Croce was born inPescasseroli in theAbruzzo region of Italy. His family was influential and wealthy, and he was raised in a very strict Roman Catholic environment. Around the age of 16, he quit Catholicism and developed a personalphilosophy of spiritual life, in which religion cannot be anything but a historical institution where the creative strength of mankind can be expressed. He kept this philosophy for the rest of his life.
In 1883, anearthquake occurred in the village of Casamicciola on the island ofIschia nearNaples, where he was on holiday with his family, destroying the home they lived in. His mother, father, and only sister were all killed, and he was buried for a long time and barely survived. After the earthquake, he inherited his family's fortune and—much likeSchopenhauer—was able to live the rest of his life in relative leisure, devoting a great deal of time to philosophy as an independent intellectual writing from hispalazzo inNaples (Ryn, 2000:xi[11]).
Influenced by Neapolitan-bornGianbattista Vico's thoughts about art and history,[12] he began studying philosophy in 1893. Croce also purchased the house in which Vico had lived. His friend, the philosopherGiovanni Gentile, encouraged him to readHegel. Croce's famous commentary on Hegel,What is Living and What is Dead of the Philosophy of Hegel, was published in 1907.
As his fame increased, Croce was persuaded, against his initial wishes,[verification needed] to become involved in politics. In 1910, he was appointed to the Italian Senate, a lifelong position (Ryn, 2000:xi).[11] He was an open critic of Italy's participation inWorld War I, feeling that it was a suicidal trade war. Although this made him initially unpopular, his reputation was restored after the war. In 1919, he supported the government ofFrancesco Saverio Nitti while also expressing his admiration for the nascentWeimar Republic and theSocial Democratic Party of Germany.[13] He was Minister of Public Education between 1920 and 1921 for the 5th and last government headed byGiovanni Giolitti.Benito Mussolini assumed power slightly more than a year after Croce's exit from the government; Mussolini's first Minister of Public Education was Giovanni Gentile, an independent who later became a fascist and with whom Croce had earlier cooperated in a philosophicalpolemic againstpositivism. Gentile remained minister for only a year but managed to begin a comprehensivereform of Italian education that was based partly on Croce's earlier suggestions. Gentile's reform remained in force well beyond the Fascist regime and was only partly abolished in 1962.
Croce initially supported Mussolini'sItalian fascism government that took power in 1922.[14] The assassination by theNational Fascist Party andBlackshirts of thesocialist politicianGiacomo Matteotti in June 1924 shook Croce's support for Mussolini. In May 1925, Croce was one of the signatories to theManifesto of the Anti-Fascist Intellectuals which had been written by Croce himself; however, in June 1924, he had voted in the Senate in support of the Mussolini government. He later explained that he had hoped that the support for Mussolini in parliament would weaken the more extreme Fascists who, he believed, were responsible for Matteotti's murder.[citation needed] Croce later became one of the firmest opponents of fascism.[15]
In 1928, Croce voted against the law which effectively abolished free elections in Italy by requiring electors to vote for a list of candidates approved by the Grand Council of Fascism.[16] He became increasingly dismayed by the number of ex-democrats who had abandoned their former principles.[16] Croce frequently provided financial assistance toanti-fascist writers and dissidents, such asGiorgio Amendola,Ivanoe Bonomi, andMeuccio Ruini, as well as those who wanted to maintain intellectual and political independence from the regime, and covertly helped them get published.[16] Croce's house in Turin became a popular destination for anti-fascists. After the war, Amendola, along withcommunists like Eugenio Reale reflected that Croce offered aid and encouragement to bothliberal andMarxist resistance members during the crucial years.[16]
Croce was seriously threatened by Mussolini's regime, and suffered the only act of physical violence at the hands of the fascists in November 1926, when fascists ransacked his home and library in Naples.[17] Although he managed to stay outside prison thanks to his reputation, he remained subject to surveillance, and his academic work was kept in obscurity by the government, to the extent that no mainstream newspaper or academic publication ever referred to him. Croce later coined the termonagrocrazia (literally "government by asses") to emphasize the anti-intellectual and boorish tendencies of parts of the Fascist regime.[18] However, in describing Fascism as anti-intellectual Croce ignored the many Italian intellectuals who at the time actively supported Mussolini's regime, including Croce's former friend and colleague, Gentile. Croce also described Fascism asmalattia morale (literally "moral illness"). When Mussolini's government adoptedantisemitic policies in 1938, Croce was the only non-Jewish intellectual who refused to complete a government questionnaire designed to collect information on the so-called "racial background" of Italian intellectuals.[19][20][21][22] Besides writing in his periodical, Croce used other means to express hisanti-racism and to make public statements against the persecution of the Jews.[23]
Brief government stints and constitutional referendum
Croce voted for the Monarchy in the1946 Italian constitutional referendum, after having persuaded his Liberal Party to adopt a neutral stance. He was elected to theConstituent Assembly which existed in Italy between June 1946 and January 1948. He spoke in the Assembly against thePeace treaty (signed in February 1947), which he regarded as humiliating for Italy. He declined to stand as provisionalPresident of Italy.
