What do you think?
Rate this book
Sammlung Göschen
Man in the Modern Age
First published in English in 1933, this detailed philosophical examination of the contemporary state and nature of mankind is a seminal work by influential German philosopher Karl Jaspers. Elucidating his theories on a variety of topics pertaining to contemporary and future human existence, Man in the Modern Age is an ambitious and wide-ranging work, which meditates upon such diverse subjects as the tension between mass-order and individual human life, our present conception of human life and the potential for mankind’s future existence. Written shortly before the accession to power of Hitler and National Socialism, this is not only an important philosophical work, but also an insightful and intriguing historical document.
230 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1931
18 people are currently reading
556 people want to read
About the author
Karl Jaspers
422 books364 followersJaspers was born in Oldenburg in 1883 to a mother from a local farming community, and a jurist father. He showed an early interest in philosophy, but his father's experience with the legal system undoubtedly influenced his decision to study law at university. It soon became clear that Jaspers did not particularly enjoy law, and he switched to studying medicine in 1902.
Jaspers graduated from medical school in 1909 and began work at a psychiatric hospital in Heidelberg where Emil Kraepelin had worked some years earlier. Jaspers became dissatisfied with the way the medical community of the time approached the study of mental illness and set himself the task of improving the psychiatric approach. In 1913 Jaspers gained a temporary post as a psychology teacher at Heidelberg University. The post later became permanent, and Jaspers never returned to clinical practice.
At the age of 40 Jaspers turned from psychology to philosophy, expanding on themes he had developed in his psychiatric works. He became a renowned philosopher, well respected in Germany and Europe. In 1948 Jaspers moved to the University of Basel in Switzerland. He remained prominent in the philosophical community until his death in Basel in 1969.
Jaspers' dissatisfaction with the popular understanding of mental illness led him to question both the diagnostic criteria and the methods of clinical psychiatry. He published a revolutionary paper in 1910 in which he addressed the problem of whether paranoia was an aspect of personality or the result of biological changes. Whilst not broaching new ideas, this article introduced a new method of study. Jaspers studied several patients in detail, giving biographical information on the people concerned as well as providing notes on how the patients themselves felt about their symptoms. This has become known as the biographical method and now forms the mainstay of modern psychiatric practice.
Jaspers set about writing his views on mental illness in a book which he published in 1913 as General Psychopathology. The two volumes which make up this work have become a classic in the psychiatric literature and many modern diagnostic criteria stem from ideas contained within them. Of particular importance, Jaspers believed that psychiatrists should diagnose symptoms (particularly of psychosis) by their form rather than by their content. For example, in diagnosing a hallucination, the fact that a person experiences visual phenomena when no sensory stimuli account for it (form) assumes more importance than what the patient sees (content).
Jaspers felt that psychiatrists could also diagnose delusions in the same way. He argued that clinicians should not consider a belief delusional based on the content of the belief, but only based on the way in which a patient holds such a belief (see delusion for further discussion). Jaspers also distinguished between primary and secondary delusions. He defined primary delusions as autochthonous meaning arising without apparent cause, appearing incomprehensible in terms of normal mental processes. (This is a distinctly different use of the term autochthonous than its usual medical or sociological meaning of indigenous.) Secondary delusions, on the other hand, he classified as influenced by the person's background, current situation or mental state.
Jaspers considered primary delusions as ultimately 'un-understandable,' as he believed no coherent reasoning process existed behind their formation. This view has caused some controversy, and the likes of R. D. Laing and Richard Bentall have criticised it, stressing that taking this stance can lead therapists into the complacency of assuming that because they do not understand a patient, the patient is deluded and further investigation on the part of the therapist will have no effect.
Most commentators associate Jaspers with the philosophy of existentialism, in part because he draws largely upon the existentialist roots of Nietzsche and Kierk
Jaspers graduated from medical school in 1909 and began work at a psychiatric hospital in Heidelberg where Emil Kraepelin had worked some years earlier. Jaspers became dissatisfied with the way the medical community of the time approached the study of mental illness and set himself the task of improving the psychiatric approach. In 1913 Jaspers gained a temporary post as a psychology teacher at Heidelberg University. The post later became permanent, and Jaspers never returned to clinical practice.
At the age of 40 Jaspers turned from psychology to philosophy, expanding on themes he had developed in his psychiatric works. He became a renowned philosopher, well respected in Germany and Europe. In 1948 Jaspers moved to the University of Basel in Switzerland. He remained prominent in the philosophical community until his death in Basel in 1969.
Jaspers' dissatisfaction with the popular understanding of mental illness led him to question both the diagnostic criteria and the methods of clinical psychiatry. He published a revolutionary paper in 1910 in which he addressed the problem of whether paranoia was an aspect of personality or the result of biological changes. Whilst not broaching new ideas, this article introduced a new method of study. Jaspers studied several patients in detail, giving biographical information on the people concerned as well as providing notes on how the patients themselves felt about their symptoms. This has become known as the biographical method and now forms the mainstay of modern psychiatric practice.
