Regeneration : $b A reply to Max NordauHake, A. Egmont (Alfred Egmont)
Philosophy
Regeneration : $b A reply to Max Nordau
Hake, A. Egmont (Alfred Egmont)
Nordau, Max Simon, 1849-1923. Entartung; World history
Nordau probably feels that Wagner’s anti-semitism, his Anarchism,
and his ability to create transcendentally beautiful pictures are
stigmata which hardly any of his readers would accept as such, and
consequently feels impelled to make much of what it pleases him to
call Wagner’s eroticism. Here, as everywhere in his book, in order
to impress his readers he counts on the mystical effect which the
use of a high-sounding scientific word generally produces upon
unscientific readers. A favourite expression of his, when speaking of
some psychological phenomenon, is that science knows all about it,
and he calls it megalomania, graphomania, echolalia, or some such
name. With people who have only a superficial knowledge of science,
and who stand in awe of its achievements, such nouns stand for a
special definite thing, thoroughly investigated and explained. They
do not know that these scientific names have been invented, not in
order to designate something real and palpable, but simply for the
purpose of bringing order into an arbitrary classification, invented
so that the exchange of ideas may be facilitated on the subject thus
treated. Such scientific terms might even be classed among mystical
symbols, in so far as they often stand for something of which hardly
anything is known, but at the same time serve the same useful end
as algebraical figures. Psychologists are prone to speak of a man’s
consciousness, though scarcely two scientific men would agree as to
what it is. But this does not prevent them from dividing consciousness
up into divisions and sub-divisions, all with their special names, in
order to be able to express their ideas in words. The unscientific
reader should bear in mind that consciousness has never been under
the microscope, or in the crucible, and that the classification of
the scientists has no counterpart in consciousness itself, and that
this remains the impalpable and indivisible _Ego_, with its infinite
number of attributes inseparably commingled. All the different states,
conditions, faculties, perfections, and defects of the _Ego_ are
of course known only by the results they produce in the physical
world, and it is by these results that they have been classified.
It is evident that such methods of classification should leave an
immense margin for those who wish, or feel impelled by their own
idiosyncrasies, to misuse scientific terms designating psychological
phenomena.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account