Max Weber: Science as a Vocation

7/31/2019 Max Weber: Science as a Vocation

1/21

MaxWeber,ScienceasaVocation

'WissenschaftalsBeruf,'fromGesammlteAufsaetzezurWissenschaftslehre(Tubingen,

1922),pp.52455.

OriginallydeliveredasaspeechatMunichUniversity,1918.

Publishedin1919byDuncker&Humblodt,Munich.

Youwishmetospeakabout 'ScienceasaVocation.'Now,wepoliticaleconomistshavea

pedantic custom, which I should like to follow, of always beginning with the external

conditions.Inthiscase,webeginwiththequestion:Whataretheconditionsofscienceasa

vocation in thematerial sense of the term? Today this questionmeans, practically and

essentially: What are the prospects of a graduate student who is resolved to dedicate

himselfprofessionallytoscienceinuniversitylife?Inordertounderstandthepeculiarityof

Germanconditionsitisexpedienttoproceedbycomparisonandtorealizetheconditions

abroad.Inthisrespect,theUnitedStatesstandsinthesharpestcontrastwithGermany,so

weshallfocusuponthatcountry.

EverybodyknowsthatinGermanythecareeroftheyoungmanwhoisdedicatedtosciencenormally begins with the position of Privatdozent. After having conversed with and

receivedtheconsentoftherespectivespecialists,hetakesupresidenceonthebasisofa

bookand,usually,aratherformalexaminationbeforethefacultyoftheuniversity.Thenhe

givesacourseof lectureswithoutreceiving any salary otherthan the lecture fees ofhis

students.Itisuptohimtodetermine,withinhisvenialegendi,thetopicsuponwhichhe

lectures.

IntheUnitedStatestheacademiccareerusuallybeginsinquiteadifferentmanner,namely,

byemploymentasan'assistant.'Thisissimilartothegreatinstitutesofthenaturalscience

and medical faculties inGermany,whereusually only a fractionof the assistants try to

habilitatethemselvesasPrivatdozentenandoftenonlylaterintheircareer.

Practically, this contrast means that the career of the academic man in Germany is

generallybaseduponplutocraticprerequisites.Foritisextremelyhazardousforayoung

scholarwithoutfundstoexposehimselftotheconditionsoftheacademiccareer.Hemust

beabletoendurethisconditionforatleastanumberofyearswithoutknowingwhetherhe

willhavetheopportunitytomoveintoapositionwhichpayswellenoughformaintenance.

IntheUnitedStates,wherethebureaucraticsystemexists,theyoungacademicmanispaid

fromtheverybeginning.Tobesure,hissalaryismodest;usuallyitishardlyasmuchasthe

wages of a semiskilled laborer. Yet he beginswith a seemingly secure position, for he

drawsa fixedsalary.Asarule,however,noticemaybegiventohimjustaswithGermanassistants, and frequently he definitely has to face this should he not come up to

expectations.

TheseexpectationsaresuchthattheyoungacademicinAmericamustdrawlargecrowds

ofstudents.ThiscannothappentoaGermandocent;onceonehashim,onecannotgetrid

ofhim.Tobesure,hecannotraiseany'claims.'Buthehastheunderstandablenotionthat

after years of work he has a sort of moral right to expect some consideration.He also


2/21

Weber,ScienceasVocation 2

expectsandthisisoftenquiteimportantthatonehavesomeregardforhimwhenthe

questionofthepossiblehabilitationofotherPrivatdozentencomesup.

Whether,inprinciple,oneshouldhabilitateeveryscholarwhoisqualifiedorwhetherone

shouldconsiderenrollments,andhencegivetheexistingstaffamonopolytoteachthatis

an awkward dilemma. It is associated with the dual aspect of the academic profession,whichweshalldiscusspresently.Ingeneral,onedecidesinfavorofthesecondalternative.

Butthisincreasesthedangerthattherespectivefullprofessor,howeverconscientioushe

is,willpreferhisowndisciples.IfImayspeakofmypersonalattitude, ImustsayI have

followedtheprinciplethatascholarpromotedbymemustlegitimizeandhabilitatehimself

with somebody else at another university. But the result has been that one of my best

discipleshasbeenturneddownatanotheruniversitybecausenobodythere believedthisto

bethereason.

A further difference between Germany and the United States is that in Germany the

Privatdozentgenerallyteachesfewercoursesthanhewishes.Accordingtohisformalright,

hecangiveanycourseinhisfield.Buttodosowouldbeconsideredan improperlackofconsiderationfortheolderdocents.Asarule,thefullprofessorgivesthe'big'coursesand

thedocentconfineshimselftosecondaryones.Theadvantageofthesearrangementsisthat

duringhisyouththeacademicmanisfreetodoscientificwork,althoughthisrestrictionof

theopportunitytoteachissomewhatinvoluntary.

InAmerica,thearrangementisdifferentinprinciple.Preciselyduringtheearlyyearsofhis

careertheassistantisabsolutelyoverburdenedjustbecauseheispaid.Inadepartmentof

German,forinstance,thefullprofessorwillgiveathreehourcourseonGoetheandthatis

enough,whereastheyoungassistantishappyif,besidesthedrillintheGermanlanguage,

his twelve weekly teaching hours include assignments of, say, Uhland. The officials

prescribe the curriculum, and in this the assistant is just as dependent as the instituteassistantinGermany.

OflatewecanobservedistinctlythattheGermanuniversitiesinthebroadfieldsofscience

developinthedirectionoftheAmericansystem.Thelargeinstitutesofmedicineornatural

science are 'state capitalist' enterprises, which cannot be managed without very

considerable funds. Here we encounter the same condition that is found wherever

capitalistenterprisecomesintooperation:the'separationoftheworkerfromhismeansof

production.'Theworker,thatis,theassistant,isdependentupontheimplementsthatthe

stateputsathisdisposal;henceheisjustasdependentupontheheadoftheinstituteasis

theemployeeinafactoryuponthemanagement.For,subjectivelyandingoodfaith,the

directorbelievesthatthisinstituteis'his,'andhemanagesitsaffairs.Thustheassistant'sposition isoftenasprecarious as is that ofany 'quasiproletarian' existenceand just as

precariousasthepositionoftheassistantintheAmericanuniversity.

InveryimportantrespectsGermanuniversitylifeisbeingAmericanized,asisGermanlife

ingeneral.This development, I amconvinced,will engulf thosedisciplines inwhich the

craftsmanpersonallyownsthetools,essentiallythelibrary,asisstillthecasetoalarge

extentinmyown field. Thisdevelopmentcorrespondsentirelytowhathappened tothe


3/21


artisanofthepastanditisnowfullyunderway.

Aswithallcapitalistandatthesametimebureaucratizedenterprises,thereareindubitable

advantages in all this. But the 'spirit' that rules in these affairs is different from the

historical atmosphere of the Germanuniversity.Anextraordinarily wide gulf, externally

andinternally,existsbetweenthechiefoftheselarge,capitalist,universityenterprisesandtheusualfullprofessoroftheoldstyle.Thiscontrastalsoholdsfortheinnerattitude,a

matter that I shall not go into here. Inwardly as well as externally, the old university

constitution has become fictitious. What has remained and what has been essentially

increasedisafactorpeculiartotheuniversitycareer:thequestionwhetherornotsucha

Privatdozent,andstillmoreanassistant,willeversucceedinmovingintothepositionofa

fullprofessororevenbecometheheadofaninstitute.Thatissimplyahazard.Certainly,

chancedoesnotrulealone,butitrulestoanunusuallyhighdegree.Iknowofhardlyany

careeronearthwherechanceplayssucharole.ImaysaysoallthemoresinceIpersonally

oweittosomemereaccidentsthatduringmyveryearlyyearsIwasappointedtoafull

professorship ina discipline inwhichmen ofmygeneration undoubtedlyhad achieved

morethatIhad.And,indeed,Ifancy,onthebasisofthisexperience,thatIhaveasharpeyefortheundeservedfateofthemanywhomaccidenthascastintheoppositedirectionand

whowithinthisselectiveapparatusinspiteofalltheirabilitydonotattainthepositions

thatareduethem.

The fact that hazard rather than ability plays so large a role is not alone or even

predominantlyowingto the 'human,all toohuman'factors,whichnaturally occurin the

process of academic selection as in any other selection. It would be unfair to hold the

personalinferiorityoffacultymembersoreducationalministriesresponsibleforthefact

that so many mediocrities undoubtedly play an eminent role at the universities. The

predominanceofmediocrityisratherduetothelawsofhumancooperation,especiallyof

the cooperation of several bodies, and, in this case, cooperation of the faculties whorecommendandoftheministriesofeducation.

