconspicuous forms, mentioned earlier, .,in which the . essence of technology assumes dominion-·- bec~use that essence ':Jl!s~~fJ}:ilii:~f~r.e 1::~~~~---~l>-~qllli~. ~t~~ voc1ty. l -·°Iii'the preceding lecture it was said that Socrates was the purest thinker of the West, while those who followed had to run for shelter. There comes ,the horrified retort: "But what about Plato, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Leibniz, Kant, Nietzsche? Dare we reduce these ;thinkers so much in . (';_ · comparison with Socrates?" But our questioner has failed '.. \ ~-- .,, i.'to hear what was also said : all great Western thinkers after '\.: '"< -':3 :;r Socrates "with all their greatness.'' Someone, -then, could ~- \?')- still be the purest thinker without being one of the greatest. "-:~}" r? That would give us here much to think about. For that "-t..._ -~: reason, the remark about Socrat_es began· with the words : ,/ ~'J"An as yet hidden history still keeps the secret why all · ~\l0 / ...,great thinkers after Socrates, with all their greatness . . ." We hear something of Socrates, the purest thinker-we 11 , ·I , fail to hear the rest, and then along the one track of some- i I ii , ~ ( thing half-heard we travel on right into being horrified at I I ;J · such one-sidedly dogmatic statements. Things are similar i 1-1 \ I \. PART I 29
ening, and gloomy, and generally __ wha! ~-~-~v~rse. W~en we-say"thoright-provoEng, ,,---~e~usuall'!F have in mmd immediately something ~-_!_~~.L!~,~g~ij._~-~- 1:-c cordingly, a statement that speaks of a thought-provokmg LECTURE time, and even of what is most thought-provoking in it, is from the start tuned in a negative key. It has in view only III the adverse and somber traits of the age. It st~~ctly to those phenomena that are good for nothing and promote
1 ~7' every for~ of nothingness-!E~-~il)jJis:tic-1~-~e~ it necessarily assumes that at t~~g9:re __9_f J~~q~~-Rp.enom~µa_'.,-. .·- there is a lack-according to our propos1t10n, lack of ~--..,.,.,..,l. When we attempt to learn what is called thinking and what th~~ght,.. This tune is familiar to us all ad nauseam from the stand calls for thinking, are we not getting lost in the reflection ard appraisals of the present age. A g~;.1-~:r-~tion ago it .was that thinks on thinking? Yet all along our way a steady "The D.ecline of the :West." Tod_11f':We-speak-of--.::-loss of, light is cast on thinkin . This li ht ~owever, is not_int_ro ce~i;~:.:'=People ~_;~~Y'¥h~~e trac;·and record the decay, the duce b t e lamp of reflection. lt issues from thmking a:;~truction, the imminent annihilation of the world. We its~lf, and only from t ere. _:__~n ___ p,g as t 1s emgmatic are surrounded by a special breed of reportorial novels that pro" ert , that 1t 1~tlfj~Jirmigfo __ !_o1!s ~VV!l Jig!iy_ though do nothing but wallow in such deterioration and depression. on y if and o y as ong as 1t 1s thinking, an keeps clear On the one hand, that sort of literature is much easier to of persisting in ratiocination about ratio. . produce than to say something that is essential and truly Thinking is ~hinki~g. when it ~nsvv:~~-!~ ~?~_! 1~ ~o~t___ I thought out; but on the other hand it is already getting tire t_Qgl!gb-J:PJ:._vyfu !_ ing. c1nd prevents all buiWing. Devastation 1s more unearthly What we call thought-provoking in the condition of thaitme~de;t~iiction":-Mere destruction sweeps aside all someone gravely ill, for example, is that it gives us cause for things including even nothingness, while devastation on worry. We call thought~PE~~.9king_ __yv_h~! iL on the decline. · 9 r Let us listen more closely! The assertion says, what is .l~~~~:i~~s~~:~!~:;~:;t!;[~!i~i~:r~~~g~}~~~~ [ 7 f< / .. most thought-provoking is that we are still __~ t4_i:r?-king: what IS most thought-provoking-especially when it is . . ' The assertion says neither that we are no"iong~r"thinking, man's highest concern-may well be also what is most nor does it say roundly that we are not thinking at all. The dangerous. _Or do we imagine that a man could even in , ,.,i,-. 7 words "still not," spoken thoughtfully, suggest that w~_are small ways ~:,;icounter_ the essence of truth, the essence of F;;"' a!rea..dy on pur~way--toward_thinkirig, presumably. from a beauty, the essence of grace-without danger? great distance, not only on our way toward thinking as a Therefore, when our assertion speaks of the thought~ conduct some day to be practiced, but on our way within provoking age and of what is most thought-provoking in thinking, o'r;i the way of thinking. it, it is in no way tuned to a key of melancholy and despair. / Our assertion, then, casts a bright ray of hope into that It is not drifting blindly toward the worst. It i~ not pessi- \ obfuscation which seems not only to oppress the world . mistic. But neither is the assertion optimistic. It does not from somewhere, but which men are almost dragging in by ! intend to offer quick comfort through artificially hopeful force. It is true that our assertion calls the ·present age the prospects of the best. But what alternative remains? In thought-provoking age. W-hat we have in mind with this decision. betw~~n the two? Indifference? These least of all. word-·ani_;'.Yitho.uj:__ any~~g~~~~_-is that For all mdecis10n always feeds only on those matters be which gives us food for thought, which _is what wants to be tween which it remains undecided. Even the man who be- . thought about. What is thought-provokjng, so understood, . _ lieves his judgmen~f-~, be beyond pessimism and optimism \ 52 WHAT rs CALLED THINKING? PART I 55 l (or on their hither side), still always takes his bearings a man wil~ ~ever find out what history is; no more_ than a J.1,, . a ,r-{,, iil ' from optimism and pessimism, and guides himself by a mere variant of indifference. But pessimism and optimism mathemati~ian. can show_ by way_ of mathematlcs-b_y ~i .. :, tf_.r,r 'I means of his science, that is, and ultimately by mathemati- 11·1· .. 