Jaspers set about writing his views on mental illness in a book which he published in 1913 as General Psychopathology. The two volumes which make up this work have become a classic in the psychiatric literature and many modern diagnostic criteria stem from ideas contained within them. Of particular importance, Jaspers believed that psychiatrists should diagnose symptoms (particularly of psychosis) by their form rather than by their content. For example, in diagnosing a hallucination, the fact that a person experiences visual phenomena when no sensory stimuli account for it (form) assumes more importance than what the patient sees (content).
Jaspers felt that psychiatrists could also diagnose delusions in the same way. He argued that clinicians should not consider a belief delusional based on the content of the belief, but only based on the way in which a patient holds such a belief (see delusion for further discussion). Jaspers also distinguished between primary and secondary delusions. He defined primary delusions as autochthonous meaning arising without apparent cause, appearing incomprehensible in terms of normal mental processes. (This is a distinctly different use of the term autochthonous than its usual medical or sociological meaning of indigenous.) Secondary delusions, on the other hand, he classified as influenced by the person's background, current situation or mental state.
Jaspers considered primary delusions as ultimately 'un-understandable,' as he believed no coherent reasoning process existed behind their formation. This view has caused some controversy, and the likes of R. D. Laing and Richard Bentall have criticised it, stressing that taking this stance can lead therapists into the complacency of assuming that because they do not understand a patient, the patient is deluded and further investigation on the part of the therapist will have no effect.
Most commentators associate Jaspers with the philosophy of existentialism, in part because he draws largely upon the existentialist roots of Nietzsche and Kierk
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
April 19, 2016
Written in 1930, MIMA feels eerily prescient of the present era. Two concerns run through the text. First: humanity, in a spiritual vacuum, is faced with the dreadful specter of Nothingness as never before, and we are consequently in a state of anxiety, despair, and aimlessness. Second, mass society has brought us to a sterile, mechanized, positivist condition that sucks out our spirit, creativity, and individuality, and reduces us to mere cogs in a grand social machine Jaspers likes to call “The Apparatus.”
As a consequence of these two trends, Jaspers notes that culture and all of our social institutions have suffered greatly. We are in the midst of a society-wide breakdown, he observes, because of the impossible paradox of civilization: we rely on the techno-society that is at the same time tearing our soul to shreds. Jaspers ends hoping for a rebirth from the ashes of our decayed culture, but he cannot be sure what lies in store for the age of mass man.
This is one of the most stimulating and insightful books I’ve read on the state of the modern world. With touches of Existentialist and early Postmodern thought, Jaspers had a pulse on the evolving project of humanity, and the trends he observed have only intensified today. I’m optimistic that we will find a new center to ground us down the line, but it may take decades or centuries more and a great deal of strife before a new balance emerges.
As a consequence of these two trends, Jaspers notes that culture and all of our social institutions have suffered greatly. We are in the midst of a society-wide breakdown, he observes, because of the impossible paradox of civilization: we rely on the techno-society that is at the same time tearing our soul to shreds. Jaspers ends hoping for a rebirth from the ashes of our decayed culture, but he cannot be sure what lies in store for the age of mass man.
This is one of the most stimulating and insightful books I’ve read on the state of the modern world. With touches of Existentialist and early Postmodern thought, Jaspers had a pulse on the evolving project of humanity, and the trends he observed have only intensified today. I’m optimistic that we will find a new center to ground us down the line, but it may take decades or centuries more and a great deal of strife before a new balance emerges.
June 12, 2021
How rare it is to encounter someone who can take a step back and contemplate the role of Christianity in time. Jaspers sees Christianity as the birth of a unique ideal that has arisen out of the womb of history and manifested remarkably in human existence. Inherent in this ideal is the belief for the possibility of attaining a heaven-like utopia, essentially a society existing in a state of perfection.
Perhaps the first demonstration reflecting metamorphoses of this society was the French Revolution, which might be viewed as one of the first deliberate attempts to radically transform a human civilization. The French Revolution was much more than just a political revolt, it was a revolt against the prevailing state of the inner man. But how does such an underlying desire to set men free so quickly turn into a terror of destruction, binding men even more?
As the student of history is aware, the nascent awareness birthed in the French Revolution is potently sustained in the historical consciousness. The subsequent rise of the communists in Russia, the solidification of democracy in the U.S., and the slow transitions of power to parliamentary forms throughout Europe, all seem to spin out of the horror of the French Revolution. And yet, subsequent conflicts spurred by these social deviations contributed to horrible wars and destruction. Just as the French Revolution spurred destruction in the rampant escapades of Napoleon, it similarly fueled underlying sentiments for subsequent wars of even greater proportions. Even today, this dichotomy between the masses and the elite continues to fuel social upheaval.
What is it about the persistent desire for liberty that can lead men into such immoral frenzies of horror? Perhaps it is the fear or realization that the degree of love necessary to create and sustain that perfect society will be forever elusive? Do men become so distraught over their inability to sustain social love that they revert to violence in spite? Certainly this is a legitimate question that our religions have failed to sufficiently contemplate. Like a child that pouts, cries, and throws its toys; so grown men perform crimes, conduct wars, and sponsor genocide.