A counterpart are the events at the papal elections, which can be traced over many

centuries andwhichare themost important controllableexamples of a selection of the

samenatureastheacademicselection.Thecardinalwhoissaidtobethe'favorite'only

rarely hasa chancetowinout. The rule is rather that theNumber Twocardinalor the

Number Three wins out. The same holds for the President of the United States. Only

exceptionally does the firstrate and most prominent man get the nomination of the

convention.MostlytheNumberTwoandoftentheNumberThreemenarenominatedand

laterrunforelection.TheAmericanshavealreadyformedtechnicalsociologicaltermsfor

thesecategories,anditwouldbequiteinterestingtoenquireintothelawsofselectionbyacollectivewillbystudyingtheseexamples,butweshallnotdosohere.Yettheselawsalso

holdforthecollegiatebodiesofGermanuniversities,andonemustnotbesurprisedatthe

frequentmistakes thataremade,but rather at the number ofcorrect appointments, the

proportion ofwhich, in spite of all, is very considerable. Onlywhereparliaments, as in

somecountries,ormonarchs,asinGermanythusfar(bothworkoutinthesameway),or

revolutionary powerholders, as in Germany now, intervene for political reasons in

academicselections,canonebecertainthatconvenientmediocritiesorstrainerswillhave


4/21


theopportunitiesalltothemselves.

Nouniversity teacher likes tobe remindedofdiscussionsofappointments, for they are

seldomagreeable.AndyetImaysaythatin thenumerouscasesknowntometherewas,

withoutexception,thegoodwilltoallowpurelyobjectivereasonstobedecisive.

Onemustbeclearaboutanotherthing:thatthedecisionoveracademicfatesissolargelya

'hazard' is not merely because of the insufficiency of the selection by the collective

formationofwill. Everyyoungmanwho feelscalled toscholarshiphas torealizeclearly

thatthetaskbeforehimhasadoubleaspect.Hemustqualifynotonlyasascholarbutalso

asateacher.Andthetwodonotatallcoincide.Onecanbeapreeminentscholarandatthe

same time an abominably poor teacher. May I remind you of the teaching of men like

HelmholtzorRanke;andtheyarenotbyanychancerareexceptions.

Now, matters are such that German universities, especially the small universities, are

engagedinamostridiculouscompetitionforenrollments.Thelandlordsofroominghouses

inuniversitycitiescelebrate theadventof the thousandthstudentbya festival,andtheywouldlovetocelebrateNumberTwoThousandbya torchlightprocession.Theinterestin

fees andone should openly admitit isaffectedbyappointmentsintheneighboring

fieldsthat'drawcrowds.'Andquiteapartfromthis,thenumberofstudentsenrolledisa

testofqualification,whichmaybegraspedintermsofnumbers,whereasthequalification

forscholarshipisimponderableand,preciselywithaudaciousinnovators,oftendebatable

that is only natural. Almost everybody thus is affected by the suggestion of the

immeasurableblessingandvalueoflargeenrollments.Tosayofadocentthatheisapoor

teacherisusuallytopronounceanacademicsentenceofdeath,evenifheistheforemost

scholarintheworld.Andthequestionwhetherheisagoodorapoorteacherisanswered

bytheenrollmentswithwhichthestudentscondescendinglyhonorhim.

It is a fact that whether or not the students flock to a teacher is determined in large

measure,largerthanonewouldbelievepossible,bypurelyexternalthings:temperament

andeventheinflectionofhisvoice.Afterratherextensiveexperienceandsoberreflection,I

have a deep distrust of courses that draw crowds, however unavoidable they may be.

Democracyshouldbeusedonlywhere itis inplace.Scientific training,asweareheldto

practice it in accordance with the tradition of German universities, is the affair of an

intellectualaristocracy,andweshouldnothidethisfromourselves.Tobesure,itistrue

thattopresentscientificproblemsinsuchamannerthatanuntutoredbutreceptivemind

canunderstandthemandwhatforusisalonedecisivecancometothinkaboutthem

independentlyisperhapsthemostdifficultpedagogicaltaskofall.Butwhetherthistaskis

orisnotrealizedisnotdecidedbyenrollmentfigures.Andtoreturntoourthemethisveryartisapersonalgiftandbynomeanscoincideswiththescientificqualificationsofthe

scholar.

IncontrasttoFrance,Germanyhasnocorporatebodyof'immortals'inscience.According

toGermantradition,theuniversitiesshalldojusticetothedemandsbothofresearchandof

instruction.Whether the abilities for both are found together in a man is a matter of

absolute chance. Hence academic life is amadhazard. If the young scholarasks formy


5/21


advice with regard to habilitation, the responsibility of encouraging him can hardly be

borne.IfheisaJew,ofcourseonesays lasciateognisperanza.Butonemustaskeveryother

man: Do you in all conscience believe that you can stand seeing mediocrity after

mediocrity,yearafteryear,climbbeyondyou,withoutbecomingembitteredandwithout

coming togrief?Naturally,onealwaysreceivestheanswer: 'Ofcourse,I liveonlyformy

"calling."'Yet,Ihavefoundthatonlyafewmencouldendurethissituationwithoutcomingtogrief.

Thismuch Ideemnecessary tosay about the externalconditionsofthe academicman's

vocation. But I believe that actually youwish to hear of something else, namely, of the

inwardcallingforscience.Inourtime,theinternalsituation,incontrasttotheorganization

ofscienceasavocation,isfirstofallconditionedbythefactsthatsciencehasentereda

phaseofspecializationpreviouslyunknownandthatthiswillforeverremainthecase.Not

onlyexternally,butinwardly,mattersstandatapointwheretheindividualcanacquirethe

sureconsciousnessofachievingsomethingtrulyperfectinthefieldofscienceonlyincase

heisastrictspecialist.

Allworkthatoverlapsneighboringfields,suchasweoccasionallyundertakeandwhichthe

sociologists must necessarilyundertakeagain and again, isburdenedwith the resigned

realization that atbest oneprovides the specialistwithuseful questions uponwhichhe

would not so easily hit from his own specialized point of view. One's own work must

inevitablyremainhighlyimperfect.Onlybystrictspecializationcanthescientificworker

become fully conscious, for once and perhaps never again in his lifetime,that he has

achievedsomethingthatwillendure.Areallydefinitiveandgoodaccomplishmentistoday

alwaysaspecializedaccomplishment.Andwhoeverlacksthecapacitytoputonblinders,so

tospeak,andtocomeuptotheideathatthefateofhissouldependsuponwhetherornot

hemakesthecorrectconjectureatthispassageofthismanuscriptmayaswellstayaway

fromscience.Hewillneverhavewhatonemaycallthe'personalexperience'ofscience.Without this strange intoxication, ridiculedbyeveryoutsider;without this passion, this

'thousands of years must pass before you enter into life and thousands more wait in

silence'accordingtowhetherornotyousucceedinmakingthisconjecture;withoutthis,

youhavenocallingforscienceandyoushoulddosomethingelse.Fornothingisworthyof

manasmanunlesshecanpursueitwithpassionatedevotion.

Yetitisafactthatnoamountofsuchenthusiasm,howeversincereandprofounditmaybe,

cancompelaproblemtoyieldscientificresults.Certainlyenthusiasmisaprerequisiteof

the 'inspiration' which is decisive. Nowadays in circles of youth there is a widespread

notion that science has become a problem in calculation, fabricated in laboratories or

statisticalfilingsystemsjustas'inafactory,'acalculationinvolvingonlythecoolintellectandnotone's'heartandsoul.'Firstofallonemustsaythatsuchcommentslackallclarity

aboutwhat goes on in a factory or in a laboratory. In both some idea has to occur to

someone's mind, and it has to be a correct idea, if one is to accomplish anything

worthwhile. And such intuition cannot be forced. It has nothing to do with any cold

calculation.Certainlycalculationisalsoanindispensableprerequisite.Nosociologist,for

instance,shouldthinkhimselftoogood,eveninhisoldage,tomaketensofthousandsof

quitetrivialcomputationsinhisheadandperhapsformonthsatatime.Onecannotwith


6/21


impunitytrytotransferthistaskentirelytomechanicalassistantsifonewishestofigure

something,eventhoughthefinalresultisoftensmallindeed.Butifno'idea'occurstohis

mind about the direction of his computations and, during his computations, about the

bearingoftheemergentsingleresults,theneventhissmallresultwillnotbeyielded.

Normallysuchan'idea'ispreparedonlyonthesoilofveryhardwork,butcertainlythisisnot always the case.Scientifically, a dilettante's ideamay have the very same oreven a

greaterbearingforsciencethanthatofaspecialist.Manyofourverybesthypothesesand

insights are due precisely to dilettantes. The dilettante differs from the expert, as

Helmholtz has said of Robert Mayer, only in that he lacks a firm and reliable work

procedure. Consequently he is usually not in the position to control, to estimate, or to

exploittheideainitsbearings.Theideaisnotasubstituteforwork;andwork,inturn,

cannotsubstitutefororcompelanidea,justaslittleasenthusiasmcan.Both,enthusiasm

andwork,andaboveallbothofthemjointly,canenticetheidea.

