Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Who thinks that they can subdue Leviathan? Strength resides in its neck; dismay goes before it. It is without fear. It looks down on all who are haughty; it is king over all who are proud. These words inspired PJ Wehry to create Chasing Leviathan. Chasing Leviathan was born out of two ideals: that truth is worth pursuing but will never be subjugated, and the discipline of listening is one of the most important habits anyone can develop. Every episode is a dialogue, a journey into the depths of a meaningful question explored through the lens of personal experience or professional expertise.
PJ Wehry (00:03.832)
Hello and welcome to Chasing Leviathan. I'm your host, PJ Weary, and I'm here today with Dr. Victorio Hussla. he is the Paul G. Kimball Professor of Arts and Letters at Notre Dame University. And we're talking about his book, Vico's New Science of the Intersubjective World. Dr. Hussla, wonderful to have you on today.
Vittorio Hosle (00:24.603)
My pleasure.
PJ Wehry (00:27.146)
So, and for me, I've read Godemer, so that's how I got introduced to Vico, and I'm not sure that everyone will be entirely familiar. So, Dr. Hussla, why this book?
Vittorio Hosle (00:39.484)
Well, I was, together with a friend, Christoph Yermann, the one who first translated the whole New Science by John Battista Vico into German. And since the book is indeed very difficult, I wrote an introduction of almost 300 pages, which of course increased the volume of the two volume, the size of the two volume edition.
long interaction was translated into both Italian and to English. And I do think that it is quite a good interaction in the sense that if you read it, you have better chances to understand what Rico wants to do in his work. The work is objectively difficult. It's still the main work of Italian philosophy. Italian philosophy does not have the same importance in the history of philosophy as in modern philosophy, German, British and French philosophy.
PJ Wehry (01:22.466)
Yes.
Vittorio Hosle (01:36.656)
But I do still think that its contributions are remarkable, and particularly I have no doubt that Vico's New Science is a stroke of genius and that it deserves to be known much, more in the philosophical circles also outside of Italy. When Christoph Yermann and I translated the whole book in 1990, it was first complete translation. There had been already a translation in 1822.
which was almost complete, only the long idea of the work at the beginning was summarized, but the translation was so literal that it was hardly understandable even for Germans and had no lasting impact. And then Erich Auerbach, the great literary critic, who probably wrote the greatest book on literary criticism, Mimesis, made a selection translation in the 1920s, if I rightly remember, which was not only...
probably less than a third of the book that he translated, but also full of elementary errors, which is surprising to say, given that he was such a great literary critic. But you need philosophical background, and you need a lot of background in other disciplines like law, history, classical philology, in order to understand what Vico is after. so, because of Jermann and my translation, Jermann said my translation was, I think, the first really reliable translation in Germany in 1990.
We could use the excellent translation of Fischenburgens that had been done in English long before. That was the first modern translation into English. There's now a second one, which is not inferior. It's quite different from Fischenburgens, but also a very valuable translation. this, hope, to British translations and
and my translation will, with due time, open up the way for the reception of this work. And again, I do think that my introduction is probably, you shouldn't praise yourself too much, but I think objectively it's the most exhaustive introduction into the main themes of the New Science. There are other introductions, but they often ignore certain aspects, which for Wico were
Vittorio Hosle (03:58.126)
extremely fundamental.
PJ Wehry (04:01.902)
Now when you say it's I definitely think as far as English goes there's nothing close to what you've done Would you say that's the same for Italian? introductions to the new science as well
Vittorio Hosle (04:13.628)
That's a very good question. Of course, the study of Vico was strongest in Italy because it's the country where he came from, where he wrote. The new science, should perhaps mention for those who are not familiar, came out in the first edition in 1725. But the edition that we use today is the last edition that Vico did in 1744, the year of the steppe. The third edition came out and it's really a vastly enlarged work.
compared to the first edition. Only the second edition of 1730 was quite a different work compared to the first edition, but the 1744 edition brings a lot of important editions. So that is usually the edition that we study because it's the final work by Vico. And of course, this work was amply commented by Italian scholars. And they have an erudition with all the earlier...
precursors of Vico, the sources that he used that is unmatched. cannot compare my book with their work. What I do think distinguishes my book from the bulk of the Italian studies of the new science is that these books are usually merely historical. They try to trace the influences on Vico, sometimes the reception of Vico. My main question is what is still valid in Vico's new science? And this
PJ Wehry (05:30.286)
Mm.
Vittorio Hosle (05:38.894)
attempt to appropriate from a, how shall I say, modern point of view the lasting insights of the new science, I think is what makes my book quite unique even if you consider the large amount of excellent Italian books on the internet.
