18. Psychological Knowing Activity
The first science in which the human spirit has to do with itself is
psychology. The human spirit confronts itself, contemplating.
Fichte allowed existence to the human being only insofar as he himself
posits this existence within himself. In other words, the human
personality has only those traits, characteristics, capacities, etc.,
that, by virtue of insight into its essential being, it ascribes to
itself. A person would not recognize as his own a human capacity about
which he knew nothing; he would attribute it to something foreign to
him. When Fichte supposed that he could found all the science of the
universe upon this truth, he was in error. But it is suited to become
the highest principle of psychology. It determines the method of
psychology. If the human spirit possesses a quality only insofar as
this spirit attributes it to itself, then the psychological method is
the penetration of the human spirit into its own activity.
Self-apprehension is therefore the method here.
We are, of course, not limiting psychology to being a science of the
chance characteristics of any one human individual. We are disengaging
the individual spirit from its chance limitations, from its secondary
features, and are seeking to raise ourselves to the contemplation of
the human individual as such.
To contemplate the entirely chance single individual is not, in fact,
the important thing, but rather to become clear about the individual
as such, which determines itself out of itself. If someone were to say
in response to this that here too we are dealing with nothing more
than the typus of mankind, he would be confusing the typus with a
generalized concept. It is essential to the typus that it stand as
something general over against its individual forms. This is not
essential to the concept of the human individual. Here the general is
directly active in the individual being, but this activity expresses
itself in different ways according to the objects upon which it
focuses. The typus presents itself in individual forms and in these
enters into interaction with the outer world. The human spirit has
only one form. But in one situation certain objects stir his feelings,
in another an ideal inspires him to act, etc. We are not dealing with
a particular form of the human spirit; but always with the whole and
complete human being. We must separate him from his surroundings if we
wish to understand him. If one wishes to attain the typus, then one
must ascend from the single form to the archetypal form; if one wishes
to attain the human spirit one must disregard the outer manifestations
through which it expresses itself, disregard the specific actions it
performs, and look at it in and for itself. We must observe it to see
how it acts in general, not how it has acted in this or that
situation. In the typus one must separate the general form by
comparison out of the individual forms; in psychology one must merely
separate the individual form from its surroundings.
In psychology it is no longer the case, as in organic science, that we
recognize in the particular being a configuration of the general, of
the archetypal form; rather we recognize the perception of the
particular as this archetypal form itself. The human spirit being is
not one configuration of its idea but rather the configuration of its
idea. When Jacobi believes that at the same time as we gain perception
of our inner life we attain the conviction that a unified being
underlies it (intuitive self-apprehension), he is in error, because in
fact we perceive this unified being itself. What otherwise is
intuition in fact becomes self-observation here. With regard to the
highest form of existence this is also an objective necessity. What
the human spirit can garner from the phenomena is the highest form of
content that it can attain at all. If the human spirit then reflects
upon itself, it must recognize itself as the direct manifestation of
this highest form, as the bearer of this highest form. What the human
spirit finds as unity in manifold reality it must find in the human
spirit's singleness as direct existence. What it places, as something
general, over against the particular it must ascribe to its own
individuality as the essential being of this individuality itself.
One can see from all this that a true psychology can be achieved only
if one studies the nature of the human spirit as an active entity. In
our time one has wanted to replace this method by another which
considers psychology's object of study to be the phenomena in which
the human spirit presents itself rather than this spirit itself. One
believes that the individual expressions of the human spirit can be
brought into external relationships just as much as the facts of
inorganic nature can. In this way one wants to found a theory of
the soul without any soul. Our study shows, however, that with
this method one loses sight of the very thing that matters. One should
separate the human spirit from its various expressions and return to
this spirit itself as the producer of them. One usually limits oneself
to the expressions and forgets the spirit. Here also one has allowed
oneself to be led astray to succumb to that incorrect standpoint that
wants to apply the methods of mechanics, physics, etc., to all
sciences.
The unified soul is given to us in experience just as much as its
individual actions are. Everyone is aware of the fact that his
thinking, feeling, and willing proceed from his I. Every
activity of our personality is connected with this center of our
being. If one disregards this connection with the personality in an
action, then the action ceases to be an expression of the soul at all.
It falls either under the concept of inorganic or of organic nature.
If two balls are lying on the table and I propel one against the
other, then, if one disregards my intention and my will, everything is
reduced to physical or physiological processes. The main thing with
all manifestations of the human spirit thinking, feeling, and
willing is to recognize them in their essential being as
expressions of the personality. Psychology is based on this.
But the human being does not belong only to himself; he also belongs
to society. What lives and manifests in him is not merely his
individuality but also that of the nation to which he belongs. What he
accomplishes emerges just as much out of the full strength of his
people as out of his own. With his mission he also fulfills a part of
the mission of the larger community of his people. The point is for
his place within his people to be such that he can bring to full
expression the strength of his individuality. This is possible only if
the social organism is such that the individual is able to find the
place where he can set to work. It must not be left to chance whether
he finds this place or not.
It is the task of ethnology and political science to investigate how
the individual lives and acts within the social community. The
individuality of peoples is the subject of this science. It has to
show what form the organism of the state has to assume if the
individuality of a people is to come to expression in it. The
constitution a people gives itself must be developed out of its
innermost being. In this domain also, errors of no small scope are in
circulation. One does not regard political science as an experiential
science. It is believed that all peoples can set up a constitution
according to a certain model.
The constitution of a people, however, is nothing other than its
individual character brought into a definite form of laws. A person
who wants to predetermine the direction a particular activity of a
people has to take must not impose anything upon it from outside; he
must simply express what lies unconsciously within the character of
his people. It is not the intelligent person that rules, but
rather intelligence; not the reasonable person, but rather
reason, says Goethe.
To grasp the individuality of a people as a reasonable one is the
method of ethnology. The human being belongs to a whole, whose nature
is an organization of reason. Here again we can quote a statement of
Goethe's: The rational world is to be regarded as a great
immortal individual that unceasingly brings about the necessary, and
through doing so in fact makes itself master over chance. Just
as psychology has to investigate the nature of the single individual,
so ethnology (the psychology of peoples) has to investigate that
immortal individual.
|