And yet, the question persists: will the sins of mankind ever work themselves out into an amicable solution, or will sin be forever sustained in regurgitated social horrors? And are men ever right to simply “give up” the idea of ascendancy and declare themselves inherently sinful, as certain religions proclaim? Do we really want to educate our posterity into believing they are predestined to an inescapable future of sinfulness, from which they can never willfully escape? Do we simply accept this as an inextricable void within ourselves?
The prevailing attitude that every man is inherently sinful grants every man an excuse for periodic backward descents into animality. Is there not a higher calling? Did Jesus not say: “Go forth and sin no more”? Instead of passively accepting the persistent horrors we make for ourselves, we should be fervently seeking an inoculation against sin.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer referred to the religious excuse for repetitive sin as “cheap grace”. The Christian religion offers more than cheap grace; it offers a way forward in the combat against animal instincts. But this way is not the apocalyptic ideas promulgated by fundamentalists. Instead of proclaiming an end time, we must contemplate a beginning. Instead of a pessimistic outlook, we must embrace optimism. In order to defeat sin, we must “believe” that it can be defeated. We must focus upon what we are “becoming” as opposed to what we are.
Effort is empowered within belief for success. A time must arise in history when the masses become intrigued by something greater than mere consumption. A time must arise when the masses see their lives as something beyond the magnitude of the extent of goods and services they can command unto themselves. The masses must become aware of themselves as humans who are “becoming” something that is beyond their present selves. The masses must gain sufficient consciousness to understand their conflict does not lay with those who possess more than they; but rather, within themselves. Grasping a situation is the first step toward its solution. So long as only a few among us rise to awareness, social progress will continue to be elusive. The traditional substitute for the absence of mass awareness is indoctrination, particularly via media, but this will never suffice.
One must exercise the personal faculties of the self, as a human, in order to modify the circumstances of ones being. This word, “exercise”, implies committed exertion to achieve something beneficial. It applies not only to physical exercise, but also to the exercise of mental processes, which include the dismissal of that which belittles us, the willful refraining from actions that we despise, and a rising to higher spiritual consciousness. Exercise is effort exerted by an active insurgent, willfully rebelling against sinful situations, and refusing to dismiss sin under a cloud of cheap grace. Exercise involves terminating the ingrained process of suppressing everything distasteful, by storing it away in the personal unconsciousness, and instead seeking to deal with it in open, conscious awareness. Instead of hiding behind a pathetic excuse of cheap grace, we seek to defeat our ineptitudes within a community that values progress over harsh judgement.
And yet, the situation of the masses is that the great majority remain incapable or resistant to this process, particularly to the process of seeking out and imbibing greater knowledge. We prefer our mind numbing comforts: to be passively entertained by frivolous television shows while sunk within our recliner, stuffing our guts long after obtaining adequate nutrition, jettisoning our self esteem in bouts of pornography, destroying our lucidity with alcohol or drugs, neglecting those around us, allowing our lives to waste away in an embodiment of one who only consumes.
At present, it is only the few who are intrigued enough by personal growth to refute the cycles of slothfulness; and it is for this reason that no such thing as a homogeneous situation for all human beings can presently exist. There are far two few enlightened individuals to bring the kingdom of utopia forth. The individual is but a link in the chain, one point in the essence of history, one minor component of the sociological situation. It takes many links to create a chain sufficient to represent the vast totality. It is clear that historical religions have failed in this regard, as they have been given hundreds of years, and only produced wars and upheavals.
It is past the time for religion to evolve into an institution that brings awareness broadly to the masses, motivating them to strive towards an understanding of the present time and its situations. We desperately need a religion that invokes a revolution, not against one another, but against the slothfulness of mankind. We need a religion that abandons the practice of immersing its adherents in ancient stories and instead encourages them to understand the present time and to become active within it. It is time to abandon the traditional eschatological notions in favor of more optimistic ones. Instead of condemning the masses to hellfire, we must motivate them towards self actualization.
Religion must become concerned with the personal development of its adherents in the present time so that the reality of a heavenly future may indeed descend upon us. And indeed, the future does inevitably descend upon us, arriving into our present existence before we know it, coming like a thief in the night.
-End-
Perhaps the first demonstration reflecting metamorphoses of this society was the French Revolution, which might be viewed as one of the first deliberate attempts to radically transform a human civilization. The French Revolution was much more than just a political revolt, it was a revolt against the prevailing state of the inner man. But how does such an underlying desire to set men free so quickly turn into a terror of destruction, binding men even more?
As the student of history is aware, the nascent awareness birthed in the French Revolution is potently sustained in the historical consciousness. The subsequent rise of the communists in Russia, the solidification of democracy in the U.S., and the slow transitions of power to parliamentary forms throughout Europe, all seem to spin out of the horror of the French Revolution. And yet, subsequent conflicts spurred by these social deviations contributed to horrible wars and destruction. Just as the French Revolution spurred destruction in the rampant escapades of Napoleon, it similarly fueled underlying sentiments for subsequent wars of even greater proportions. Even today, this dichotomy between the masses and the elite continues to fuel social upheaval.
What is it about the persistent desire for liberty that can lead men into such immoral frenzies of horror? Perhaps it is the fear or realization that the degree of love necessary to create and sustain that perfect society will be forever elusive? Do men become so distraught over their inability to sustain social love that they revert to violence in spite? Certainly this is a legitimate question that our religions have failed to sufficiently contemplate. Like a child that pouts, cries, and throws its toys; so grown men perform crimes, conduct wars, and sponsor genocide.