PJ Wehry (05:57.454)
And yes, thank you. So as we kind of look at this, my introduction to is through Gottemoer. And so for Gottemoer, Vico is kind of one of the first and most valuable critics of Descartes. What is the value of Vico's work? When you talk about his lasting contribution, you kind of mentioned it just now.
what does he bring to the table that the world, that philosophy needs?
Vittorio Hosle (06:30.278)
Yeah, Gadamer was indeed important in an increasing interest in Vico in Germany. However, what Gadamer is mainly quoting in his main work, Vahaet un metode, Truth and Method, is an early work by Vico, De nostre tempo le studiorum razione, on the...
method of studies in our own time, in which Riegel contrasts the emergent new form of intellectual education that is deeply shaped by the scientific revolution, which of course was due to Descartes, and the ancient way of acquiring a general education. And Riegel clearly strongly sympathizes for the ancient way of thinking, even if you recognize it's
the importance of the new methods. It's not so that he is reactionary, that rejects it, but he thinks it has removed too much of a traditional humanistic education. And that is what gave such an appeal to Vico, to Gadamer. Gadamer, in fact, never studied, as far as I know, the new science, the major work of Vico. And certainly in Truth and Method, there is no real discussion of the work.
So, Garama's reception of Vico was very selective. It was still important, and I do think that the Rennoste tempo de studiorum razione is an excellent work. I call it in my introduction, I think, a jewel. It's one of the most interesting texts on the educational revolution that followed the scientific revolution. But I don't think it's his main work. His main work is, as already the title announces, the new science that proposes
a science that had not existed before.
PJ Wehry (08:24.494)
Yes, and I read On the Study of our Methods of our Time and it made a lot of sense to me and then as I mentioned to you before, I read The New Science and I'm really excited about your book because I was very lost. I was like, wow, On the Study of Methods of our Time is really good. What else? Like this is his main work and then I was completely lost. what is moving past kind of like, I think part of this is On the Study of Methods of our Time is what, 100 pages maybe?
And yes, the new science is very thick. What is the new science, as you say here, the intersubjective world, what is Vico accomplishing with the new science?
Vittorio Hosle (09:09.148)
The book that you mentioned before, the short book on the methods of the studies of our time, is of course a built, it's worked out inaugural lecture that Wico had given at the beginning of the academic year. So it cannot be a systematic work because it's again an enriched version of an individual lecture.
So it doesn't have a systematic ambition of a new science. And Wico, who also wrote an extraordinary autobiography, one of the best philosophical autobiographies I've ever read. Wico, in this autobiography, explains that he needed many, many decades to conceive the new science. So he was simply not yet there when he delivered on the methods of his studies of our time. What is the central idea of a new science? Of course,
The title of New Science is influenced by Bacon's Novum Organum. The new organ, which at the beginning of the 17th century, tries to lay a foundation for the new experimental science. Bacon himself was not a creative scientist. That distinguishes him very strongly from Galileo and from Descartes. But he had a lot of methodologically extremely important ideas that somehow
helped to prepare the great scientific breakthroughs of the 17th century. He also had a clear understanding that the new method, the new organon, which is course polemically against Aristotle, whose logical writings were later collected under the title organon, largely justifies this new science by insisting on the enormous
changes that they will bring about in human life. Bacon is a prophet, not only of a scientific but of an industrial revolution. He understands that through the scientific discoveries, we will be able to solve a lot of problems that have vexed humanity. And he's particularly committed to the progress of medicine, even if in fact the scientific revolution
Vittorio Hosle (11:32.154)
had an enormous impact on the evolution of medicine only in the 19th century. It took a while until the new methods could be applied, for example, after the invention of microscopes, to the study of cells, to the discovery of bacteria, and so on and so on. So this still was a long way to go, but Bacon rightly understood that this would ensue the change
of the new program, the change of the understanding of science and the application and adoption of his new program. Vico's new science is not a science about nature, but about the common nature of nations. So what Vico wants to do is to develop, if you want, a general theory of social systems. In this sense, he is
clearly much more a forerunner of sociology. The term, in fact, appears much later. In print, I think it appears only in Auguste Comte's work in the 1820s, even if we now know that the term appeared in an unpublished paper of Joseph Siez, who wrote a famous pamphlet, What is the Third Estate, that contributed very much to the acceleration of the French Revolution.
Vico himself, again, doesn't have the term of sociology, but what he offers is a comparative study of human societies, including their development in time. Therefore, in the 19th century, when a first very imperfect French translation of the book was done by Jules Michelet, he gave the title
to the French translation philosophy of history. But this is deeply misleading. The term philosophy of history appears also much later than Vico in the course of the 18th century. think Voltaire was the first who used it, the term in the 1760s. And Vico doesn't have at all what became the main concern of philosophy of history as it begins to unfold in the second half of the 18th century.