Ideasoccurtouswhentheyplease,notwhenitpleasesus.Thebestideasdoindeedoccur

toone'smindinthewayinwhichIheringdescribesit:whensmokingacigaronthesofa;orasHelmholtzstatesofhimselfwithscientificexactitude:whentakingawalkona slowly

ascendingstreet;orinasimilarway.Inanycase,ideascomewhenwedonotexpectthem,

andnotwhenwearebroodingandsearchingatourdesks.Yet ideaswouldcertainlynot

cometomindhadwenotbroodedatourdesksandsearchedforanswerswithpassionate

devotion.

Howeverthismaybe,thescientificworkerhastotakeintohisbargaintheriskthatenters

intoallscientificwork:Doesan'idea'occurordoesitnot?Hemaybeanexcellentworker

andyetneverhavehadanyvaluableideaofhisown.Itisagraveerrortobelievethatthis

issoonlyinscience,andthatthings,forinstance,inabusinessofficearedifferentfroma

laboratory.Amerchantorabigindustrialistwithout'businessimagination,'thatis,withoutideasoridealintuitions,willforallhisliferemainamanwhowouldbetterhaveremained

aclerkora technicalofficial.Hewillneverbetrulycreativeinorganization.Inspirationin

thefieldofsciencebynomeansplaysanygreaterrole,asacademicconceitfancies,thanit

doesinthefieldofmasteringproblemsofpracticallifebyamodernentrepreneur.Onthe

otherhand,andthisalsoisoftenmisconstrued,inspirationplaysnolessaroleinscience

thanitdoesintherealmofart.Itisachildishnotiontothinkthatamathematicianattains

anyscientificallyvaluableresultsbysittingathisdeskwitharuler,calculatingmachinesor

othermechanicalmeans.ThemathematicalimaginationofaWeierstrassisnaturallyquite

differentlyorientedinmeaningandresultthanistheimaginationofanartist,anddiffers

basicallyinquality.Butthepsychologicalprocessesdonotdiffer.Botharefrenzy(inthe

senseofPlato's'mania')and'inspiration.'

Now,whetherwehavescientificinspirationdependsupondestiniesthatarehiddenfrom

us, and besides upon 'gifts.' Last butnot least, because of this indubitable truth, a very

understandableattitudehasbecomepopular,especiallyamongyouth,andhasputthemin

theserviceofidolswhoseculttodayoccupiesabroadplaceonallstreetcornersandinall

periodicals. These idols are 'personality' and 'personal experience.' Both are intimately

connected, the notion prevails that the latter constitutes the former and belongs to it.


7/21


People belabor themselves in trying to 'experience' life for that befits a personality,

consciousofitsrankandstation.Andifwedonotsucceedin'experiencing'life,wemustat

least pretend to have this gift of grace. Formerly we called this 'experience,' in plain

German, 'sensation'; and I believe that we then had a more adequate idea of what

personalityisandwhatitsignifies.

Ladiesandgentlemen.Inthefieldofscienceonlyhewhoisdevoted solelytotheworkat

handhas'personality.'Andthisholdsnotonlyforthefieldofscience;weknowofnogreat

artistwhohaseverdoneanythingbutservehisworkandonlyhiswork.Asfarashisartis

concerned, evenwithapersonalityofGoethe'srank, ithasbeen detrimental totake the

libertyoftryingtomakehis'life'intoaworkofart.Andevenifonedoubtsthis,onehasto

beaGoetheinordertodarepermitoneselfsuchliberty.Everybodywilladmitatleastthis

much:thatevenwithamanlikeGoethe,whoappearsonceinathousandyears,thisliberty

did not gounpaid for. Inpoliticsmattersarenot different,butweshallnot discuss that

today.Inthefieldofscience,however,themanwhomakeshimselftheimpresarioofthe

subjecttowhichheshouldbedevoted,andstepsuponthestageandseekstolegitimate

himself through 'experience,' asking:How canIprovethat I amsomething otherthan amere'specialist'andhowcanImanagetosaysomethinginformorincontentthatnobody

else has ever said? such a man is no 'personality.' Today such conduct is a crowd

phenomenon, and italwaysmakesa petty impression anddebases the onewho is thus

concerned. Instead of this, an innerdevotion to the task, and that alone, should lift the

scientisttotheheightanddignityofthesubjecthepretendstoserve.Andinthisitisnot

differentwiththeartist.

Incontrastwiththesepreconditionswhichscientificworkshareswithart, sciencehasa

fate thatprofoundlydistinguishes itfromartisticwork.Scientificwork ischained tothe

courseofprogress;whereasintherealmofartthereisnoprogressinthesamesense.Itis

nottruethattheworkofartofaperiodthathasworkedoutnewtechnicalmeans,or,forinstance, the laws ofperspective, stands therefore artistically higher than awork of art

devoidofallknowledgeofthosemeansandlawsifitsformdoesjusticetothematerial,

thatis,ifitsobjecthasbeenchosenandformedsothatitcouldbeartisticallymastered

withoutapplyingthoseconditionsandmeans.Aworkofart,whichisgenuine'fulfilment,'

isneversurpassed;itwillneverbeantiquated.Individualsmaydifferinappreciatingthe

personalsignificanceofworksofart,butnoonewilleverbeabletosayofsuchaworkthat

itis'outstrippedbyanotherworkwhichisalso'fulfilment.'

In science, each of us knows that what he has accomplished will be antiquated in ten,

twenty,fiftyyears.Thatisthefatetowhichscienceissubjected;itisthevery meaningof

scientific work, towhich it isdevoted ina quitespecificsense, ascomparedwithotherspheresofcultureforwhichingeneralthesameholds.Everyscientific'fulfilment'raises

new'questions';itasks tobe 'surpassed'andoutdated.Whoeverwishes toservescience

has to resign himself to this fact. Scientific works certainly can last as 'gratifications'

becauseoftheirartisticquality,ortheymayremainimportantasameansoftraining.Yet

theywillbesurpassedscientificallyletthatberepeatedforitisourcommonfateand,

more,ourcommongoal.Wecannotworkwithouthopingthatotherswilladvancefurther

thanwehave.Inprinciple,thisprogressgoesonadinfinitum.Andwiththiswecometo


8/21


inquire into themeaning of science. For, after all, it is not selfevident that something

subordinate to such a law is sensibleandmeaningful in itself.Whydoesone engage in

doingsomethingthatinrealitynevercomes,andnevercancome,toanend?

One does it, first, for purely practical, in the broader sense of the word, for technical,

purposes: in order to be able to orient our practical activities to the expectations thatscientific experience places at our disposal. Good. Yet this has meaning only to

practitioners.Whatistheattitudeoftheacademicmantowardshisvocationthatis,ifhe

isatall inquestofsuchapersonalattitude?Hemaintainsthatheengagesin'sciencefor

science's sake' and not merely because others, by exploiting science, bring about

commercial or technical success and can better feed, dress, illuminate, andgovern. But

what does he who allows himself to be integrated into this specialized organization,

runningonadinfinitum,hopetoaccomplishthatissignificantintheseproductionsthatare

alwaysdestinedtobeoutdated?Thisquestionrequiresafewgeneralconsiderations.

Scientific progress is a fraction, the most important fraction, of the process of

intellectualization which we have been undergoing for thousands of years and whichnowadaysisusuallyjudgedinsuchanextremelynegativeway.Letusfirstclarifywhatthis

intellectualistrationalization,createdbyscienceandbyscientificallyorientedtechnology,

meanspractically.

Does it mean that we, today, for instance, everyone sitting in this hall, have a greater

knowledgeoftheconditionsoflifeunderwhichweexistthanhasanAmericanIndianora

Hottentot?Hardly.Unlessheisaphysicist,onewhoridesonthestreetcarhasnoideahow

thecarhappenedtogetintomotion.Andhedoesnotneedtoknow.Heissatisfiedthathe

may'count'onthebehaviorofthestreetcar,andheorientshisconductaccordingtothis

expectation;butheknowsnothingaboutwhatittakestoproducesuchacarsothatitcan

move.Thesavageknowsincomparablymoreabouthistools.WhenwespendmoneytodayIbetthateveniftherearecolleaguesofpoliticaleconomyhereinthehall,almosteveryone

ofthemwillholdadifferentanswerinreadinesstothequestion:Howdoesithappenthat

one can buy something formoney sometimesmore and sometimes less? The savage

knowswhathedoesinordertogethisdailyfoodandwhichinstitutionsservehiminthis

pursuit.Theincreasingintellectualizationandrationalizationdonot,therefore,indicatean

increasedandgeneralknowledgeoftheconditionsunderwhichonelives.