Croce's most interesting philosophical ideas are expounded in three works:Aesthetic (1902),Logic (1908), andPhilosophy of the Practical (1908), but his complete work is spread over 80 books and 40 years worth of publications in his own bi-monthly literary magazine,La Critica (Ryn, 2000:xi[11]) Croce was philosophically apantheist, but, from a religious point of view, anagnostic;[24] however, he published an essay entitled "Why We Cannot Help Calling Ourselves Christians". This essay shows the Christian roots of European culture, but religion is considered by Croce a merepropaedeutic study for philosophy, which is the only true science: philosophy is, in fact, the science of spirit (the "Philosophy of Spirit").
Heavily influenced byHegel and other German Idealists such asSchelling, Croce produced what was called, by him, the Philosophy of Spirit. His preferred designations were "absolute idealism" or "absolute historicism". Croce's work can be seen as a second attempt (contraKant) to resolve the problems and conflicts betweenempiricism andrationalism (or sensationalism and transcendentalism, respectively). He calls his wayimmanentism, and concentrates on the lived human experience, as it happens in specific places and times. Since the root of reality is this immanent existence in concrete experience, Croce placesaesthetics at the foundation of his philosophy.
Croce's methodological approach to philosophy is expressed in his divisions of the spirit, or mind. He divides mental activity first into the theoretical, and then the practical. The theoretical division splits between aesthetics and logic. This theoretical aesthetic includes most importantly: intuitions and history. The logical includes concepts and relations. Practical spirit is concerned with economics and ethics. Economics is here to be understood as an exhaustive term for all utilitarian matters.
Each of these divisions has an underlying structure that colours, or dictates, the sort of thinking that goes on within them. While aesthetics are driven by beauty, logic is subject to truth, economics is concerned with what is useful, and the moral, or ethics, is bound to the good. This schema is descriptive in that it attempts to elucidate the logic of human thought; however, it is prescriptive as well, in that these ideas form the basis for epistemological claims and confidence.
Croce also had great esteem forVico and shared his opinion that history should be written by philosophers. Croce'sOn History sets forth the view of history as "philosophy in motion", that there is no "cosmic design" or ultimate plan in history, and that the "science of history" was a farce.
Croce's workBreviario di estetica (The Essence of Aesthetics) appears in the form of four lessons (quattro lezioni) inaesthetics that he was asked to write and deliver at the inauguration ofRice University in 1912. He declined an invitation to attend the event, but he wrote the lessons and submitted them for translation so that they could be read in his absence.
In this brief, but dense, work, Croce sets forth his theory of art. He believed that art is more important than science or metaphysics since only art edifies us. He claimed that all we know can be reduced to imaginative knowledge. Art springs from the latter, making it at its heart, pure imagery. All thought is based in part on this, and it precedes all other thought. The task of an artist is then to invent the perfect image that they can produce for their viewer since this is what beauty fundamentally is – the formation of inward, mental images in their ideal state. Our intuition is the basis for forming these concepts within us.
Croce was the first to develop a position later known asaesthetic expressivism,[25] the idea that art expresses emotions, not ideas.[26] (R. G. Collingwood later developed a similar thesis.)[25]
Croce's theory was later debated by such contemporary Italian philosophers asUmberto Eco, who locates the aesthetic within a semiotic construction.[27]
Croce's liberalism differs from the theories advocated by most proponents of liberal political thought, including those in Britain and the United States. While Croce theorises that the individual is the basis of society, he rejectssocial atomism. While Croce acceptslimited government, he disputes the idea that the government should have fixed legitimate powers. Croce did not agree withJohn Locke about the nature of liberty. Croce believed that liberty is not anatural right but an earned right that arises out of the continuing historical struggle for its maintenance. Croce defined civilization as the "continual vigilance" against barbarism, and liberty conformed to his ideal for civilization as it allows one to experience the full potential of life. Croce also rejectsegalitarianism as absurd. In short, his variety of liberalism isaristocratic, as he views society as being led by the few who can create the goodness of truth, civilization, and beauty, with the great mass of citizens, simply benefiting from them but unable to fully comprehend their creations (Ryn, 2000:xii).[11]
InEtica e politica (1931), Croce defines liberalism as an ethical conception of life that rejects dogmatism and favours diversity, and in the name of liberty and free choice of the individual, is hostile to the authoritarianism of fascism, communism, and the Catholic Church.[16] While Croce realizes that democracy can sometimes threaten individual liberty, he sees liberalism and democracy as predicated on the same ideals of moral equality and opposition to authority.[16] Furthermore, he acknowledged the positive historical role played by the Socialist parties in Italy in their struggles to improve conditions for the working class, and urged modern socialists to swear off dictatorial solutions.[16] In contrast to the socialists, who Croce viewed as part of modernity along with liberals, his condemnation of reactionaries is unremittingly harsh.[16]
Croce draws a distinction between liberalism and capitalism orlaissez-faire economic doctrines.[16] For Croce, capitalism only emerged to meet certain economic needs of society, and could be changed or even replaced if better solutions to those needs were found, if it failed to promote freedom, or if economic values clashed with higher values.[16] Thus liberalism could welcome socialistic proposals so long as they promoted freedom.[16] Croce's ideas on the separation between liberalism as an ethical principle and the contingentlaissez-faire economic doctrines which accompanied it in certain contexts would influence Italian social democrats such asLeo Valiani andGiuseppe Saragat as well as theliberal socialist synthesis ofCarlo Rosselli.[16]
^abcdefghijklRizi, Fabio Fernando (2003).Benedetto Croce and Italian Fascism. University of Toronto Press. pp. 124–139.
