In this blog post, we will examine the trajectory of complex thought—in which modern philosophy sought not to drift into simple rationalism but rather to explore both conflict and harmony with emotion—and explore its internal dynamics.
It is generally said that the philosophical modern era began with Descartes, who established a rational self completely detached from the influence of emotion, and culminated in German idealism, which defined not only the subject but also the world of objects as a state of a priori reason. However, it would be a hasty judgment to generalize the entire era as a linear march of rationalism based solely on its beginning and end. This is because, throughout the development of modern philosophy, various schools of thought emerged as significant counter-currents, seeking to assign active meaning and value to emotion in opposition to the dominance of reason. If so, what twists and turns did the philosophical modern era undergo to reach such a conclusion?
The intellectual movement known as “New Mythology” provides a crucial clue to answering this question. Among these, the anonymous text from the late 18th century—discovered in 1913 and later designated as the “Manifesto” (hereinafter the Manifesto), the oldest programmatic document of German idealism—is particularly intriguing. This is because, while German idealism is often regarded as the definitive manifestation of rationalism, this text—which marks the very beginning of that tradition—actually presents a markedly different perspective.
To understand the Manifesto, one must first grasp Schiller’s political aesthetics, which are strongly evident in this text. This is because, much like Schiller who cried out, “O beautiful world, where art thou? Come again!”, the author of the Manifesto also yearns for a culture of such rich aesthetic dimensions that it can be compared to ancient Greece. Schiller’s thinking stemmed primarily from his disappointment with the French Revolution—which had been radicalized into a reign of terror—and with civil society, where human alienation was rampant; more fundamentally, it arose from a strong critical consciousness toward the Enlightenment, the ideological cradle of the Revolution. In Schiller’s view, the radicalization of the Revolution was inevitable because the Enlightenment had become overly fixated on the enlightenment of abstract reason, thereby destroying the harmony of humanity’s precious mental faculties. In contrast, the people of ancient Greece lived in organic harmony with their communities, because their dispositions maintained a harmonious, undivided unity of sensibility and reason. Accordingly, Schiller viewed the construction of culture on an aesthetic level as a prerequisite for realizing a true human community in the realm of practical politics. Consequently, he proposed as a concrete strategy the aesthetic education of the human mind itself—specifically, the cultivation of the “play impulse,” which reconciles the impulses of sensibility and reason.
The author of the Manifesto develops this line of political aesthetics to propose a model called “New Mythology.” As the term “New” suggests, the ideal he pursues is not a mythology that nullifies the Enlightenment at its source, but rather an Enlightenment that transforms mythology into its true form through the reconciliation of reason and emotion. Much like the return of the beautiful world Schiller hoped for, the New Mythology he advocates also centers on the aesthetic elevation of the Enlightenment. Furthermore, the author of the Manifesto takes this approach to its extreme by shifting it toward anarchism, conceiving of the culture of the aesthetic dimension—mythology—not as a precondition for true realpolitik, but as the ultimate goal to be reached through the abolition of the state.
However, German idealism, which began on this path radicalized into aesthetic absolutism, transforms into a form of rationalism far more intense than that of the early modern period in the final version reached by subsequent thinkers. This transformation stems from a new interpretation of the mythical world of the past and the contemporary mode of national life. In other words, the political aspects of modernity are now evaluated not as a loss but as a gain. According to this view, in antiquity—which at first glance appears beautiful—the oppression of the absolute majority for the benefit of a minority was actually rampant, whereas in the constitutional order of modernity, formed through civil society, the universal freedom of the majority, and indeed of all people, is realized.
Underlying this political stance is a metaphysics positing that the entire course of the world belongs to the process of the self-realization of free reason. That is, since history is merely a subcategory within the grand process by which transcendental reason—the primordial principle of the beginning—is realized in the phenomenal world, the supersession of the mythical world dominated by sensibility and the emergence of civil society and the state system governed by reason are both just and inevitable. Consequently, elements belonging to the aesthetic dimension, such as mythology, can serve as a medium for cultivating the human spirit only in the undeveloped early stages of intellectual history. Dreaming of an aesthetic utopia in an era reached through the advancement of reason is viewed not as an elevation of enlightenment, but rather as going against the massive current of the realization of reason.