Vittorio Hosle (13:55.3)
an account of the major steps of human evolution that occur over history. He has the opinion that cultures develop but all follow the same pattern and that cultures, when they have achieved a certain degree of perfection, collapse and everything begins anew. So he's absolutely not interested in saying, for example, what distinguishes the
modern type of rationality from the Greek time of rationality. He's interested in understanding why the ancient civilization collapses and why in the early Middle Ages we go back to a form of thinking that according to him characterized early Roman and early Greek history. That is what he is after. And therefore it's much better to consider him a precursor of Montesquieu.
who in L'Esprit de l'Oiseau offers for the first time comparative political science, also strongly enriched by a very powerful historical sense, then to consider him a precursor of Voltaire or Condorcet, who shaped philosophy of history in the second half of the 18th century.
That is at least my approach to him. An interesting question, by the way, to which we have no clear answer is did Montesquieu know Vico? When Montesquieu travels in Italy, he comes to Venice and the first edition of New Science had been published in Venice, which was at that time the most important.
place for publishing books in Italy, he writes in his diary, when I am in Naples, I should buy Vico New Signs. But that's the only note that we have about Vico. In his library, the book was not found, and he never quotes Vico. But we know that in Venice, someone must have alerted him to the importance of his book and that he had the intention to buy it. Of course, Montesquieu
PJ Wehry (15:46.67)
you
PJ Wehry (16:05.102)
Hmm.
Vittorio Hosle (16:07.672)
rights with the French clarity that is so much missing in Wicco, maybe it be that he bought the book but didn't find the time or didn't develop any interest in it because it was too cumbersomely written. So that is a possible aspect. But it could also be that he studied it more seriously than he was willing to recognize and that it impacted some features of his approach to comparative political science.
PJ Wehry (16:37.806)
Forgive me for kind of stepping back for a second, but when we talk about the Novamorganon, that's a reference from Bacon to Aristotle, and this idea of science, especially for a popular audience, science is generally just natural science. Do you mind kind of placing for us what the term science would have meant for Vico?
Vittorio Hosle (17:06.108)
That's a very, very good question. Americans sometimes suffer from the fact that they think the way how they categorize the world is the only natural and plausible one. This leads to difficulties in understanding earlier epochs of thought, but also to understand current forms of sports in countries different from the United States. In Germany, where I grew up,
PJ Wehry (17:18.623)
Hahaha
Vittorio Hosle (17:35.004)
We have had since the 19th century always the idea that science comes both as Naturwissenschaft, natural science, and as sciences of the mind, Geisteswissenschaft. So the German terminology still today for science includes the natural sciences and the humanities. It was, by the way, in many aspects, so still in the British
discussions of the 19th century, what we today call the humanities, John Stuart Mill calls moral sciences. So also here they are subsumed under the concept of science. And I personally think that this is completely reasonable, because what makes a science a science is that it follows rigorous methods. And the methods developed for the
humanities, of historical sciences, were very rigorous. They came after those developed for the natural sciences, but this only has to do with the fact that in many aspects the Geisteswissenschaften, or human sciences, I prefer to call them human sciences, when humanities stress the fact that they are scientific in their outlook, the humanity, the human sciences have to
solves an issue that doesn't exist for the natural sciences, namely how do I access the mind of other people. Because the mind of other people is not directly accessible to me through introspection like my own mental life. And this creates problems that do not exist in the case of the natural sciences. And therefore it took more time before people were able to develop this.
this type of approach. But they achieved a method when its rigor is not inferior to that of an actual scientist. And in fact, Vico is a strong supporter of this idea. And therefore, for example, one of the most influential Italian philosophers of the 20th century, Benedetto Croce, gets him completely wrong when in this influential introduction to Vico says,
Vittorio Hosle (19:57.636)
that Vico is a critic of a modern concept of science. He is committed to the concept of science, but he thinks it has to be extended to the world of the intersubjective spirit, as I call it in my book. And Croce, by the way, identified very strongly with Vico. He even bought the house in which Vico lived. And still today the Instituto
The Italiano per gli studi storici, popularly called the Instituto Croce, is housed in the house of Vico. So Croce liked to, how should say, portray himself as the newborn Vico. Vico is a much better philosopher than Croce, by the way. But certainly Croce missed completely the central asset.