Itmeanssomethingelse,namely,theknowledgeorbeliefthatifonebutwishedonecould

learnitatanytime.Hence,itmeansthatprincipallytherearenomysteriousincalculable

forces that come into play, but rather that one can, in principle, master all things by

calculation.Thismeansthattheworldisdisenchanted.Oneneednolongerhaverecoursetomagicalmeansinordertomasterorimplorethespirits,asdidthesavage,forwhom

suchmysterious powers existed.Technical means andcalculations perform the service.

Thisabovealliswhatintellectualizationmeans.

Now,thisprocessofdisenchantment,whichhascontinuedtoexistinOccidentalculturefor

millennia, and, ingeneral, this 'progress,' towhichscience belongs asa link andmotive

force,dotheyhaveanymeaningsthatgobeyondthepurelypracticalandtechnical?You


9/21


willfindthisquestionraised inthemostprincipledformintheworksofLeoTolstoy.He

cametoraisethequestioninapeculiarway.Allhisbroodingsincreasinglyrevolvedaround

theproblemofwhetherornotdeathisameaningfulphenomenon.Andhisanswerwas:for

civilizedmandeathhasnomeaning.Ithasnonebecausetheindividuallifeofcivilizedman,

placed into an infinite 'progress,' according to its own imminentmeaning should never

cometoanend;forthereisalwaysafurtherstepaheadofonewhostandsinthemarchofprogress.Andnomanwhocomestodiestandsuponthepeakthatliesininfinity.Abraham,

orsomepeasantofthepast,died'oldandsatiatedwithlife'becausehestoodintheorganic

cycleoflife;becausehislife,intermsofitsmeaningandontheeveofhisdays,hadgivento

himwhat lifehad tooffer; because forhim thereremainednopuzzleshemightwishto

solve;andthereforehecouldhavehad'enough'oflife.Whereascivilizedman,placedinthe

midstof the continuous enrichment of culture by ideas,knowledge, and problems,may

become 'tiredoflife'butnot 'satiatedwithlife.'Hecatchesonlythemostminutepartof

whatthelifeofthespiritbringsfortheveranew,andwhatheseizesisalwayssomething

provisionalandnotdefinitive,and therefore deathfor him isameaninglessoccurrence.

And because death is meaningless, civilized life as such is meaningless; by its very

'progressiveness'itgivesdeaththeimprintofmeaninglessness.ThroughouthislatenovelsonemeetswiththisthoughtasthekeynoteoftheTolstoyanart.

What stand should one take? Has 'progress' as such a recognizable meaning that goes

beyondthetechnical,sothattoserveitisameaningfulvocation?Thequestionmustbe

raised.But this isno longermerely the questionofman'scallingfor science,hence,the

problemofwhatscienceasavocationmeanstoitsdevoteddisciples.Toraisethisquestion

istoaskforthevocationofsciencewithinthetotallifeofhumanity.What isthevalueof

science?

Here the contrast between the past and the present is tremendous. Youwill recall the

wonderfulimageatthebeginningoftheseventhbookofPlato'sRepublic:thoseenchainedcavemenwhosefacesareturnedtowardthestonewallbeforethem.Behindthemliesthe

source of the light which they cannot see. They are concerned only with the shadowy

images thatthis lightthrowsuponthewall,andtheyseektofathomtheirinterrelations.

Finally one of them succeeds in shattering his fetters, turns around, and sees the sun.

Blinded,hegropesaboutandstammersofwhathesaw.Theotherssayheisraving.But

graduallyhelearnstobeholdthelight,andthenhistaskistodescendtothecavemenand

toleadthemtothe light.Heis thephilosopher; thesun,however,is the truthofscience,

whichaloneseizesnotuponillusionsandshadowsbutuponthetruebeing.

Well,whotodayviewsscienceinsuchamanner?Todayyouthfeelsratherthereverse:the

intellectual constructionsof science constitute anunreal realmof artificial abstractions,whichwiththeirbonyhandsseektograspthebloodandthesapoftruelifewithoutever

catchingupwithit.Buthereinlife,inwhatforPlatowastheplayofshadowsonthewalls

ofthecave,genuinerealityispulsating;andtherestarederivativesoflife,lifelessghosts,

andnothingelse.Howdidthischangecomeabout?

Plato'spassionateenthusiasminTheRepublicmust,inthelastanalysis,beexplainedbythe

factthatforthefirsttimetheconcept,oneofthegreattoolsofallscientificknowledge,had


10/21


beenconsciouslydiscovered.Socrateshaddiscovereditinitsbearing.Hewasnottheonly

manintheworldtodiscoverit.InIndiaonefindsthebeginningsofalogicthatisquite

similartothatofAristotle's.Butnowhereelsedowefindthisrealizationofthesignificance

oftheconcept.InGreece,for the firsttime,appearedahandymeansbywhichonecould

put the logical screws upon somebodysothathecouldnot comeoutwithoutadmitting

eitherthatheknewnothingorthatthisandnothingelsewastruth,the eternaltruththatnever would vanish as the doings of the blind men vanish. That was the tremendous

experiencethatdawneduponthedisciplesofSocrates.Andfromthisitseemedtofollow

that if one only found the right concept of the beautiful, the good, or, for instance, of

bravery,ofthesoulorwhateverthatthenonecouldalsograspitstruebeing.Andthis,

inturn,seemedtoopenthewayforknowingandforteachinghowtoactrightlyinlifeand,

above all, how to act as a citizen of the state; for this question was everything to the

Hellenicman,whosethinkingwaspoliticalthroughout.Andforthesereasonsoneengaged

inscience.

Thesecondgreattoolofscientificwork,therationalexperiment,madeitsappearanceat

the side of this discovery of the Hellenic spirit during the Renaissance period. Theexperimentisameansofreliablycontrollingexperience.Withoutit,presentdayempirical

science would be impossible. There were experiments earlier; for instance, in India

physiologicalexperimentsweremadeintheserviceofasceticyogatechnique;inHellenic

antiquity,mathematicalexperimentsweremadeforpurposesofwartechnology;andinthe

MiddleAges,forpurposesofmining.Buttoraisetheexperimenttoaprincipleofresearch

wastheachievementoftheRenaissance.Theywerethegreatinnovatorsinart,whowere

the pioneers of experiment. Leonardo andhis like and, above all, the sixteenthcentury

experimenters inmusicwith their experimental pianos were characteristic. From these

circles the experiment entered science, especially throughGalileo, and itentered theory

through Bacon; and then it was taken over by the various exact disciplines of the

continentaluniversities,firstofallthoseofItalyandthenthoseoftheNetherlands.

What did sciencemean to thesemenwho stood at the threshold of modern times? To

artisticexperimentersofthetypeofLeonardoandthemusicalinnovators,sciencemeant

thepathtotrueart,andthatmeantforthemthepathtotrue nature.Artwastoberaisedto

therankofascience,andthismeantatthesametimeandabovealltoraisetheartisttothe

rank of the doctor, socially and with reference to the meaning of his life. This is the

ambitiononwhich,forinstance,Leonardo'ssketchbookwasbased.Andtoday?'Scienceas

the way to nature' would sound like blasphemy to youth. Today, youth proclaims the

opposite:redemptionfromthe intellectualismofscience inorder toreturntoone'sown

natureandtherewithtonatureingeneral.Scienceasawaytoart?Herenocriticismiseven

needed.

Butduringtheperiodoftheriseoftheexactsciencesoneexpectedagreatdealmore.Ifyou

recall Swammerdam's statement, 'HereI bringyou the proofofGod'sprovidence inthe

anatomy of a louse,' youwill seewhat the scientific worker, influenced (indirectly) by

ProtestantismandPuritanism,conceivedtobehistask:toshowthepathtoGod.Peopleno

longer found this path among the philosophers,with theirconcepts anddeductions.All

pietisttheologyofthetime,aboveallSpener,knewthatGodwasnottobefoundalongthe


11/21


roadbywhichtheMiddleAgeshadsoughthim.Godishidden,Hiswaysarenotourways,

His thoughts are not our thoughts. In the exact sciences, however, where one could

physicallygraspHisworks,onehopedtocomeuponthetracesofwhatHeplannedforthe

world.And today? Who aside from certain big childrenwho are indeed found in the

natural sciences still believes that the findings of astronomy, biology, physics, or

chemistry could teachusanythingabout themeaning of theworld? If there is any such'meaning,'alongwhatroadcouldonecomeuponitstracks?Ifthesenaturalsciencesleadto

anything in this way, they are apt to make the belief that there is such a thing as the

'meaning'oftheuniversedieoutatitsveryroots.