And yet, the question persists: will the sins of mankind ever work themselves out into an amicable solution, or will sin be forever sustained in regurgitated social horrors? And are men ever right to simply “give up” the idea of ascendancy and declare themselves inherently sinful, as certain religions proclaim? Do we really want to educate our posterity into believing they are predestined to an inescapable future of sinfulness, from which they can never willfully escape? Do we simply accept this as an inextricable void within ourselves?
The prevailing attitude that every man is inherently sinful grants every man an excuse for periodic backward descents into animality. Is there not a higher calling? Did Jesus not say: “Go forth and sin no more”? Instead of passively accepting the persistent horrors we make for ourselves, we should be fervently seeking an inoculation against sin.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer referred to the religious excuse for repetitive sin as “cheap grace”. The Christian religion offers more than cheap grace; it offers a way forward in the combat against animal instincts. But this way is not the apocalyptic ideas promulgated by fundamentalists. Instead of proclaiming an end time, we must contemplate a beginning. Instead of a pessimistic outlook, we must embrace optimism. In order to defeat sin, we must “believe” that it can be defeated. We must focus upon what we are “becoming” as opposed to what we are.
Effort is empowered within belief for success. A time must arise in history when the masses become intrigued by something greater than mere consumption. A time must arise when the masses see their lives as something beyond the magnitude of the extent of goods and services they can command unto themselves. The masses must become aware of themselves as humans who are “becoming” something that is beyond their present selves. The masses must gain sufficient consciousness to understand their conflict does not lay with those who possess more than they; but rather, within themselves. Grasping a situation is the first step toward its solution. So long as only a few among us rise to awareness, social progress will continue to be elusive. The traditional substitute for the absence of mass awareness is indoctrination, particularly via media, but this will never suffice.
One must exercise the personal faculties of the self, as a human, in order to modify the circumstances of ones being. This word, “exercise”, implies committed exertion to achieve something beneficial. It applies not only to physical exercise, but also to the exercise of mental processes, which include the dismissal of that which belittles us, the willful refraining from actions that we despise, and a rising to higher spiritual consciousness. Exercise is effort exerted by an active insurgent, willfully rebelling against sinful situations, and refusing to dismiss sin under a cloud of cheap grace. Exercise involves terminating the ingrained process of suppressing everything distasteful, by storing it away in the personal unconsciousness, and instead seeking to deal with it in open, conscious awareness. Instead of hiding behind a pathetic excuse of cheap grace, we seek to defeat our ineptitudes within a community that values progress over harsh judgement.
And yet, the situation of the masses is that the great majority remain incapable or resistant to this process, particularly to the process of seeking out and imbibing greater knowledge. We prefer our mind numbing comforts: to be passively entertained by frivolous television shows while sunk within our recliner, stuffing our guts long after obtaining adequate nutrition, jettisoning our self esteem in bouts of pornography, destroying our lucidity with alcohol or drugs, neglecting those around us, allowing our lives to waste away in an embodiment of one who only consumes.
At present, it is only the few who are intrigued enough by personal growth to refute the cycles of slothfulness; and it is for this reason that no such thing as a homogeneous situation for all human beings can presently exist. There are far two few enlightened individuals to bring the kingdom of utopia forth. The individual is but a link in the chain, one point in the essence of history, one minor component of the sociological situation. It takes many links to create a chain sufficient to represent the vast totality. It is clear that historical religions have failed in this regard, as they have been given hundreds of years, and only produced wars and upheavals.
It is past the time for religion to evolve into an institution that brings awareness broadly to the masses, motivating them to strive towards an understanding of the present time and its situations. We desperately need a religion that invokes a revolution, not against one another, but against the slothfulness of mankind. We need a religion that abandons the practice of immersing its adherents in ancient stories and instead encourages them to understand the present time and to become active within it. It is time to abandon the traditional eschatological notions in favor of more optimistic ones. Instead of condemning the masses to hellfire, we must motivate them towards self actualization.
Religion must become concerned with the personal development of its adherents in the present time so that the reality of a heavenly future may indeed descend upon us. And indeed, the future does inevitably descend upon us, arriving into our present existence before we know it, coming like a thief in the night.
-End-
July 24, 2023
Written in the early 1930s by the German-Swiss psychiatrist-philosopher, Karl Jaspers, Man in the Modern Age is notable as a piece of existentialist philosophy, and as a time-capsule of late Weimar Germany. As a psychiatrist and a philosopher, Jaspers occupied a unique dual-status position, which made him intimately familiar with the collective neuroses and shared cultural anxieties of his day. The text has a wonderful sense of historical immanence as a result.
Jaspers, who was somewhat unwittingly standing on the precipice of great disaster, identifies a series of maladies characterizing the modern man. Drawing inspiration primarily from Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, he offers his own kind of aspirational psychology – what he refers to as “existence-philosophy” – as one potential solution to the problems which man faces in a progressively dehumanizing, ultra-mechanized, and positivistic society. An obsession with technique and efficiency, he argues, is displacing man’s sense of selfhood and history – his two most authentic modes of being-in-the-world.