the central claim of Wicom. Now, the concept of science goes of course back to Plato and Aristotle. The Greeks were the first to develop a completely rigorous science, namely mathematics. This happened to a large amount in the Platonic Academy. And in the second analytics, Aristotle elaborates the concept of science. And a crucial aspect of the concept of science is that it infers certain
assumptions from other assumptions. So there are certain principles from which then other assumptions are derived. That is the essence of the scientific method. And Vico believes that human sciences, the sciences of the common nature of nations, should go the same way and he unfolds his principles in
the second chapter of the first book of the New Science, where we find his denita, as he calls them, denita. Seems a little bit strange because it reminds us of dignity, but it's the translation of Greek axioma. Axion means also worthy in Greek, so it's a literal translation of that. the axioms are developed there. It is true, however,
Vittorio Hosle (22:21.186)
that Vico lacked any mathematical training. He mentions in the autobiography that he began to reduct its elements but stopped very early on because he felt that he didn't have the talent for that. So of course his work doesn't have the deductive rigor that modern science had. Still Vico sent his first edition to Isaac Newton because he fundamentally thought I do something analogous to what Newton had done
in the Philosophia Naturalis Principia Mathematica of 1687. Of course, Newton never reacted to the gift, but we know that Vico sent it to him. again, the ways of thinking of authors was very, different. Still, I do think that Vico has had the clear intention to grant the
science of the common nature of nations, and epistemic status analogous to that of modern natural science. Whether rightly or wrongly is a different question, but that he had this claim is beyond any doubt.
PJ Wehry (23:35.606)
Now this is a shot in the dark. Is there any connection between Vico and Wilhelm Dilty?
Vittorio Hosle (23:41.468)
Well, a certain sense, you're right, Wilhelm Diltai continues this tradition because one of his main works is the introduction into the Geisteswissenschaften, into the sciences of the mind, and that continues the project initiated by Wiko. But in this book, certainly, Diltai never quotes Wiko. I don't know whether he ever read him. He could have read it.
in the translation of Weber, as I mentioned before, it fundamentally was ignored when it came out, although because it was not a very good translation, a very readable translation. So I don't think that Vico had certainly any important impact on Diltai. But clearly Diltai continues the project of a foundation of the sciences of humanity that begins fundamentally in the modern world.
PJ Wehry (24:27.48)
Okay.
Vittorio Hosle (24:38.992)
with Gian Battista Vico.
PJ Wehry (24:42.072)
Thank you. was, I would have been shocked if there was a connection, but I wanted to ask because their projects are so similar. Now, so can you lay out, go ahead.
Vittorio Hosle (24:51.441)
There is, if I may say something on that, can I add something? There is, of course, an important difference. Diltai starts in the context of the foundation of modern empirical psychology. At the end of the 19th century, psychology begins to appear as an academic science. In America, it was William James who in the late 19th century founded the first lab of psychology at Harvard University.
PJ Wehry (25:06.67)
Mm.
Vittorio Hosle (25:18.69)
And in Germany, had begun a little bit earlier, and Diltai's roots are in the attempt of giving foundation to psychology. And there's nothing like that in Wiko. So Wiko is much more inspired by the traditional humanistic knowledge, the study of the ancient culture, but he tries to give it a foundation that no humanists ever thought to do. But again, the difference with Diltai is clearly
the fact that in the course of the 19th century modern psychology began to be recognized as one of the sciences of the canons. And for Diltai this is ultimately the foundation on which the geisteswissenschaften have to rest.
PJ Wehry (26:07.01)
Yes, which would be so we have modern empirical psychology for a dilt I and I actually I'm glad I asked that then because it gives us kind of a way to Approach Vico. How does he ground the human sciences? How does he ground his new science?
Vittorio Hosle (26:22.752)
That's a very, very good question. The discovery of which Vico was particularly proud, he said that it took him many, years to understand it, was a discovery that for us seems almost trite, perhaps with the exception of Americans. Namely, the fact that people in earlier times thought very differently than we do.
that he said took him most time to enter into the way how archaic people thought. He had to find out that a lot of what we consider anthropological constants are something that are in fact the result of historical development, that earlier humans were very different. And I give you a few examples. In the time of Wico, of course, think of Tasso.
the Jerusalem liberata, knights falling in love with beautiful princesses, are a very common law. Vico says in the Iliad we find nothing of that. There is no scene in which Menelaus seems to be really romantically involved with Helen. He is insulted in this honor that this prized woman has been taken from him. But that's the whole thing.
idea of falling in love, Vico says, is something that develops only with civilization. It's not something that is there. Of course there is sexual attraction, but falling in love is more than sexual attraction, and that is, again, a historically relatively late procedure. Even the way according to which we think today in abstract concepts is not natural to humans. Vico insists that first humans
thought in a very sensual way and their metaphors for them were not something they used to show themselves in connection with nature trying to bridge differences between the mental and the physical realm. It was the only way how they could approach problems. Therefore, the metaphorical way of thinking is
PJ Wehry (28:42.061)
Hmm.