And finally, science as a way 'to God'? Science, this specifically irreligious power? That

sciencetodayisirreligiousnoonewilldoubtinhisinnermostbeing,evenifhewillnot

admitittohimself.Redemptionfromtherationalismandintellectualismofscienceisthe

fundamentalpresuppositionoflivinginunionwiththedivine.This,orsomethingsimilarin

meaning, isoneofthe fundamentalwatchwordsonehears amongGermanyouth,whose

feelingsare attuned toreligionorwho cravereligious experiences.They cravenot only

religiousexperiencebutexperienceassuch.Theonlythingthatisstrange isthemethodthatisnowfollowed:thespheresoftheirrational,theonlyspheresthatintellectualismhas

notyettouched,arenowraisedintoconsciousnessandputunderitslens.Forinpractice

thisiswherethemodernintellectualistformofromanticirrationalismleads.Thismethod

ofemancipationfromintellectualismmaywellbringabouttheveryoppositeofwhatthose

whotaketoitconceiveasitsgoal.

AfterNietzsche'sdevastatingcriticismofthose'lastmen'who'inventedhappiness,'Imay

leave aside altogether the naive optimism in which science that is, the technique of

mastering lifewhichrestsuponscience has been celebrated as theway tohappiness.

Who believes in this? aside from a few big children in university chairs or editorial

offices.Letusresumeourargument.

Undertheseinternalpresuppositions,what isthemeaningofscienceasavocation, now

afteralltheseformerillusions,the'waytotruebeing,'the'waytotrueart,'the'waytotrue

nature,'the'waytotrueGod,'the'waytotruehappiness,'havebeendispelled?Tolstoyhas

given the simplest answer, with the words: 'Science ismeaningless because it gives no

answertoourquestion,theonlyquestionimportantforus:"Whatshallwedoandhow

shall we live?" That science does not give an answer to this is indisputable. The only

questionthatremainsisthesenseinwhichsciencegives'no'answer,andwhetherornot

sciencemightyetbeofsomeusetotheonewhoputsthequestioncorrectly.

Todayoneusuallyspeaksofscienceas'freefrompresuppositions.'Istheresuchathing?Itdepends upon what one understands thereby. All scientific work presupposes that the

rulesoflogicandmethodarevalid;thesearethegeneralfoundationsofourorientationin

the world; and, at least for our special question, these presuppositions are the least

problematic aspect of science. Science further presupposes that what is yielded by

scientificworkisimportantinthesensethatitis'worthbeingknown.'Inthis,obviously,

are contained all our problems. For this presupposition cannot be proved by scientific

means.Itcanonlybe interpretedwithreferencetoitsultimatemeaning,whichwemust


12/21


rejectoracceptaccordingtoourultimatepositiontowardslife.

Furthermore, the nature of the relationship of scientific work and its presuppositions

varies widely according to their structure. The natural sciences, for instance, physics,

chemistry, and astronomy, presuppose asselfevident that it isworthwhile toknow the

ultimatelawsofcosmiceventsasfarassciencecanconstruethem.Thisisthecasenotonlybecausewithsuchknowledgeonecanattain technical resultsbut for itsownsake, ifthe

questforsuchknowledgeistobea'vocation.'Yetthispresuppositioncanbynomeansbe

proved.Andstilllesscanitbeprovedthattheexistenceoftheworldwhichthesesciences

describeisworthwhile, thatithasany'meaning,'orthatitmakessensetolive insucha

world.Sciencedoesnotaskfortheanswerstosuchquestions.

Considermodernmedicine,a practical technologythat is highlydevelopedscientifically.

The general 'presupposition' ofthemedicalenterprise isstated trivially inthe assertion

thatmedicalsciencehasthetaskofmaintaininglifeassuchandofdiminishingsufferingas

such tothegreatestpossibledegree.Yet this isproblematical.Byhismeansthemedical

manpreservesthelifeofthemortallyillman,evenifthepatientimploresustorelievehimof life, even if his relatives, to whom his life is worthless and to whom the costs of

maintaining his worthless life grow unbearable, grant his redemption from suffering.

Perhapsapoorlunaticisinvolved,whoserelatives,whethertheyadmititornot,wishand

mustwishforhisdeath.Yetthepresuppositionsofmedicine,andthepenalcode,prevent

thephysicianfromrelinquishinghistherapeuticefforts.Whetherlifeisworthwhileliving

andwhenthisquestionisnotaskedbymedicine.Naturalsciencegivesusananswerto

thequestionofwhatwemustdoifwewishtomasterlifetechnically.Itleavesquiteaside,

orassumesforitspurposes,whetherweshouldanddowishtomasterlifetechnicallyand

whetheritultimatelymakessensetodoso.

Consideradisciplinesuchasaesthetics.Thefactthatthereareworksofartisgivenforaesthetics.Itseekstofindoutunderwhatconditionsthisfactexists,butitdoesnotraise

thequestionwhetherornot therealmofart isperhapsa realmofdiabolicalgrandeur,a

realm of this world, and therefore, in its core, hostile to God and, in its innermost and

aristocratic spirit, hostile to the brotherhood of man. Hence, aesthetics does not ask

whetherthereshouldbeworksofart.

Consider jurisprudence. It establishes what is valid according to the rules of juristic

thought,whichispartlyboundbylogicallycompellingandpartlybyconventionallygiven

schemata. Juridical thought holds when certain legal rules and certain methods of

interpretationsarerecognizedasbinding.Whetherthereshouldbelawandwhetherone

shouldestablishjusttheserulessuchquestionsjurisprudencedoesnotanswer.Itcanonlystate:Ifonewishesthisresult,accordingtothenormsofourlegalthought,thislegalruleis

theappropriatemeansofattainingit.

Consider the historical and cultural sciences. They teach us how to understand and

interpretpolitical,artistic,literary,andsocialphenomenaintermsoftheirorigins.Butthey

giveusno answerto thequestionofwhethertheexistenceoftheseculturalphenomena

havebeenandareworthwhile.Andtheydonotanswerthefurtherquestion,whetheritis


13/21


worth the effort required to know them. They presuppose that there is an interest in

partaking, through this procedure, of the community of 'civilizedmen.'But they cannot

prove 'scientifically' that this is the case; and that they presuppose this interest by no

meansprovesthatitgoeswithoutsaying.Infactitisnotatallselfevident.

Finally,letusconsiderthedisciplinesclosetome:sociology,history,economics,politicalscience,and thosetypesofculturalphilosophythatmake ittheir task'to interpret these

sciences.Itissaid,andIagree,thatpoliticsisoutofplaceinthelectureroom.Itdoesnot

belongthereonthepartofthestudents.If,forinstance,inthelectureroomofmyformer

colleagueDietrichSchaferinBerlin,pacifiststudentsweretosurroundhisdeskandmake

an uproar, I should deplore it just as much as I should deplore the uproar which anti

pacifiststudentsare said tohavemadeagainstProfessor Forster,whoseviewsinmany

waysareasremoteascouldbe frommine.Neitherdoespolitics,however,belong inthe

lectureroomonthepartofthedocents.Andwhenthedocentisscientificallyconcerned

withpolitics,itbelongsthereleastofall.

Totakeapracticalpoliticalstandisonething,andtoanalyzepoliticalstructuresandpartypositionsisanother.Whenspeakinginapoliticalmeetingaboutdemocracy,onedoesnot

hide one's personal standpoint; indeed, to come out clearly and take a stand is one's

damnedduty.Thewordsoneusesinsuchameetingarenotmeansofscientificanalysisbut

meansofcanvassingvotesandwinningoverothers.Theyarenotplowsharestoloosenthe

soil of contemplative thought; they are swords against the enemies: such words are

weapons.Itwouldbeanoutrage,however,tousewordsinthisfashioninalectureorinthe

lectureroom. If, for instance, 'democracy' isunderdiscussion,oneconsiders its various

forms,analyzestheminthewaytheyfunction,determineswhatresultsfortheconditions

of life the one form has as compared with the other. Thenone confronts the forms of

democracy with nondemocratic forms of political order and endeavors to come to a

positionwherethestudentmayfindthepointfromwhich,intermsofhisultimateideals,hecantakeastand.Butthetrueteacherwillbewareofimposingfromtheplatformany

politicalpositionuponthestudent,whetheritisexpressedorsuggested.'Toletthefacts

speak for themselves' is themost unfair way of putting over a political position to the

student.

