MYTHOLOGY REVEALED IN TELEVISION
Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling returns from the first half of the 19th century to appear as the main character of the newest issue of "Kronos" (1-2/2009). Is there anything for the contemporary reader to be astonished at by this 19th century philosopher most cherished by romanticists? Although very often mentioned in one go with Kant, Fichte and Hegel, Schelling seems to be underestimated by the public, at least in Poland. Could it be that Schelling, whose early developed, albeit restless, mind was continually disturbed by new unfinished thoughts, had no worse enemy than his own self? The most concise presentation of Schelling’s mental evolution would comprise three points. Firstly, Schelling is an author of the romantic Naturphilosophie which itself constitutes a reference to Plato’s dialogue Timaeus (analysed in Fundamental Apocrypha by Wawrzyniec Rymkiewicz). Secondly, inspired by Spinoza, Schelling created a system of identities described by Alberto Toscano in Fanatism and Creation. Schellingian undiversified philosophy. Thirdly, Schelling’s return to University of Berlin in 1841 led to disappointment among not only the students of the Hegelian Left (among his students were Mikhail Bakunin and Friedrich Engels) but also of the German clergy determined to settle a score with revolutionary disposed atheists.
Fragments of late lectures newly translated into Polish leave no doubt as to the sort of issues which were of interest to Schelling during the last phase of his work (Historical and Critical Introduction to the Philosophy of Mythology, A Short Summary of the Philosophy of Mythology, Philosophy of Revelation).
What are mythology and revelation to Schelling? What lies behind the philosopher’s decision to tell myths just like Plato? These questions are asked by Wawrzyniec Rymkiewicz in the article Baśń rozumu (The tale of the mind) which is crucial for the understanding of the whole issue. Rymkiewicz refers to late lectures of the German philosopher as “the reversed euhemerism”. Euhemerus claimed that gods are the work of humans who thus paid homage to their ancestors through religious practices. Freud and Marks also considered mythology an unnecessary allegory of the reality. Indeed, reality together with mythology, is described and explained by the notions of the scientific discourse. For Schelling though, the notions used in philosophy and the exact sciences are the remains of not only the medieval theology but also of the forgotten mythologies of the antiquity. For what is the source of the notions of being and whole on which the most enlightened mind draws? The notions which constitute the basic language of ontology, without which the development of philosophy would be inconceivable? Schelling’s answer to that question is as follows: the notions used in philosophy and the exact sciences are the remains of not only the medieval theology but also of the forgotten mythologies of the antiquity. Whereas mythology is defined as the nature’s narration, nature, as explained by Schelling, constitutes the system of three forces: repelling, attraction and the third one uniting the two. The principle of stability (i.e. the third force uniting alternately the explosions and implosions of the other forces) allows the nature to retain the evolutionary balance due to which ever more developed organisms emerge. Consciousness gained in the natural process of evolution underwent numerous transformations which are recorded in the mythologies of particular peoples. We may therefore say that human consciousness is part of the process called mythology (Piotr Graczyk, Czaszka Yoricka, czyli proces mitologiczny jako historia / Yorick’s skull or the Mythological Process as History).
According to the “reversed euhemerism” mythology is considered not an allegory referring to some reality external to mythology but as tautegory (the notion borrowed from Coleridge) which obscures its own meaning. “For mythology gods really are the existing creatures who are not something different than what they mean but they mean only what they are” as Schelling comments on it in Historical and Critical Introduction to the Philosophy of Mythology. In his lectures, he dedicates substantial parts to the phenomenon of Christian revelation which constitutes the moment in which science transcends its own self. Due to this experience, human consciousness, having liberated from religious images overwhelming it, becomes free since Christ’s death is first and for most free choice. Therefore, Schelling is of the opinion that if human being is god’s consciousness then Christianity is awareness of liberty which transcends determinism of nature and mythological narration.
Can it, therefore, be that Schelling has returned to Poland as a philosopher of religion whose underestimated lectures dating from 1840s have finally reached proper audience? According to Wawrzyniec Rymkiewicz Schelling’s return is first and foremost the return of the philosopher of culture who makes possible the analysis of the tautegorical reality of television dramas. Since neither Marx’s nor Freudian theories reveal the subject of people’s daydreaming but rather it is popculture which determines the emergence of new consumer fashions and creates sexual phantasms. Finally, contemporary popculture swarms with various types of cyborgs which constitute new, improved version of Frankenstein and Golem, expressing human’s new biocultural situation. “It is as though Nature- (…) in human and through human, aspired to transcend the border between life and death in order to rise to power to govern life and death” – writes Rymkiewicz in the article’s last sentence (The tale of the Mind). Thereby, he hastens to add that Schelling’s suggested return is ghostly. F. Scott Scribner in turn (Blasphemous Monologue. Technology and Metaphysics of imagination in Schelling’s “World-Ages”), in his article, through reading of the German philosopher, attempts to figure out the possibility of transcending human’s finiteness through finite means offered by today’s media technology. Its speed seems to defy time and complement the power of imagination to such an extent that it becomes possible to simultaneously present time and eternity. Due to this, Scribner draws the “blasphemous” conclusion suggested in the title: machine time constitutes every possible revelation since metaphysics is inconceivable without technological support, and Schelling turns out to be an excellent partner for such new media theoreticians as Jean Baudrillard, Marshall McLuhan and Paul Virilio.
The latter may well arouse doubts but no one will deny the fact that the popularity of Schelling’s thoughts has gradually evolved. In the 19th century he inspired first and foremost those who searched for nations’ mental identity. In Poland, references to his works appear in August Cieszkowski’s “Our Father” on which Andrzej Wawrzynowicz has written an article (“Our Father” as the project of the practical realization of the idea of historiosophy). In Russia, Schelling inspired, amongst others, Ivan Kireyevski [Schelling’s speech (1854)], whose portrait has been taken by Marcin Rychter (Ivan Kireyevski: From Liubomudry1 through anticapitalism to the Orthodox faith). In the 20th century at least in Poland, Schelling’s popularity somewhat faded. The way his works have been treated in The History of Philosophy by Władysław Tatarkiewicz or in a series of publications “Biblioteka Klasyków Filozofii” (“Library of the Classics of Philosophy”: Wawrzyniec Rymkiewicz’s, Edytorial) seems to confirm that this is indeed the case. It looks like now that the ideas transcending Nietzsche’s metaphysics of the subject and Heidegger’s philosophy (which is analysed by Jean Francois Courtine in Schelling and the filling of metaphysics) have been adopted, the return to thoughts conceived by the author of The World-Ages is finally possible. Earlier, Schelling could have aroused interest in the first critics of Hegel’s system which is one of the issues raised in the fragments of doctor’s dissertation of Jürgen Habermas published in “Kronos” (Absolute and History). The beginning century which sociologists often describe in a category of “the experience mediated through the media”, seems to open incredible prospects for Schelling’s thoughts, referred to through two very popular adjectives: blasphemous and ghostly.
Michał Wróblewski
Translated by Katarzyna Strębska