1.'~{' . 1r b~th, together with the indifference and its variants which I i cal formulae-what mathematics is. The essence of their they support, stem from a peculiar relatedness of man to J sphere-history, art, poetry, language, nature, man, God _what we call ~story. This rela:e~e~s is difficult t~asp l -remains ,inaccessible to the sciences. At the same time, ~ i~eculianty-not because it is situated far a~aL.,_but however, the sciences would constantly fall into the void if because it is by now habitual j,Q,._..:!!s. Our assert10n, too, i th!:'..Y..,did not operate within these spheres. The essenceof pai;;_tly stems from a relatedness to the history and situ~ ) the spheres I have named is the concern of thinking. As the tion of man. What is the nature of that relatedness? This sciences qua sciences have no ·access to this concern, it must . brings us to the second point about our: assertion to which be said that they are not thinking. Once this is put in words,/ we must give attention. it tends to sound at first as though thinking fancied itself superior to the sciences. Such arrogance, if and where it Summary and Transition exists, would be unjustified; thinking always knows ~ssen- tially less than the sciences precisely because it operates After our transitional remarks on science, on learning, and where it could think the essence of history, art, nature, ./ on hand and handicraft, we returned to our theme. A ref erence to one-track thinking provided the transition. One language-.and ye.t is still not capable of it. The sciences ale fully entitled to their name, '7hich me~s . of track thinking is something else than mere one-sided ~owledge, because they have infinitely more knowledge thinking; it has a greater reach and a loftier origin. In_ the [ than thinking does. And ,yet there is another side in every present discourse concerning one-sided and one-track thmk science which that science as such can never reaGh : the ing, the word "thinking" means as much as "having views." e~al nature and ongm of its sphere, the essence and One might say, for instance: "I thin_k it yvil~ s~ow ~to essential origin of the manner of knowing which it culti night." But he who speaks tha!,~ay he ~-'=-~:· .\l ··-- ,!JJ¼!-2!":.J~~§_~~ v~es, and other things besides. The sciences .. rema~ of (: ) just has vi~~~--~-:1.,~~pethi:g?·:7w e U:-~st ?e. ve~~ careful, necessity on the one side. In this sense they are 9ne-sided, however, not to regard this' viewin~ ~s msigmficant. ~11- but ·in such a way that th~her side nonetheless always our daily life and all we do moves withm what we have m appears as well. The sciences' one-sidedness retains its own \ view and necessarily so. Even the sciences stay within it. many-sidedness. But that many-sidedness may expand to An/how is it one-sided? Is it not one of science's highest such proportions that the one-sidedness on which it is ba~ed principles to explore its objects from as many sides as possi- no longer catches our.eye-.. And when man no longer sees ble, even from all sides? Where is the one-sidedness in that? the one side as one side, he has lost sight of the other s.ide It lies precisely in the sphere of scientific exploration. His as well. What sets the two sides apart, what lies between torical science may thoroughly explore a period, for in ~ them, is covered up, so to speak. ~thing is leveled to stance, in every possible respect, and yet never explore what ~el. Our minds hold views on all and everything, and history is. It cannot do so, scientifically. By way of history, . view all things in the identical way. Today every ne~s- _/ 54 WHAT IS CALLED THINKING? PART I 55 paper, every illustrated magazine, and every radio program out of the "U" and study "phy. sci." .!!_ut the question offers all things in the identical way to uniform views. The remains what kind of order is heralded here in the spread subjects of science and the concern of thinking are dealt in~ this kind of _language. Perhaps it is an order~into ' with in the identical manner. However, it would be a which we are drawn, and to which we are abandoned, by disastrous error for us to take the view that the mention That which withdraws from us. of such phenomena merely served to characterize or even And that is what we call most thought-provoking. Ac criticize our present age ..We should fall victim to a dis cording to our assertion, it expresses itself in that we a~e astrous self-deception if we~~ that a still not thinking. h°a.ughty contempt is all that is needed to let us esca~e from The assertion seems to be tuned in a negative and pes..: the_imperceptible :power a£ the uniformly one-side!!