Why should we abstain from doing this? I state in advance that some highly esteemed

colleaguesareoftheopinionthatitisnotpossibletocarrythroughthisselfrestraintand

that, even if it were possible, it would be a whim to avoid declaring oneself. Now one

cannot demonstratescientificallywhat the dutyofanacademicteacher is. One can only

demandofthe teacherthathehavethe intellectualintegritytoseethat itisone thingto

state facts, to determine mathematical or logical relations or the internal structure ofculturalvalues,whileitisanotherthingtoanswerquestionsofthevalueofcultureandits

individualcontentsandthequestionofhowoneshouldactintheculturalcommunityand

inpoliticalassociations.Thesearequiteheterogeneousproblems.Ifheasksfurtherwhyhe

shouldnotdealwithbothtypesofproblemsinthelectureroom,theansweris:becausethe

prophetandthedemagoguedonotbelongontheacademicplatform.

Totheprophetandthedemagogue,itissaid:'Goyourwaysoutintothestreetsandspeak


14/21


openlytotheworld,'thatis,speakwherecriticismispossible.Inthelectureroomwestand

oppositeour audience,and ithas toremain silent. Ideem it irresponsible toexploit the

circumstancethatforthesakeoftheircareerthestudentshavetoattendateacher'scourse

whilethere isnobodypresenttoopposehimwithcriticism.The taskoftheteacheristo

servethestudentswithhisknowledgeandscientificexperienceandnottoimprintupon

themhispersonalpoliticalviews.Itiscertainlypossiblethattheindividualteacherwillnotentirelysucceedineliminatinghispersonalsympathies.Heisthenexposedtothesharpest

criticismintheforumofhisownconscience.Andthisdeficiencydoesnotproveanything;

other errors are also possible, for instance, erroneous statements of fact, and yet they

prove nothing against the duty of searching for the truth. I also reject this in the very

interestofscience.Iamreadytoprovefromtheworksofourhistoriansthatwheneverthe

manofscience introduceshis personalvalue judgment, a fullunderstandingofthe facts

ceases.Butthisgoesbeyondtonight'stopicandwouldrequirelengthyelucidation.

Iaskonly:HowshouldadevoutCatholic,ontheonehand,andaFreemason,ontheother,

in a course on the formsof church and stateor on religioushistoryever be brought to

evaluate these subjectsalike?This isout of the question. Andyet the academic teachermust desire andmust demand of himself to serve the one as well as the other by his

knowledge and methods. Now you will rightly say that the devout Catholic will never

accepttheviewofthefactorsoperativeinbringingaboutChristianity,whichateacherwho

isfreeofhisdogmaticpresuppositionspresentstohim.Certainly!Thedifference,however,

lies in the following: Science 'free from presuppositions,' in the sense of a rejection of

religiousbonds,doesnotknowofthe'miracle'andthe'revelation.'Ifitdid,sciencewould

beunfaithfultoitsown'presuppositions.'Thebelieverknowsboth,miracleandrevelation.

Andscience'freefrompresuppositions'expectsfromhimnolessandnomorethan

acknowledgment that if the process can be explained without those supernatural

interventions, which an empirical explanation has to eliminate as causal factors, the

processhastobeexplained thewayscienceattemptstodo.And thebelievercandothiswithoutbeingdisloyaltohisfaith.

Buthasthecontributionofsciencenomeaningatallforamanwhodoesnotcaretoknow

facts as such and to whom only the practical standpoint matters? Perhaps science

neverthelesscontributessomething.

The primary taskofauseful teacher is toteachhis students torecognize 'inconvenient'

facts Imean facts that are inconvenient for theirpartyopinions.And for everyparty

opiniontherearefactsthatareextremelyinconvenient,formyownopinionnolessthan

for others. I believe the teacher accomplishes more than a mere intellectual task if he

compels his audience to accustom itself to the existence of such facts. I would be soimmodestaseventoapplytheexpression'moralachievement,'thoughperhapsthismay

soundtoograndioseforsomethingthatshouldgowithoutsaying.

ThusfarIhavespokenonlyofpracticalreasonsforavoidingtheimpositionofapersonal

point of view. But these are not the only reasons. The impossibility of 'scientifically'

pleadingforpracticalandinterestedstandsexceptindiscussingthemeansforafirmly

givenandpresupposedendrestsuponreasonsthatliefardeeper.


15/21


'Scientific' pleading ismeaningless inprinciple because the variousvaluespheresofthe

worldstandinirreconcilableconflictwitheachother.TheelderMill,whosephilosophyI

willnotpraiseotherwise,wasonthispointrightwhenhesaid:Ifoneproceedsfrompure

experience, one arrives at polytheism. This is shallow in formulation and sounds

paradoxical,andyetthereistruthinit.Ifanything,werealizeagaintodaythatsomethingcanbesacrednotonlyinspiteofitsnotbeingbeautiful,butratherbecauseandinsofaras

itisnotbeautiful.Youwillfindthisdocumentedinthefiftythirdchapterofthebookof

IsaiahandinthetwentyfirstPsalm.And,sinceNietzsche,werealizethatsomethingcanbe

beautiful, not only in spiteof the aspect inwhich it is notgood,but rather in that very

aspect.Youwill findthisexpressedearlierintheFleursdumal,asBaudelairenamedhis

volumeofpoems.Itiscommonplacetoobservethatsomethingmaybetruealthoughitis

notbeautifulandnotholyandnotgood.Indeeditmaybetrueinpreciselythoseaspects.

Butalltheseareonlythemostelementarycasesofthestrugglethatthegodsofthevarious

orders and values are engaged in. I do not know how one might wish to decide

'scientifically'thevalueofFrenchandGermanculture;forhere,too,differentgodsstruggle

withoneanother,nowandforalltimestocome.

We live as did the ancientswhen theirworldwasnot yet disenchantedof its gods and

demons,onlyweliveinadifferentsense.AsHellenicmanattimessacrificedtoAphrodite

andatothertimestoApollo,and,aboveall,aseverybodysacrificedtothegodsofhiscity,

sodowestillnowadays,onlythebearingofmanhasbeendisenchantedanddenudedofits

mysticalbutinwardlygenuineplasticity.Fate,andcertainlynot'science,'holdsswayover

thesegodsandtheirstruggles.Onecanonlyunderstandwhatthegodheadisfortheone

orderorfortheother,orbetter,whatgodheadisintheoneorintheotherorder.Withthis

understanding,however,thematterhasreacheditslimitsofarasitcanbediscussedina

lectureroomandbyaprofessor.Yetthegreatandvitalproblemthatiscontainedtherein

is, ofcourse,veryfarfrombeingconcluded.But forcesotherthanuniversitychairshavetheirsayinthismatter.

What man will take upon himself the attempt to 'refute scientifically' the ethic of the

SermonontheMount?Forinstance,thesentence,'resistnoevil,'ortheimageofturning

the other cheek? And yet it is clear, in mundane perspective, that this is an ethic of

undignifiedconduct;onehastochoosebetweenthereligiousdignitythatthisethicconfers

and thedignityofmanlyconductwhichpreachessomethingquitedifferent; 'resistevil

lestyoubecoresponsibleforanoverpoweringevil.'Accordingtoourultimatestandpoint,

theoneisthedevilandtheothertheGod,andtheindividualhastodecidewhichisGodfor

himandwhichisthedevil.Andsoitgoesthroughoutalltheordersoflife.

The grandiose rationalism of an ethical and methodical conduct of life that flows from

everyreligiousprophecyhasdethroned thispolytheisminfavorofthe 'one thingthatis

needful.' Faced with the realities of outer and inner life, Christianity has deemed it

necessarytomakethosecompromisesandrelativejudgments,whichweallknowfromits

history.Todaytheroutinesofeverydaylifechallengereligion.Manyoldgodsascendfrom

theirgraves; theyare disenchantedandhence take the formof impersonal forces.They

strivetogainpoweroverourlivesandagaintheyresumetheireternalstrugglewithone


16/21


another.What ishard formodernman, and especially for the younger generation, is to

measureuptoworkadayexistence.Theubiquitouschasefor'experience'stemsfromthis

weakness;foritisweaknessnottobeabletocountenancethesternseriousnessofour

fatefultimes.

Our civilization destines us to realizemore clearly these struggles again, after our eyeshavebeenblindedforathousandyearsblindedbytheallegedlyorpresumablyexclusive

orientationtowardsthegrandiosemoralfervorofChristianethics.

Butenoughof thesequestionswhichleadfaraway.Thoseofouryouthare inerrorwho

reacttoallthisbysaying,'Yes,butwehappentocometolecturesinordertoexperience

somethingmorethanmereanalysesandstatementsoffact.'Theerroristhattheyseekin

theprofessorsomethingdifferentfromwhatstandsbeforethem.Theycravealeaderand

notateacher.Butweareplacedupontheplatformsolelyasteachers.Andthesearetwo

different things, as one can readily see. Permit me to take you once more to America,

becausethereonecanoftenobservesuchmattersintheirmostmassiveandoriginalshape.

