| Part of a series on |
| Philosophy |
|---|
 |
Philosophy of culture is a branch ofphilosophy that examines the essence and meaning ofculture.
It focuses on how human creativity, rationality, and collective experiences shape cultural identities. It traces the development of cultural thought fromearly modern discussions on national identity and Enlightenment ideals, through German and EnglishRomanticism, to more scientific approaches.
The German philosopherImmanuel Kant (1724–1804) has formulated an individualist definition of "enlightenment" similar to the concept ofbildung: "Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-incurred immaturity."[1] He argued that this immaturity comes not from a lack of understanding, but from a lack of courage to think independently. Against this intellectual cowardice, Kant urged:Sapere aude, "Dare to be wise!" In reaction to Kant,German scholars such asJohann Gottfried Herder (1744–1803) argued that humancreativity, which necessarily takes unpredictable and highly diverse forms, is as important as human rationality. Moreover, Herder proposed a collective form ofbildung: "For Herder, Bildung was the totality of experiences that provide a coherent identity, and sense of common destiny, to a people."[2]
In 1795, the linguist and philosopherWilhelm von Humboldt (1767–1835) called for an anthropology that would synthesize Kant's and Herder's interests. During theRomantic era, scholars inGermany, especially those concerned withnationalist movements—such as the nationalist struggle to create a "Germany" out of diverse principalities, and the nationalist struggles by ethnic minorities against theAustro-Hungarian Empire—developed a more inclusive notion of culture as "worldview"(Weltanschauung). According to this school of thought, each ethnic group has a distinct worldview that is incommensurable with the worldviews of other groups. Although more inclusive than earlier views, this approach to culture still allowed for distinctions between "civilized" and "primitive" or "tribal" cultures.
In 1860,Adolf Bastian (1826–1905) argued for "the psychic unity of mankind". He proposed that a scientific comparison of all human societies would reveal that distinct worldviews consisted of the same basic elements. According to Bastian, all human societies share a set of "elementary ideas" (Elementargedanken); different cultures, or different "folk ideas" (Völkergedanken), are local modifications of the elementary ideas.[3] This view paved the way for the modern understanding of culture.Franz Boas (1858–1942) was trained in this tradition, and he brought it with him when he left Germany for the United States.
In the 19th century, humanists such asEnglish poet and essayistMatthew Arnold (1822–1888) used the word "culture" to refer to an ideal of individual human refinement, of "the best that has been thought and said in the world."[4] This concept of culture is comparable to theGerman concept ofbildung: "...culture being a pursuit of our totalperfection by means of getting to know, on all the matters which most concern us, the best which has been thought and said in the world."[4]
In practice,culture referred to anélite ideal and was associated with such activities asart,classical music, andhaute cuisine.[5] As these forms were associated with urban life, "culture" was identified with "civilization" (from lat.civitas, city). Another facet of theRomantic movement was an interest infolklore, which led to identifying a "culture" among non-elites. This distinction is often characterized as that betweenhigh culture, namely that of therulingsocial group, andlow culture. In other words, the idea of "culture" that developed in Europe during the 18th and early 19th centuries reflected inequalities within European societies.[6]
Matthew Arnold contrasted "culture" withanarchy; other Europeans, followingphilosophersThomas Hobbes andJean-Jacques Rousseau, contrasted "culture" with "the state of nature". According to Hobbes and Rousseau, theNative Americans who were being conquered by Europeans from the 16th centuries on were living in a state of nature; this opposition was expressed through the contrast between "civilized" and "uncivilized." According to this way of thinking, one could classify some countries and nations as more civilized than others and some people as more cultured than others. This contrast led toHerbert Spencer's theory ofSocial Darwinism andLewis Henry Morgan's theory ofcultural evolution. Just as some critics have argued that the distinction between high and low cultures is really an expression of the conflict between European elites and non-elites, some critics have argued that the distinction between civilized and uncivilized people is really an expression of the conflict between Europeancolonial powers and their colonial subjects.
Other 19th-century critics, following Rousseau have accepted this differentiation between higher and lower culture, but have seen the refinement andsophistication of high culture as corrupting and unnatural developments that obscure and distort people's essential nature. These critics consideredfolk music (as produced by "the folk", i.e., rural, illiterate, peasants) to honestly express a natural way of life, while classical music seemed superficial and decadent. Equally, this view often portrayedindigenous peoples as "noble savages" livingauthentic and unblemished lives, uncomplicated and uncorrupted by the highly stratifiedcapitalist systems ofthe West.
In 1870 the anthropologistEdward Tylor (1832–1917) applied these ideas of higher versus lower culture to propose a theory of theevolution of religion. According to this theory, religion evolves from more polytheistic to more monotheistic forms.[7] In the process, he redefined culture as a diverse set of activities characteristic of all human societies. This view paved the way for the modern understanding of culture.
Media related toPhilosophy of culture at Wikimedia Commons| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
