II
Goethe's Science Considered According
to the Method of Schiller
(See Exposition on Brief, Chapter 2)
I
N THE
preceding pages we have determined the direction that
is to be taken by the following inquiries. They are to
constitute a development of that which became manifest in
Goethe as a scientific sense; an interpretation of his way of
observing the world.
The objection may
be raised that this is not the way in which to present a point of
view scientifically. A scientific opinion must never under any
circumstances rest upon authority, but must always rest upon
principles. Let us at once discuss this objection. An opinion based
upon Goethe's world-conception is not accepted by us as truth
simply because it can be deduced from this conception, but because we
believe that Goethe's view of the world can be supported by tenable
basic principles and can be represented as a self-sustaining view.
The fact that we take our point of departure from Goethe shall not
prevent us from being just as much concerned to show grounds for the
opinions maintained by us as are the exponents of any science which
claims to be free from presuppositions. We represent Goethe's view of
the world, but we shall confirm this according to the
requirements of science.
The road that must
be taken by such inquiries has already been indicated by Schiller. No
one perceived the greatness of Goethe's genius so clearly as did he.
In his letters to Goethe he held up before the latter an image of
Goethe's own nature; in his letters concerning the aesthetic
education of the human race he develops the ideal of the artist as he
had recognized this in Goethe; and in his essays on naïve and
sentimental poetry he describes the nature of genuine art as he had
come to know this in the poetical works of Goethe. This is our
justification for designating our discussion as being built
upon the foundation of the Goethe-Schiller world-conception. Its
purpose is to consider the scientific thought of Goethe according to
the method for which Schiller has already provided a model. Goethe's
look is directed toward Nature and toward life; and the manner of
observation followed by him shall be the subject (the content) of our
discussion. Schiller's look is directed toward the mind of Goethe,
and the manner of observation which he followed shall be the ideal of
our own method.
In this manner we
believe the scientific endeavors of Goethe and Schiller are made
fruitful for the present age.
According to the customary scientific
terminology, our work must be conceived as a theory of knowledge. The
questions discussed will, indeed, be of a very different sort
from those which are now almost always posed by that branch of
philosophy. We have seen why this is so. Where similar inquiries
appear nowadays, they almost invariably take Kant as their
point of departure. It has been altogether overlooked in
scientific circles that, beside the science of knowledge set up by
the great thinker of Königsberg, there is at
least the possibility of another trend of thought in this field, no
less capable than that of Kant of dealing profoundly with the
facts.
Otto
Liebmann at the beginning of the
'sixties gave expression to the conviction that we must return to
Kant if we would attain to a view of the world free of
contradictions. This is the reason why we possess to-day a Kant
literature almost beyond the possibility of survey. But this road
also will fail to afford any assistance to philosophical thinking,
which will not again play a role in our cultural life until, instead
of returning to Kant, it enters more deeply into the scientific
conceptions of Goethe and Schiller.
And now we shall
touch upon one of the basic questions of a science of knowledge
corresponding to these preliminary remarks.
|