Vittorio Hosle (28:46.628)
anthropological mark of the early stage of human development. Also, what we could discover is that our idea that morality has to be based on equality of human beings is very late. Human beings arose only late to the recognition of a fundamental equality of rights and duties of all human beings.
archaic societies are deeply inegalitarian. And in this egalitarian world is supported by the religion that somehow mirrors the social structure of the world. And the aristocrats wielded much more power than the plebeians thought themselves descendants of the divinities and thought that therefore they had much, much more rights than other people.
So all these are important discoveries of Wico, which he caches out by interpreting classical texts, but also by interpreting juridical institutions, because let's not forget Wico was professor of rhetorics at the University of Naples, but he had always desired, however failed in his attempt, to become a professor of law, because the position was paid much, more and was also far more prestigious. And Wico was certainly
someone who had an excellent knowledge of Roman law. That is one of the reasons why Vico integrates in this new science the various aspects of human culture. Human culture, according to him, is a unity, certain spirit permeates the various realms of culture. So early Greek poetry, early Greek legal systems, early Greek
linguistic expression, early Greek family structures, early Greek cosmology, all are expressions of a certain mindset that is very distant from our own.
PJ Wehry (30:54.83)
So, me, I just want to make sure that I am on track with you. There are two examples that come to mind. One is I'm reading through Don Quixote. So for instance, Cervantes skewering romantic love would have made absolutely no sense to anyone in the 400s or before, right? Because they wouldn't have had this courtly love.
what we consider a work of genius would have been incomprehensible.
Vittorio Hosle (31:28.156)
Absolutely. That is a crucial aspect of Vico. We should ask what are the methods that Vico uses. One important method for him is comparison. He compares and contrasts different expressions of the human mind in different epochs. That is a very important aspect. Of course, also is aware of the body-mind problem.
The idea is that ultimately we cannot go back to the mindset of archaic people. can never feel like them. However, he says, we can develop a conceptual understanding of them. We can develop categories and say that's the way how they must have had, for example, certain fears of gods.
which according to Vico were experienced in meteorological phenomena when a lightning fell. The archaic man must have felt a fear that for us is inaccessible, but we can assume that this is the case because otherwise we cannot explain their behavior. So that is fundamentally Vigie and that's very different from the Diltayan method of einfühlen that we have to achieve a form of empathy.
with the people whom we try to understand. Vico recognizes that this is often impossible. We cannot feel like these archaic persons, but we can develop, as he says, intendere, an intentional conceptual grasp of their forms of thinking.
PJ Wehry (33:14.742)
Mmm. yeah. Yes, please.
Vittorio Hosle (33:17.135)
Perhaps I can add another thing with regard to the methodological issue. Vico is also convinced, and of course here he completely exaggerates, that human cultures develop in an analogous way. This means every culture has to go through three steps, the age of gods, the age of heroes, and the age of man.
PJ Wehry (33:22.732)
Mm-hmm.
Vittorio Hosle (33:37.954)
from a time where the passions are dominant, where inegalitarian thinking is common to our people, where metaphors have a function of concepts, where political societies are based on violence and on the inequality between the patricians and the plebeians, where families are dominated by tyrannical patriarchs. All cultures have to go through that.
and all cultures develop towards higher levels. He is completely blind to a phenomenon of interference between cultures. And also he underrates that even if, we'll certainly speak more about it, Vico has a very strong awareness of a collapse of high civilization, which according to him occurred in the fifth, sixth century of AD with the collapse of...
PJ Wehry (34:16.078)
Hmm.
Vittorio Hosle (34:35.644)
Western Roman Empire, he does not understand that despite this enormous collapse, lot of acquisitions of the earlier times were preserved in the Middle Ages. The Middle Ages were not simply a return to the archaic times of Greece or Rome.
PJ Wehry (34:57.138)
There are artifacts, there's the literature, the architecture is all still there, which is part of the reason that humanism is reborn the way it is.
Vittorio Hosle (35:03.418)
Exactly.
Vittorio Hosle (35:09.756)
And what is also surprising is, even if Wico was always obsessively exhibiting his own Catholic faith, he doesn't recognize that Christianity changed history. It's completely absent from his account of the historical evolution. That is a very, very surprising thing.
PJ Wehry (35:32.822)
It is. Yes, it is. I was actually going to ask, and so that actually answers one of my questions, because in the early church, one of the really important things to the early church fathers is theosis, the idea that we participate in the divine nature. I would immediately, I mean, I know he had to be familiar with the church fathers. I would make the connection between that and egalitarian thinking in regards to patricians being from divinities. He doesn't make that connection though.
Vittorio Hosle (36:01.712)
No, he doesn't. He doesn't. And you are completely right. It is surprising that he doesn't do it. think the reason is that he was so overwhelmed by some analogies that he discovered between early Middle Ages and archaic Roman practices that he kept his eyes shut to the moments of continuity that was, for example, upheld in the monasteries. The monasteries were the places where not all but
PJ Wehry (36:06.605)
Yeah!
PJ Wehry (36:13.934)
Hmm.
Vittorio Hosle (36:32.04)
certain amount of the ancient works were preserved and were certainly, you rightly say, the church fathers and their intellectual acquisitions were kept intact and were continued.
PJ Wehry (36:47.342)
So what, we talked a little bit about what he's missing, but what do you think he keeps? What do you think reading Vico today helps us see and what we're missing that Vico understood?
Vittorio Hosle (37:02.448)
Yeah, that's a very good question. I would say it's quite a lot. First of all, do think that Vico has a very deep understanding of the, how should I say, the lateness of rationality. He is in fact convinced that the rational approach to reality is the right one. Therefore, he is committed to the program of modern science that is often confused in the literature. People say, well, but Vico has such a strong theory.
PJ Wehry (37:07.278)
Yeah
Vittorio Hosle (37:32.252)
of the irrational forces of history. Therefore he's an irrationalist himself. Not at all. Vico has a rational theory of irrational forces. And he's completely committed to a program of rational justification of society. He is in favor of equal treatment of citizens. He is in many aspects
PJ Wehry (37:43.874)
Mmm.
Vittorio Hosle (38:00.188)
someone who embraces enlightenment ideals. But at the same time, he says, let's not forget that this is a late result of human history. And in a very powerful metaphor of his book, he says, when a river enters the sea for a while, it keeps its sweet water before it minnows with the salty water that surrounds it. And so we should never forget that also modern societies have a lot of archaic
PJ Wehry (38:21.486)
Hmm.
Vittorio Hosle (38:29.944)
archaic residues in them. And maintaining this awareness, I think, is very important if you want to interpret civilizational collapses. Now, civilizational collapse, this is another important issue that we find in Wico. Wico not only has the theory that society has developed slowly, powered rationality,
But he also has a theory that once this rationality is achieved, it has a tendency to destroy itself. That is one of most worrisome theories of Wicco. And I do think that in its, how shall I say, form, it's of course unacceptable. We cannot say that all societies are doomed to collapse after a time span of achievement. Also, Spengler in the 20th century will make a very similar point.
By the Oswald Spenger never quotes Vico, also an interesting phenomenon, how little he was received outside of Italy and perhaps France, Eastern Europe. But Vico is very, very strongly aware of that. And I do think that we must at least have in the background of the mind that this may happen.
So what I want to say is we should assume that the collapse of a civilization remains always a possibility. Vico, of course, has in mind the collapse of the Western Roman Empire that at the same time was not only a political collapse, but also a technological and civilizational collapse. The number of illiterates in the early Middle Ages
was much, much higher than it was in late antiquity. The diplomatic juridical forms of communication really were reduced to much more primitive forms. But what we certainly have witnessed in the 20th century is, being a German, can certainly point to my own country, the collapse of the state based on the rule of law.
Vittorio Hosle (40:54.576)
that occurred during fascism. And in fascism we saw the re-emergence of certain archaic forms of thinking that we thought long overcome. And Vico has a very, very strong awareness of this danger. He also thinks that this process may be triggered by over-rationality, in the sense that if the development of reason leads to
the rule, the dominion of universal rational egoism, the forms of trust that connect humans inevitably dissolve, and that this leads to a cultural decay. So this, think, the awareness of the very different nature of earlier humans.
the painful consciousness that much of it is still present in modern societies and that
self-destructive forces characteristic of modern rationalism may lead to a re-emergence of his forces are I think some of the greatest discoveries of
PJ Wehry (42:18.798)
So maybe an appropriate follow-up question of that is if we want to be cautious about being overly rational, what then is the value of the sort of mythic or poetic wisdom? Which seems, would that be kind of the counterbalance? Of course, and if you don't mind, in the American cultural sphere, myth
can just mean false, right? And so, like, what does it mean to have mythic wisdom? What does that do? And how does that, if I'm reading this correctly, how does that help protect against being overly rational?
Vittorio Hosle (42:59.696)
Well, think that Vico in fact has a different view. The largest of the five books of the third edition of the New Science deals with the poetic wisdom. And the poetic wisdom is the wisdom of society based on myth. That's fundamentally his concept. But he is not trying to reinstate it. He wants to understand the logic of myth. How does a mythical world you build up and
This includes both the social institutions that are considered justified and legitimate in such a mythical worldview, but also, for example, the mythical cosmography, geography, et cetera, what is the view of nature that people have in this time. But he thinks that they are wrong, and he thinks that they are ultimately rightly, they've ultimately rightly been surpassed.
I don't think that the idea of reinstating myths would have pleased Vico. Something that happened in the fascist movements, that you deliberately try to create certain mythical items. Vico is deeply committed to the idea of natural law being based on reason and on the recognition of the equality of all humans. There is no doubt that that is his deep philosophical and religious commitment. What he is
probably aware is that the radical individualism of modernity is a danger. So it's not the fact that we use concepts that he disapproves of, it is the fact that instead of maintaining a concept of reason that encompasses humanity, we are committed to a radical individualism. And that's criticism of Descartes.
We believe that alone we can achieve wisdom. Vico, in his autobiography, which I already mentioned, detaches himself very, very sharply from the Discours de la méthode, the discourse on the method by Descartes, saying that this is a fiction, that Descartes pretends that he found all his philosophical insights by isolating himself from the rest of the world. Vico says this is not true.
PJ Wehry (45:15.214)
Mm-hmm.
Vittorio Hosle (45:27.182)
At the same time, in his autobiography, describes his years of formation, where he was the house tutor of an aristocratic family, which often spent time outside of Naples in their villa, somehow as an equivalent of the years of loneliness that Descartes
went through and we know today that he exaggerates the degree of loneliness he had because the family went to Batola, to this residence of them outside of Naples, but spent also a large part of the year in Naples. So it is not so that Wiko was absent for very extended periods from Naples, which was one of the cultural centers of Europe. Wiko was quite embedded in the cultural humus.
of his birth town.
PJ Wehry (46:26.082)
So how does a reason that encompasses humanity answer the barbarism of fascism?
Vittorio Hosle (46:37.638)
Yeah, Vico has a standard aspect, barbarism of reflection. And barbarism of reflection is when, for example, you obsessively think about what gets, what do I get out for myself from anything that happens. That is the barbarism of reflection. And the ultimate result of this barbarism of reflection is the dissolution of the trust that unites people.
So I think this is what he really is mostly afraid of.
Wicot does not have therapy for the ills that he diagnoses. It's quite interesting that in the second edition of his work he had included a chapter on the practice of the new science in which he tried to address the issue what can we do to somehow slow down the process of decadence that he sees unfolding. And he took it out in the last edition. There are different interpretations why he did.
PJ Wehry (47:20.334)
Hmm.
Vittorio Hosle (47:41.564)
Some people say he didn't want to with the ways of the divine providence. The others say he thought that his own proposals were too naive. But it certainly always was not a major but only a marginal concern, if it was a marginal concern, how we could try to prevent this decay from happening.
Other very important insights of Wiko that I want to mention are his contribution to modern historiography.
PJ Wehry (48:19.394)
Hmm. Yes, please.
Vittorio Hosle (48:20.668)
Wigo develops, through his analysis of the workings of the mindset of archaic men, a very important theory that a lot of the data that we find in early Roman history are not reliable. For example, he was one of the first, I think probably the first, who showed becoming the 19th century based on the work of the splendid German-Danish Roman historian, Bartol Nibour.
it became common knowledge that the seven kings of Rome are legendary figures. They are created to represent certain ways of recognizing general types of impact in the evolution of a society. Romulus stands for the original act based on violence. Numa Pompilius stands for the introduction of religious rites.
Tunus Hostilius goes back to Bellico's behavior. All these constructions, and according to Vico, it has to do with the fact that since archaic man does not yet have abstract concepts in order to say there have been these social events, they have to, how shall I say, individualize these
general concepts in certain figures that are created by the fantasy, Universale Fantastico is the name which she uses, which represent in a way that archaic men can understand the insight that is behind it. We had a face based on violence and then there was some form of religious domestication. You create, you can express this only
by saying there was first one king who was more prone to violence and then someone who had a stronger religious attitude. And so a lot of the figures of ancient history according to Vico should not be recognized as truly historical persons. He exaggerates with that. He, for example, fought with Draco, the attic legislator.