^See the detailed description in a letter by Fausto Nicolini to Giovanni Gentile published inSasso, Gennaro (1989).Per invigilare me stesso. Bologna: Il mulino. pp. 139–40.
^It is a disdainful term for misgovernment, a late and satirical addition toAristotle's famous three:tyranny,oligarchy, and democracy.
^Chiarini, Roberto (2008).L'intellettuale antisemita (in Italian). Marsilio. p. 94.ISBN978-88-317-9635-4.BENEDETTO CROCE. Il filosofo napoletano fu l'unico grande intellettuale a prendere pubblicamente posizione in Italia contro le concezioni razziste e contro le persecuzioni antiebraiche attuate dal nazismo e dal fascismo, in scritti e interventi pubblicati sulla sua rivista « La Critica » e su organi di stampa stranieri.
^La Critica. Rivista di Letteratura, Storia e Filosofia diretta da B. Croce, 1, 1903 p. 372
^abBerys Gaut and Dominic McIver Lopes,The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics, Routledge, 2002, ch. 11: "Expressivism: Croce and Collingwood."
^Benedetto Croce,Breviario di estetica, 1912: "Not the idea, but the feeling, is what confers upon art the airy lightness of a symbol: an aspiration enclosed in the circle of a representation—that is art." [Non l'idea, ma il sentimento è quel che conferisce all'arte l'aerea leggerezza del simbolo: un'aspirazione chiusa nel giro di una rappresentazione, ecco l'arte.]
^Umberto Eco,A Theory of Semiotics (Indiana University Press, 1976).
Alfredo Parente,Il pensiero politico di Benedetto Croce e il nuovo liberalismo (1944).
Hayden White, "The Abiding Relevance of Croce's Idea of History." The Journal of Modern History, vol. XXXV, no 2, June 1963, pp. 109–124.
Hayden White, "The Question of Narrative in Contemporary Historical Theory", History and Theory, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Feb. 1984), pp. 1–33.
Myra E. Moss,Benedetto Croce reconsidered: Truth and Error in Theories of Art, Literature, and History, Hanover, NH: UP of New England, 1987.
Ernesto Paolozzi,Science and Philosophy in Benedetto Croce, in "Rivista di Studi Italiani", University of Toronto, 2002.
Janos Keleman,A Paradoxical Truth. Croce's Thesis of Contemporary History, in "Rivista di Studi Italiani, University of Toronto, 2002.
Giuseppe Gembillo,Croce and the Theorists of Complexity, in "Rivista di Studi Italiani, University of Toronto, 2002.
Fabio Fernando Rizi,Benedetto Croce and Italian Fascism, University of Toronto Press, 2003.ISBN978-0-8020-3762-6.
Ernesto Paolozzi,Benedetto Croce, Cassitto, Naples, 1998 (translated by M. Verdicchio (2008) www.ernestopaolozzi.it)
Carlo Schirru, Per un’analisi interlinguistica d’epoca: Grazia Deledda e contemporanei, Rivista Italiana di Linguistica e di Dialettologia, Fabrizio Serra editore, Pisa–Roma, Anno XI, 2009, pp. 9–32
David D. Roberts,Benedetto Croce and the Uses of Historicism. Berkeley: U of California Press, (1987).
Claes G. Ryn,Will, Imagination and Reason: Babbitt, Croce and the Problem of Reality (1997; 1986).
R. G. Collingwood,"Croce's Philosophy of History" inThe Hibbert Journal, XIX: 263–278 (1921), collected in Collingwood,Essays in the Philosophy of History, ed. William Debbins (University of Texas 1965) at 3–22.
Roberts, Jeremy,Benito Mussolini, Twenty-First Century Books, 2005.ISBN978-0-8225-2648-3.