Curiously, Jaspers’ philosophic scaffolding bears a marked resemblance to that of another contemporary thinker, Martin Heidegger. Yet, throughout the Second World War, their paths couldn’t have been more divergent. While Heidegger went on to become one of the star intellectuals of Nazi Germany, Jaspers was persecuted by the regime. Even so, he continued to devote his life and work to challenging totalitarian, anti-humanist thinking, with his “existence-philosophy” forming the basis of this project.
It’s unfortunate, then, that history has mostly overlooked Jaspers’ contributions to philosophy, whereas Heidegger has enjoyed a comparably privileged position, despite being a terrible person and a far less elegant writer. But I suppose that, in the battlefield of warring ideas, history doesn’t always favour the winner. Hopefully a corrective is in order.
Jaspers, who was somewhat unwittingly standing on the precipice of great disaster, identifies a series of maladies characterizing the modern man. Drawing inspiration primarily from Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, he offers his own kind of aspirational psychology – what he refers to as “existence-philosophy” – as one potential solution to the problems which man faces in a progressively dehumanizing, ultra-mechanized, and positivistic society. An obsession with technique and efficiency, he argues, is displacing man’s sense of selfhood and history – his two most authentic modes of being-in-the-world.
Curiously, Jaspers’ philosophic scaffolding bears a marked resemblance to that of another contemporary thinker, Martin Heidegger. Yet, throughout the Second World War, their paths couldn’t have been more divergent. While Heidegger went on to become one of the star intellectuals of Nazi Germany, Jaspers was persecuted by the regime. Even so, he continued to devote his life and work to challenging totalitarian, anti-humanist thinking, with his “existence-philosophy” forming the basis of this project.
It’s unfortunate, then, that history has mostly overlooked Jaspers’ contributions to philosophy, whereas Heidegger has enjoyed a comparably privileged position, despite being a terrible person and a far less elegant writer. But I suppose that, in the battlefield of warring ideas, history doesn’t always favour the winner. Hopefully a corrective is in order.
July 26, 2022
Argues for the development of a true a self contingent on interfacing—between the individual and the masses (skirting the edge so one is neither subsumed nor lost), between the historical self and the aspirational self, between the possible and the necessary. It's ultimately an argument to neither sacrifice one's soul to the social apparatus, to be reduced to a cog and lose contact with one's own being, nor to succumb to self-limitation in the realm of the possible, which cannot be fully known. This requires both faith as well as "active forecasting," which is what has more recently come to be known as hyperstition—understanding that one's predictions for the future are a factor in how the future unfolds. The book starts from a place of rationale critique and goes into a kind of Heideggerian abstraction, championing an almost mystic vision premised on the limits of the rational mind, and then delving into a kind of New Thought ethos, a power of attraction based on a good faith mindset.
July 11, 2016
Hard going and less compelling than I had anticipated. That I put it down in 2012 and didn't remember to pick it up again until four years later tells its own story.
Explores some of the same territory as Erich Fromm and Ernest Becker - what do we do in a mechanised, bureaucratised, despiritualised world, but the writing is drier and, for me, less urgent.
Explores some of the same territory as Erich Fromm and Ernest Becker - what do we do in a mechanised, bureaucratised, despiritualised world, but the writing is drier and, for me, less urgent.
February 8, 2025
Beyond question there is a widespread conviction that human activities are unavailing; everything has become questionable; nothing in human life holds good; that existence is no more than an unceasing maelstrom of reciprocal deception and self-deception by ideologies. 21
We find in Western man a firm conviction that the world is a tangible reality in time, this conviction being contraposed to the "in" of the East, which is the outcome of a sentiment that not-being is perhaps the essential reality of what presents itself to us as being. 22
Robbers abound... No one ploughs the land. People are saying: "We do not know what will happen from day to day." Dirt prevails everywhere, and no longer does anyone wear clean raiment... The country is spinning round and round like a potter's wheel... Slave women are wearing necklaces of gold and lapis lazuli... No more do we hear any one laugh... Great men and small agree in saying: "Would that I had never been born." ... Well-to-do persons are set to turn millstones... Ladies have to demean themselves to the tasks of serving-women... People are so famished that they snatch what falls from the mouths of swine... The offices where records are kept have been broken into and plundered... and the documents of the scribes have been destroyed... Moreover, certain foolish persons have bereft the country of the monarchy;... the officials have been driven hither and thither... no public office stands open where it should, and the masses are like timid sheep without a shepherd... Artists have ceased to apply their art... The few slay the many... One who yesterday was indigent is now wealthy, and the sometime rich overwhelm him with adulation... Impudence is rife... Oh that man could cease to be, that women should no longer conceive and give birth. Then, at length, the world would find peace.