TheAmericanboylearnsunspeakablylessthantheGermanboy.Inspiteofanincredible

numberofexaminations,hisschoollifehasnothadthesignificanceofturninghimintoan

absolutecreatureofexaminations,suchastheGerman.ForinAmerica,bureaucracy,which

presupposes the examination diploma as a ticket of admission to the realm of office

prebends, isonly in its beginnings. The youngAmericanhas no respect for anythingor

anybody, for tradition or for public officeunless it is for the personal achievement of

individual men. This is what the American calls 'democracy.' This is the meaning of

democracy,howeverdistorteditsintentmayinrealitybe,andthisintentiswhatmatters

here.TheAmerican'sconceptionoftheteacherwhofaceshimis:hesellsmehisknowledge

andhismethodsformyfather'smoney,justasthegreengrocersellsmymothercabbage.

Andthatisall.Tobesure,iftheteacherhappenstobeafootballcoach,then,inthisfield,heisaleader.Butifheisnotthis(orsomethingsimilarinadifferentfieldofsports),heis

simply a teacher and nothingmore.And noyoungAmerican would think of having the

teacher sell himaWeltanschauung or a code of conduct.Now,when formulated in this

manner, we should reject this. But the question is whether there is not a grain of salt

contained in this feeling, which I have deliberately stated in extreme with some

exaggeration.

Fellowstudents!Youcometoourlecturesanddemandfromusthequalitiesofleadership,

andyoufailtorealizeinadvancethatofahundredprofessorsatleastninetyninedonot

and must not claim to be football masters in the vital problems of life, or even to be

'leaders' inmatters ofconduct.Please, consider that aman'svaluedoes not dependonwhetherornothehasleadershipqualities.Andinanycase,thequalitiesthatmakeaman

anexcellentscholarandacademicteacherarenotthequalitiesthatmakehimaleaderto

give directions in practical life or, more specifically, in politics. It is pure accident if a

teacher also possesses this quality, and it is a critical situation if every teacher on the

platformfeelshimself confrontedwith the students'expectationthat the teacher should

claimthisquality.Itisstillmorecriticalifitislefttoeveryacademicteachertosethimself

upasaleaderinthelectureroom.Forthosewhomostfrequentlythinkofthemselvesas


17/21


leadersoftenqualifyleastasleaders.Butirrespectiveofwhethertheyareorarenot,the

platform situation simply offers nopossibility ofproving themselves tobe leaders. The

professorwhofeelscalledupontoactasacounselorofyouthandenjoystheirtrustmay

provehimselfamaninpersonalhumanrelationswiththem.Andifhefeelscalleduponto

interveneinthestrugglesofworldviewsandpartyopinions,hemaydosooutside,inthe

marketplace,inthepress,inmeetings,inassociations,whereverhewishes.Butafterall,itis somewhat too convenient to demonstrate one's courage in taking a stand where the

audienceandpossibleopponentsarecondemnedtosilence.

Finally, you will put the question: 'If this is so, what then does science actually and

positivelycontributetopracticalandpersonal"life"?'Therewithwearebackagainatthe

problemofscienceasa'vocation.'

First, of course, science contributes to the technology of controlling life by calculating

externalobjectsaswellasman'sactivities.Well,youwillsay,that,afterall,amountstono

morethanthegreengroceroftheAmericanboy.Ifullyagree.

Second, science can contribute something that the greengrocer cannot: methods of

thinking, the tools and the training for thought. Perhaps you will say: well, that is no

vegetable,but itamountsto nomorethan themeansforprocuringvegetables.Welland

good,letusleaveitatthatfortoday.

Fortunately,however,thecontributionofsciencedoesnotreachitslimitwiththis.Weare

inapositiontohelpyoutoathirdobjective:togainclarity.Ofcourse,itispresupposedthat

we ourselves possess clarity. As far as this is the case, we can make clear to you the

following:

Inpractice,youcantakethisorthatpositionwhenconcernedwithaproblemofvalueforsimplicity'ssake,pleasethinkofsocialphenomenaasexamples. Ifyoutakesuchandsucha

stand, then,according toscientificexperience,youhavetousesuchandsuchameansin

ordertocarryoutyourconvictionpractically.Now,thesemeansareperhapssuchthatyou

believe you must reject them. Then you simply must choose between the end and the

inevitablemeans.Doestheend'justify'themeans?Ordoesitnot?Theteachercanconfront

youwiththenecessityofthischoice.Hecannotdomore,solongashewishestoremaina

teacherandnottobecomea demagogue.Hecan,ofcourse,alsotellyouthatifyouwant

suchandsuchanend, thenyoumust take into thebargain the subsidiaryconsequences

thataccordingtoallexperiencewilloccur.Againwefindourselvesinthesamesituationas

before.Thesearestillproblemsthatcanalsoemergeforthetechnician,whoinnumerous

instances has to make decisions according to the principle of the lesser evil or of therelativelybest.Onlytohimonething,themainthing,isusuallygiven,namely,theend.But

assoonastruly'ultimate'problemsareatstakeforusthisisnotthecase.Withthis,atlong

last,wecometothefinalservicethatscienceassuchcanrendertotheaimofclarity,andat

thesametimewecometothelimitsofscience.

Besideswe canandwe should state: In termsof itsmeaning, such andsuch apractical

standcanbederivedwithinnerconsistency,andhenceintegrity,fromthisorthatultimate


18/21


weltanschauliche position. Perhaps it can only be derived from one such fundamental

position, or maybe from several, but it cannot be derived from these or those other

positions.Figurativelyspeaking,youservethisgodandyouoffendtheothergodwhenyou

decidetoadheretothisposition.Andifyouremainfaithfultoyourself,youwillnecessarily

cometocertainfinalconclusionsthatsubjectivelymakesense.Thismuch,inprincipleat

least, can be accomplished. Philosophy, as a special discipline, and the essentiallyphilosophicaldiscussionsofprinciplesintheothersciencesattempttoachievethis.Thus,if

we are competent in our pursuit (which must be presupposed here) we can force the

individual,oratleastwecanhelphim,togivehimselfanaccountoftheultimatemeaningof

hisownconduct.This appears tome asnotso trifling a thing to do,even forone'sown

personallife.Again,Iamtemptedtosayofateacherwhosucceedsinthis:hestandsinthe

serviceof'moral'forces;hefulfilsthedutyofbringingaboutselfclarificationandasenseof

responsibility. And I believe he will be the more able to accomplish this, the more

conscientiouslyheavoidsthedesirepersonallyto imposeuponorsuggesttohisaudience

hisownstand.

Thisproposition,which Ipresenthere,always takesits pointofdeparture fromtheonefundamentalfact,thatsolongasliferemainsimmanentandisinterpretedinitsownterms,

itknowsonlyofanunceasingstruggleofthesegodswithoneanother.Orspeakingdirectly,

theultimatelypossibleattitudestowardlifeareirreconcilable,andhencetheirstrugglecan

never be brought to a final conclusion. Thus it is necessary to make a decisive choice.

Whether, under such conditions, science is a worthwhile 'vocation' for somebody, and

whether science itself has an objectively valuable 'vocation' are again value judgments

aboutwhichnothingcanbesaidinthelectureroom.Toaffirmthevalueofscienceisa

presuppositionforteachingthere.Ipersonallybymyveryworkanswerintheaffirmative,

andIalsodosofrompreciselythestandpointthathatesintellectualismastheworstdevil,

asyouthdoestoday,orusuallyonlyfanciesitdoes.Inthatcasethewordholdsforthese

youths:'Mindyou,thedevilisold;growoldtounderstandhim.'Thisdoesnotmeanageinthesenseof thebirthcertificate.Itmeansthatifonewishestosettlewiththisdevil,one

mustnottaketoflightbeforehimassomanyliketodonowadays.Firstofall,onehasto

seethedevil'swaystotheendinordertorealizehispowerandhislimitations.

Science today is a 'vocation' organized in special disciplines in the service of self

clarification and knowledge of interrelated facts. It is not the gift of grace of seers and

prophets dispensing sacred values and revelations, nor does it partake of the

contemplation ofsagesand philosophers about themeaning of the universe.This, tobe

sure,istheinescapableconditionofourhistoricalsituation.Wecannotevadeitsolongas

weremaintruetoourselves.AndifTolstoy'squestionrecurstoyou:assciencedoesnot,

whoistoanswerthequestion:'Whatshallwedo,and,howshallwearrangeourlives?'or,inthewordsusedheretonight:'Whichofthewarringgodsshouldweserve?Orshouldwe

serve perhaps an entirely different god, andwho is he?' then one can say that only a

prophetorasaviorcangivetheanswers.Ifthereisnosuchman,orifhismessageisno

longerbelievedin,thenyouwillcertainlynotcompelhimtoappearonthisearthbyhaving

thousandsofprofessors,asprivilegedhirelingsofthestate,attemptaspettyprophetsin

theirlectureroomstotakeoverhisrole.Alltheywillaccomplishistoshowthattheyare

unawareof thedecisive state of affairs: theprophet forwhom somany of ouryounger


19/21


generationyearnsimplydoesnotexist.Butthisknowledgeinitsforcefulsignificancehas

neverbecomevitalforthem.Theinwardinterestofatrulyreligiously'musical'mancan

neverbeservedbyveilingtohimandtoothersthefundamentalfactthatheisdestinedto

liveinagodlessandprophetlesstimebygivinghimthe ersatzofarmchairprophecy.The

integrityofhisreligiousorgan,itseemstome,mustrebelagainstthis.

Nowyouwillbeinclinedtosay:Whichstanddoesonetaketowardsthefactualexistenceof

'theology'anditsclaimstobea'science'?Letusnotflinchandevadetheanswer.Tobe

sure, 'theology' and 'dogmas' do not exist universally, but neither do they exist for

Christianity alone.Rather (going backwardintime),theyexist inhighly developedform

alsoinIslam,inManicheanism,inGnosticism,inOrphism,inParsism,inBuddhism,inthe

Hindusects,inTaoism,andintheUpanishads,and,ofcourse,inJudaism.Tobesuretheir

systematicdevelopmentvaries greatly.It isnoaccidentthatOccidentalChristianity in

contrasttothetheologicalpossessionsofJewryhasexpandedandelaboratedtheology

moresystematically,orstrivestodoso.IntheOccidentthedevelopmentoftheologyhas

hadbyfarthegreatesthistoricalsignificance.ThisistheproductoftheHellenicspirit,and

alltheologyoftheWestgoesbacktoit,as(obviously)alltheologyoftheEastgoesbacktoIndianthought.Alltheologyrepresentsanintellectualrationalizationofthepossessionof

sacredvalues.Noscienceisabsolutelyfreefrompresuppositions,andnosciencecanprove

its fundamental value to the man who rejects these presuppositions. Every theology,

however,addsafewspecificpresuppositionsforitsworkandthusforthejustificationof

itsexistence.Theirmeaningandscopevary.Everytheology,includingforinstanceHinduist

theology, presupposes that theworldmust have ameaning, and thequestion is how to

interpretthismeaningsothatitisintellectuallyconceivable.

It is the same as with Kant's epistemology. He took for his point of departure the

presupposition: 'Scientific truth exists and it is valid,' and then asked: 'Under which

presuppositionsof thought is truthpossibleandmeaningful?'Themodern aestheticians(actuallyorexpressly,asforinstance,G.V.Lukacs)proceedfromthepresuppositionthat

'worksofartexist,'andthenask:'Howistheirexistencemeaningfulandpossible?'

Asa rule,theologies,however,donot content themselveswiththis (essentially religious

andphilosophical)presupposition.Theyregularlyproceedfromthefurtherpresupposition

that certain 'revelations' are facts relevant for salvation and as such make possible a

meaningful conduct of life. Hence, these revelations must be believed in. Moreover,

theologies presuppose that certain subjective states and acts possess the quality of

holiness,thatis,theyconstituteawayoflife,oratleastelementsofone,thatisreligiously

meaningful.Thenthequestionoftheologyis:Howcanthesepresuppositions,whichmust

simply beacceptedbemeaningfullyinterpreted inaviewofthe universe? For theology,these presuppositions as such lie beyond the limits of 'science.' They do not represent

'knowledge,'intheusualsense,butrathera'possession.'Whoeverdoesnot'possess'faith,

ortheotherholystates,cannothavetheologyasasubstituteforthem,leastofallanyother

science.Onthecontrary,inevery'positive'theology,thedevoutreachesthepointwhere

theAugustiniansentenceholds:credononquod,sedquiaabsurdumest.

Thecapacityfortheaccomplishmentofreligiousvirtuososthe'intellectualsacrifice'is


20/21


thedecisivecharacteristicof thepositivelyreligiousman.Thatthisisso isshownbythe

fact that in spite (or rather in consequence) of theology (which unveils it) the tension

between the valuespheres of 'science' and the sphere of 'the holy' is unbridgeable.

Legitimately,onlythediscipleoffersthe'intellectualsacrifice'to theprophet,thebeliever

tothechurch.Neverasyethasanewprophecyemerged(andIrepeatheredeliberately

thisimagewhichhasoffendedsome)bywayoftheneedofsomemodernintellectualstofurnishtheirsoulswith,sotospeak,guaranteedgenuineantiques.Indoingso,theyhappen

torememberthatreligionhasbelongedamongsuchantiques,andofallthingsreligionis

whattheydonotpossess.Bywayofsubstitute,however,theyplayatdecoratingasortof

domestic chapel with small sacred images from all over the world, or they produce

surrogates through all sortsofpsychic experiences towhich they ascribe the dignity of

mystic holiness, which they peddle in the book market. This is plain humbug or self

deception. It is, however, nohumbug but rather something very sincere and genuine if

someoftheyouthgroupswhoduringrecentyearshavequietlygrowntogethergivetheir

humancommunitytheinterpretationofareligious,cosmic,ormysticalrelation,although

occasionallyperhaps such interpretationrestsonmisunderstandingofself. True as it is

that every act of genuine brotherliness may be linked with the awareness that itcontributes something imperishable to a superpersonal realm, it seems tome dubious

whether the dignity of purely human and communal relations is enhanced by these

religiousinterpretations.Butthatisnolongerourtheme.

Thefateofourtimesischaracterizedbyrationalizationandintellectualizationand,above

all,bythe'disenchantmentoftheworld.'Preciselytheultimateandmostsublimevalues

haveretreatedfrompubliclifeeitherintothetranscendentalrealmofmysticlifeorintothe

brotherlinessofdirectandpersonalhumanrelations.Itisnotaccidentalthatourgreatest

artisintimateandnotmonumental,norisitaccidentalthattodayonlywithinthesmallest

and intimate circles, in personal human situations, in pianissimo, that something is

pulsatingthatcorrespondstotheprophetic pneuma,whichinformertimessweptthroughthegreatcommunitieslikeafirebrand,weldingthemtogether.Ifweattempttoforceand

to 'invent'amonumental style inart, suchmiserablemonstrositiesare producedasthe

many monuments of the last twenty years. If one tries intellectually to construe new

religionswithoutanewandgenuineprophecy,then,inaninnersense,somethingsimilar

will result, but with stillworse effects.Andacademicprophecy, finally,will createonly

fanaticalsectsbutneveragenuinecommunity.

To thepersonwhocannotbear the fate of the times likeaman, onemust say:mayhe

rather return silently,without the usualpublicity buildupofrenegades, but simply and

plainly.Thearmsoftheoldchurchesareopenedwidelyandcompassionatelyforhim.After

all,theydonotmakeithardforhim.Onewayoranotherhehastobringhis 'intellectualsacrifice'that is inevitable. If he can really do it,we shall not rebuke him. For such an

intellectual sacrifice in favor of an unconditional religious devotion is ethically quite a

differentmatterthantheevasionoftheplaindutyofintellectualintegrity,whichsetsinif

one lacksthe courage toclarifyone'sownultimatestandpointandrather facilitatesthis

dutybyfeeblerelativejudgments.Inmyeyes,suchreligiousreturnstandshigherthanthe

academic prophecy, which does not clearly realize that in the lecturerooms of the

universitynoothervirtueholdsbutplainintellectualintegrity.Integrity,however,compels


21/21


ustostatethatforthemanywhotodaytarryfornewprophetsandsaviors,thesituationis

thesameasresoundsinthebeautifulEdomitewatchman'ssongoftheperiodofexilethat

hasbeenincludedamongIsaiah'soracles:

He calleth to me out of Seir, Watchman, what of the night? The watchman said, The

morningcometh,andalsothenight:ifyewillenquire,enquireye:return,come.

Thepeopletowhomthiswassaidhasenquiredandtarriedformorethantwomillennia,

andweareshakenwhenwerealizeitsfate.Fromthiswewanttodrawthelessonthat

nothingisgainedbyyearningandtarryingalone,andweshallactdifferently.Weshallset

toworkandmeetthe'demandsoftheday,'inhumanrelationsaswellasinourvocation.

This,however,isplainandsimple,ifeachfindsandobeysthedemonwhoholdsthefibers

ofhisverylife.

Date post:	05-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	michael-zeleny
View:	224 times
Download:	0 times

Max Weber: Science as a Vocation

Documents