_view. simistic key. However,_ "thought-provoking" here means On the contrary, the point is to discern what weird, un what gives food for thought. Most thought-provoking is ·earthly things are here in {he making. The one-sided view, not only what gives most food for thought; in the sense that which nowhere pays attention any longer to the essence of it makes the greatest demands on our thinking; ~t things, has uffed itself up into an all-sidedness which in thought-provoking is what inherently gathe~s and keeps turn is masked so as to ook harmless and natural. But this within itself the greatest riches of what is thought-worthy ill-sided ~ew which deals m all and everything witnequal and memorable. Our assertion says that we are still not uni:formit a-;:a_ mmdlessness, is only a pre aration for thmkmg. ,This "still not" contains a peculiar reference to w~ is really going on. or it is only on the plane of the something still to come, of which we absolutely do not one-sided uniform .view that one-track thinking takes its know whether it will come to us. This "still not" is of a start. It reduces everything to a univocity of concepts and unique kind, which refuses to be equated with other kinds. specifications the precision of which not only corresponds to, For example, we can say, around midnight, that the sun but has the same essential origin as, the precision of techno- has still not come up. We can say the same thing in the ;- logical process. For the moment, we need to keep in mind early dawh. The "still not" in each case is different. But, it only that one-track thinking is not co-extensive with the will be objected, it is different here only regarding the time \ one-sided view, but rather is building on it even while span, the number of hours that pass between midnight and transforming it. A symptom, at first sight quite superficial, dawn; while the daily rising of the sun is certain. Certain of the growing power of one-track thinking is the increase in· what sense? Perchance in the scientific sense? But since everywhere of_ designations consisting of abbrev_:iations of Copernicus, science no longer recognizes sunrises and sun words, or combinations of their initials. Presumably no sets. Scientifically, it has been unequivocally established one here ha.s ever given serious thought to what has already that these things are illusions of the senses. By the common come to pass when you, instead of University~ siIIJ.ply say ~ssumption of the customary view, this "still not" concern "U." "U"-·-that is like "movie." True, the moving picture ing the rising sun retains its truth at midnight and at dawn; theater continues _to be different from the academy of the b_ut this truth can ne".'er be scientifically established, for the sciences ..Still, the designation "U" is not accidental, let .~llnple reason that the daily morning expectation of the sun alone llarmless. It may even be in order that you go in and is of a nature that has no ,room for scientific proofs. When iJ · 1
56 WHAT IS CALLED THINKING? ( I we wait for the sun to rise, we never do it on the strength ( of scientific insight. It will be objected that men have be come habituated to the regularity of these phenomena. As thou h the habitual went without sa . , as thou h ii: m~e understood! s though there · could be anything habitual without habitation! As though we had ever given thought LECTURE to habitation! Now if even the coming and going of the sun is such a rare and curious matter for us, how much more IV mysterious will matters be in that realm where that which \ must be thought withdraws from man and, at the same time, in its withdrawal, comes to him. This, and this alone, is why we say, then, that what gives us most food for thought is ·that we are still not thinking. First, t~e tone of_ our assertion is in no way negative, This means : insofar as w~t all, we are ~dy in a thollgh 1t may easily seem so to an inattentive listener or relatedness to what gives food for thought. Evei'iso/in our reade~. In g:neral, the proposition does not express a dis thinking we have still not come to what is most thought paragmg_ attitude of any sort. The second point concerns provoking. Nor can we know by ourselves whether we will :he q~est10n whethe_r the. ~~!'.!~:~~t8:!._~~-~_:!:t. The way get there. Accordingly, our assertion is not optimistic m which our assert10n speaks can be adequately indicatei:l either; nor does it hang suspended in indecision between only when we are able to give thought to what the assertion pessimismancCoptimism, for then it would have to reckon actually says. That possibility will at best present itself at ~ and thereby basically adopt their ways of_reck t~e end of our lectures, or long afterward. It is much more onm/::£:.. hkely that this most fortunate eventuality will still not The key in which our assertion is tuned cannot, then, be come about._ This is why we must even now pay attention determined simply like that of an ordinary statement. t? the q~!:~"i;~~J>9J~_g .!Qf,_~J~y_JpJ~ !-\~S-~rJi.QI}.j'\'.h~n _yye con- Therefore, it will be well to give thought not only to the _s!:~~r !~.~_ay_gi_~hi_c;ii_it s:e~ak~, or how it speaks:. ·By ''~~Y? key note of our assertion, but also to its character ?-S a or how, we mean something other than manner or mode. statement. '.~ay" here means_~elod~> the ring and tone, which is not Just a ~att~r of how the sq.ying sounds. Th~.!!~Y- CJ_r_ p.9_vy: _of ~p.~ ~gymg_i~_:tJie tone from which and _to which what is said i§. __~~~e_i:_,We. ~~ggest','°th~-th;t~h; t;~~~;;ti~;;~=coii.- cernmg the "tone" of our assertion, and concerning its nature as a statement-hang together. One can hardly deny, it seems, that th.!;Lll~n, which speaks of our thought-provoking time and of wh.at in it is most thought-provoking, .i,~!:ljE;<.!griie~o~p!esen~age. I . -- 57 ·