Selections from Erman, Die Literature der Aegypten, 1923, pp130-148
Egyptian papyrus from 4000 years ago, 24
For the first time an effective control of nature has begun. If we think of our world as being buried, subsequent excavators would not bring to light any such beautiful objects as those which have come down to us from classical days, whose street pavement, even, is a delight to us. They would, however, discover such vast quantities of iron and concrete as to make it plain that during the last few decades ( as contrasted with all previous ages ) man had begun to enwrap the planet in a mesh of apparatus. 27
We find in Western man a firm conviction that the world is a tangible reality in time, this conviction being contraposed to the "in" of the East, which is the outcome of a sentiment that not-being is perhaps the essential reality of what presents itself to us as being. 22
Robbers abound... No one ploughs the land. People are saying: "We do not know what will happen from day to day." Dirt prevails everywhere, and no longer does anyone wear clean raiment... The country is spinning round and round like a potter's wheel... Slave women are wearing necklaces of gold and lapis lazuli... No more do we hear any one laugh... Great men and small agree in saying: "Would that I had never been born." ... Well-to-do persons are set to turn millstones... Ladies have to demean themselves to the tasks of serving-women... People are so famished that they snatch what falls from the mouths of swine... The offices where records are kept have been broken into and plundered... and the documents of the scribes have been destroyed... Moreover, certain foolish persons have bereft the country of the monarchy;... the officials have been driven hither and thither... no public office stands open where it should, and the masses are like timid sheep without a shepherd... Artists have ceased to apply their art... The few slay the many... One who yesterday was indigent is now wealthy, and the sometime rich overwhelm him with adulation... Impudence is rife... Oh that man could cease to be, that women should no longer conceive and give birth. Then, at length, the world would find peace.
Selections from Erman, Die Literature der Aegypten, 1923, pp130-148
Egyptian papyrus from 4000 years ago, 24
For the first time an effective control of nature has begun. If we think of our world as being buried, subsequent excavators would not bring to light any such beautiful objects as those which have come down to us from classical days, whose street pavement, even, is a delight to us. They would, however, discover such vast quantities of iron and concrete as to make it plain that during the last few decades ( as contrasted with all previous ages ) man had begun to enwrap the planet in a mesh of apparatus. 27
October 14, 2024
JASPERS USES HIS “EXISTENCE-PHILOSOPHY” TO VIEW THE CONTEMPORARY SITUATION
Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) was a German psychiatrist and existentialist philosopher, who wrote many important books such as 'Reason and Existenz,' 'Philosophy of Existence,' 'Way to Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy,' 'Man in the Modern Age,' 'The Future of Mankind,' etc.
He wrote in the Foreword, “This book was written in 1930. At that time I had scarcely any knowledge of National Socialism… I was amazed and shocked when I heard of the first success of the National Socialists in the September elections of 1930. The manuscript was put aside for a year, as I did not wish it to appear before the three volumes of my ‘Philosophy,’ which were published in 1931… To elucidate that period I made use of facts which belong to those particular years, and in many respects the book has the atmosphere of the time. On considering, however… it seemed to me that the book was as valid now as then, in spite of all that has happened since its first appearance.”
He said in the Introduction, “Today… the pride which aims at universal understanding, and the arrogance of one who regards himself as master of the world and therefore wants to mould it to his liking, knock at all doors, while their frustration arouses a feeling of terrible impotence. How man is to accommodate himself to this and rise superior to it, is one of the most vital questions of the present situation. Man not only exists but knows that he exists… Man is mind, and the situation of man is a mental situation. One who wishes to throw light on the present situation must begin by inquiring how it has hitherto been regarded, how it came into being, what in general the situation is, what aspects it displays, how the question as to the nature of man is today answered, and towards what future mankind is moving. The more clearly these questions are answered… the quicker shall we reach the boundaries at which man realizes himself as an individual.” (Pg. 3-4)
He suggests, “The notion that people will generally and for an indefinite period remain content to practice birth control has been too readily adopted; the struggles that have to be faced by an indefinitely-increasing population will be renewed through the working of the will to reproduction, which is stronger in some members of our species than in others. Eugenics will prove unable to hinder the survival of the weakly, and will fail to prevent that racial deterioration which would seem unavoidable amid the conditions of modern civilization---for we have no objective standard of values to guide us in eugenic selection, and the idea of such a standard becomes almost unthinkable in view of the multiplicity of the primitive stocks out of which the human species has sprung.” (Pg. 72-73)
He states, "the State, as a living reality, was the limit at which something which is more than life itself determines life through the will in the whole. Whereas, however, the State is… not supreme for the human being himself. The State does not come to rest in the human being… the State remains nothing more than an intermediate entity in the perpetual movement in time.” (Pg. 122)
He argues, “The situation of philosophy is today characterized by three indefinite realities. First of all, the epoch has produced a vast number of persons devoid of all faith and receiving their stamp exclusively from the apparatus. Secondly religion… would seem to have lost the power of creative expression in conformity with an actual present. In the third place philosophy has, during a whole century, become, it would appear, more and more a mere enterprise of doctrine and history, thus increasingly renouncing its true function.” (Pg. 151)
He says, “Man is always something more than what he knows of himself. He is not what he is simply once for all, but is a process; he is not merely an extant life, but it, within that life, endowed with possibilities through the freedom he possesses to make of himself what he will by the activities on which he decides.” (Pg. 159)
He explains, “Existence-philosophy is the way of thought by means of which man seeks to become himself; it makes use of expert knowledge while at the same time going beyond it. This way of thought… makes actual the being of the thinker… it appeals to its own freedom … and gains space for its own unconditioned activity through conjuring up Transcendence.” (Pg. 175)
He concludes, “The significance of entering into the world constitutes the value of philosophy. True, philosophy is not an instrument, and still less is it a talisman, but it is awareness in the process of realization. Philosophy is the thought with which or as which I am active in my own self.” (Pg. 198)
Not one of Jaspers’ “major works,” it still provides insight into his philosophy (particularly given the historical context in which it was written!).
Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) was a German psychiatrist and existentialist philosopher, who wrote many important books such as 'Reason and Existenz,' 'Philosophy of Existence,' 'Way to Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy,' 'Man in the Modern Age,' 'The Future of Mankind,' etc.
He wrote in the Foreword, “This book was written in 1930. At that time I had scarcely any knowledge of National Socialism… I was amazed and shocked when I heard of the first success of the National Socialists in the September elections of 1930. The manuscript was put aside for a year, as I did not wish it to appear before the three volumes of my ‘Philosophy,’ which were published in 1931… To elucidate that period I made use of facts which belong to those particular years, and in many respects the book has the atmosphere of the time. On considering, however… it seemed to me that the book was as valid now as then, in spite of all that has happened since its first appearance.”
He said in the Introduction, “Today… the pride which aims at universal understanding, and the arrogance of one who regards himself as master of the world and therefore wants to mould it to his liking, knock at all doors, while their frustration arouses a feeling of terrible impotence. How man is to accommodate himself to this and rise superior to it, is one of the most vital questions of the present situation. Man not only exists but knows that he exists… Man is mind, and the situation of man is a mental situation. One who wishes to throw light on the present situation must begin by inquiring how it has hitherto been regarded, how it came into being, what in general the situation is, what aspects it displays, how the question as to the nature of man is today answered, and towards what future mankind is moving. The more clearly these questions are answered… the quicker shall we reach the boundaries at which man realizes himself as an individual.” (Pg. 3-4)
He suggests, “The notion that people will generally and for an indefinite period remain content to practice birth control has been too readily adopted; the struggles that have to be faced by an indefinitely-increasing population will be renewed through the working of the will to reproduction, which is stronger in some members of our species than in others. Eugenics will prove unable to hinder the survival of the weakly, and will fail to prevent that racial deterioration which would seem unavoidable amid the conditions of modern civilization---for we have no objective standard of values to guide us in eugenic selection, and the idea of such a standard becomes almost unthinkable in view of the multiplicity of the primitive stocks out of which the human species has sprung.” (Pg. 72-73)
He states, "the State, as a living reality, was the limit at which something which is more than life itself determines life through the will in the whole. Whereas, however, the State is… not supreme for the human being himself. The State does not come to rest in the human being… the State remains nothing more than an intermediate entity in the perpetual movement in time.” (Pg. 122)
He argues, “The situation of philosophy is today characterized by three indefinite realities. First of all, the epoch has produced a vast number of persons devoid of all faith and receiving their stamp exclusively from the apparatus. Secondly religion… would seem to have lost the power of creative expression in conformity with an actual present. In the third place philosophy has, during a whole century, become, it would appear, more and more a mere enterprise of doctrine and history, thus increasingly renouncing its true function.” (Pg. 151)
He says, “Man is always something more than what he knows of himself. He is not what he is simply once for all, but is a process; he is not merely an extant life, but it, within that life, endowed with possibilities through the freedom he possesses to make of himself what he will by the activities on which he decides.” (Pg. 159)
He explains, “Existence-philosophy is the way of thought by means of which man seeks to become himself; it makes use of expert knowledge while at the same time going beyond it. This way of thought… makes actual the being of the thinker… it appeals to its own freedom … and gains space for its own unconditioned activity through conjuring up Transcendence.” (Pg. 175)
He concludes, “The significance of entering into the world constitutes the value of philosophy. True, philosophy is not an instrument, and still less is it a talisman, but it is awareness in the process of realization. Philosophy is the thought with which or as which I am active in my own self.” (Pg. 198)
Not one of Jaspers’ “major works,” it still provides insight into his philosophy (particularly given the historical context in which it was written!).
December 9, 2024
Could be more modern
June 20, 2023
“Man in the Modern Age" by Karl Jaspers delves into the existential challenges faced by individuals in the modern era, examining the profound shifts in human existence brought about by technological advancements, societal transformations, and the erosion of traditional values. Jaspers explores the impact of these changes on human freedom, identity, and meaning, while reflecting on the possibilities and limitations of authentic human existence. This review aims to provide an academic evaluation of Jaspers' arguments, discussing the book's strengths, weaknesses, and its significance within the fields of existential philosophy, sociology, and cultural studies.
In "Man in the Modern Age," Jaspers delves into the complexities of human existence in the context of the modern world. He analyzes the tension between the increasing interconnectedness and fragmentation of society, examining how these dynamics affect the individual's sense of self and engagement with the world. Jaspers reflects on the challenges of maintaining authenticity, personal freedom, and ethical responsibility in an era marked by rapid change, technological advancements, and the erosion of traditional structures.