Vittorio Hosle (50:45.212)
of the late 7th century BC was a fictional character. No historian would agree with him today. But he is one of the first who develops the idea that a lot of figures in very venerable old traditions are not necessarily historical figures. And the 19th century continued.
that it also exaggerated. mean, in the 19th century, we found many people who said Buddha was not a historical figure, Saratustra was not a historical figure. Today, most people think, yes, a lot of legends that accrued to these figures, but we should not deny their historicity. So, yes, I do think that this was an exaggeration, but it was a very important aspect. And the other very important insight of Vico is
that the Homeric poems were not created by an individual, but that they represent a long evolution. thinks that also Homer is such fantastic universal of a poetic spirit of the nation. He also analyses the language of the text and finds out that it cannot have been written by a single person. These ideas became then...
very important at the end of the 18th century with Friedrich August Wolf, a German classical philologist. Both Wolf and Niebuhr had to learn from other people that some of their most famous claims had indeed been already proposed, even if not with the same methodological rigor, in the first half of the 18th century by Jean-Baptiste Hiccon.
PJ Wehry (52:32.814)
Does Vico consider himself at all, is there a connection there between his work and obviously we don't have this social view of it, but when we look at someone like Lorenzo Valla, does Vico see himself as kind of a successor to Lorenzo Valla? On the donation of Constantine, that kind of work.
Vittorio Hosle (52:51.228)
I frankly don't remember that he ever quotes him, but certainly he was imbibed with humanistic knowledge. His background is a humanistic education, like, for example, of Grotius, a great jurist of the early 17th century who was deeply rooted in this humanistic tradition. In fact, we can recognize these four authors as his authors who inspired him most. These are Plato.
Tacitus, Bacon and Grotius. These are his four heroes. And so yes, clearly he comes from this tradition, but again I do not remember that he explicitly mentions Walla. I may be wrong, it may be that he does, but in the moment I don't remember.
PJ Wehry (53:40.322)
It was just the Historia using the language to disprove it. Made me, I was fishing for a connection there. I want to be respectful of your time.
Vittorio Hosle (53:48.346)
Well, Waller is course famous because he showed that the Constantinian donation was a forgery. That is the reason why he became famous. But you must see the difference between this discovery, which was of course very important, and the Wiccan project. Waller uses philological methods showing contradictions, etc. He never assumes that the persons who forged the Constantinian donation had a different mindset. That is...
PJ Wehry (53:53.506)
Right? Right!
Vittorio Hosle (54:17.902)
Vico's real discovery. And Vico is also very cautious with the forgery claim. He thinks that when we, again, not in relation to the specific issue of the Constantine donation, but Vico believes that it is absurd to assume that, for example, there were astute priests who made up religions. No, the priests fought in this way themselves.
PJ Wehry (54:18.913)
yeah.
Vittorio Hosle (54:47.8)
And a lot of the myths were the natural way to interpret the world for both the priests and the populace. And to assume that they were astute manipulators of the masses, he thinks it's completely anachronistic. And Vico is also the one who doesn't use the word but creates the concept of anachronistic. He this is one of the great errors.
PJ Wehry (54:49.197)
Yes.
PJ Wehry (55:16.11)
Hmm.
Vittorio Hosle (55:17.372)
of the erudite people, that they project back the way how they think into the past. And this misses out on how the past really works. So I would insist again on this important new contribution of Wiko with regard to the philological discovery that certain texture forgeries.
PJ Wehry (55:32.344)
Mm-hmm.
Yes.
PJ Wehry (55:42.348)
Yes, I think that's, you've established that quite clearly, I think that's so important, right? mean, any historian worth their salt recognizes the fallacy of anachronism. Like that's foundational to the study of history. You really can't have history without it, or you wouldn't have any kind of accurate history without it. I do want to be respectful of your time.
If I could ask you, besides buying and reading your excellent book, which I think everyone should do so that they can understand these contributions and be prepared to read, Vico. Yes! A beautiful cover too. Besides buying and reading your excellent book, what is something that you would recommend to our audience after listening for the last hour that they should do or meditate on over the next week in response?
Vittorio Hosle (56:14.62)
I show it to you.
Vittorio Hosle (56:34.192)
where they should certainly read Vico. Much more important to read Vico than myself. Vico is a much better philosopher than I was. So, by Vico. But if you then have difficulties to understand him, as our gentle host said, he confessed to that, then my book may be one way to get some threat that orient you through the labyrinth of his work. So, that is the first thing I would add.
PJ Wehry (56:37.441)
Yeah
Vittorio Hosle (57:04.246)
Second, would suggest, become aware of the barbarism of reflection, become aware of the rise of primitivism in the modern world, and don't buy all the naive stories of an automatic progress going to make us greater and greater, perhaps great, at least great again, more fantastic, more beautiful, and so on, because that may be delusional.
and Vico has a strong awareness of the dangers that are implied in a form of completely empty rationality.
PJ Wehry (57:45.518)
Beautiful answer to end and very applicable for those who are willing to hear it. Dr. Hussla, wonderful having you on today. Thank you so much.
Vittorio Hosle (57:55.92)
Thank you. Bye.
PJ Wehry (58:00.398)
Real quick