One of the notable strengths of Jaspers' work lies in his profound understanding of existential philosophy and his ability to translate complex ideas into accessible language. Jaspers explores the existential dilemmas faced by individuals in the modern age, emphasizing the importance of self-reflection, individual agency, and the pursuit of meaningful engagement with others and the world.
Jaspers' analysis in "Man in the Modern Age" is characterized by its depth and philosophical rigor. He engages with a wide range of philosophical and sociological ideas, drawing upon the works of Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, and Weber, among others, to enrich his exploration of the modern condition. Jaspers' interdisciplinary approach contributes to a nuanced understanding of the existential challenges faced by individuals in the modern era.
Moreover, Jaspers' emphasis on the importance of subjective experience, personal responsibility, and individual freedom resonates with contemporary discussions on the complexities of modern existence. His insights into the potential alienation and fragmentation caused by technological progress and social changes remain highly relevant today.
While "Man in the Modern Age" offers a comprehensive analysis of the existential challenges of the modern era, some critics argue that Jaspers' work could benefit from a more concrete exploration of social and political structures that shape individual experiences. A more explicit examination of power dynamics, structural inequalities, and the interplay between individual agency and societal forces would enhance the book's analytical breadth.
Additionally, scholars contend that Jaspers' analysis could be further enriched by a more diverse and inclusive perspective, incorporating the experiences and voices of marginalized individuals and communities. Expanding the analysis beyond a predominantly Western focus would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the complexities of modern existence.
"Man in the Modern Age" holds significant importance within the fields of existential philosophy, sociology, and cultural studies. Jaspers' exploration of the existential challenges faced by individuals in the modern era prompts critical reflections on the nature of human freedom, identity, and authenticity. The book's enduring significance lies in its ability to stimulate scholarly debates, inspire self-reflection, and encourage a deeper understanding of the complexities of modern existence.
"Man in the Modern Age" by Karl Jaspers offers a profound analysis of the existential challenges faced by individuals in the modern era. Jaspers' depth of thought, philosophical rigor, and interdisciplinary approach contribute to a nuanced understanding of the complexities of human existence in the context of societal and technological transformations. While the book has its limitations, its enduring significance lies in its ability to prompt critical reflections, inform scholarly discussions, and inspire individuals to navigate the existential challenges of the modern age with authenticity and purpose.
GPT
In "Man in the Modern Age," Jaspers delves into the complexities of human existence in the context of the modern world. He analyzes the tension between the increasing interconnectedness and fragmentation of society, examining how these dynamics affect the individual's sense of self and engagement with the world. Jaspers reflects on the challenges of maintaining authenticity, personal freedom, and ethical responsibility in an era marked by rapid change, technological advancements, and the erosion of traditional structures.
One of the notable strengths of Jaspers' work lies in his profound understanding of existential philosophy and his ability to translate complex ideas into accessible language. Jaspers explores the existential dilemmas faced by individuals in the modern age, emphasizing the importance of self-reflection, individual agency, and the pursuit of meaningful engagement with others and the world.
Jaspers' analysis in "Man in the Modern Age" is characterized by its depth and philosophical rigor. He engages with a wide range of philosophical and sociological ideas, drawing upon the works of Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, and Weber, among others, to enrich his exploration of the modern condition. Jaspers' interdisciplinary approach contributes to a nuanced understanding of the existential challenges faced by individuals in the modern era.
Moreover, Jaspers' emphasis on the importance of subjective experience, personal responsibility, and individual freedom resonates with contemporary discussions on the complexities of modern existence. His insights into the potential alienation and fragmentation caused by technological progress and social changes remain highly relevant today.
While "Man in the Modern Age" offers a comprehensive analysis of the existential challenges of the modern era, some critics argue that Jaspers' work could benefit from a more concrete exploration of social and political structures that shape individual experiences. A more explicit examination of power dynamics, structural inequalities, and the interplay between individual agency and societal forces would enhance the book's analytical breadth.
Additionally, scholars contend that Jaspers' analysis could be further enriched by a more diverse and inclusive perspective, incorporating the experiences and voices of marginalized individuals and communities. Expanding the analysis beyond a predominantly Western focus would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the complexities of modern existence.
"Man in the Modern Age" holds significant importance within the fields of existential philosophy, sociology, and cultural studies. Jaspers' exploration of the existential challenges faced by individuals in the modern era prompts critical reflections on the nature of human freedom, identity, and authenticity. The book's enduring significance lies in its ability to stimulate scholarly debates, inspire self-reflection, and encourage a deeper understanding of the complexities of modern existence.
"Man in the Modern Age" by Karl Jaspers offers a profound analysis of the existential challenges faced by individuals in the modern era. Jaspers' depth of thought, philosophical rigor, and interdisciplinary approach contribute to a nuanced understanding of the complexities of human existence in the context of societal and technological transformations. While the book has its limitations, its enduring significance lies in its ability to prompt critical reflections, inform scholarly discussions, and inspire individuals to navigate the existential challenges of the modern age with authenticity and purpose.
GPT
Want to read
June 30, 2015I registered a book at BookCrossing.com!
http://www.BookCrossing.com/journal/13453023
http://www.BookCrossing.com/journal/13453023
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews