Advertisement

Spinoza and Friends: Religion, Philosophy and Friendship in the Berlin Enlightenment

  • Adam Sutcliffe

Abstract

The topic of friendship was widely and vigorously discussed during the eighteenth century, but it was a subject on which no clear Enlightenment consensus emerged.1 The unrestrained intensity of the Renaissance ideal of friendship — most famously expressed in Michel de Montaigne’s elegiac essay, in which he describes his deceased friend as so close to him as to have been barely distinguishable from his own self2 — could no longer easily be sustained in the eighteenth century, when both changing gender relations and the competitive vigour of commercial society complicated the imagined innocence of intimacies between men. Michel Foucault has argued that it was in this century that homosexuality became a problem in Europe, concomitantly with the decline of traditional models of male friendship and the rise of modern institutions that sought to discipline these intimacies.3 For Alan Bray, too, it was in this period, in England at least, that premodern traditions of friendship were almost extinguished by the modern rationalization of interpersonal relations demanded by Kantian ethics.4 The increasing visibility of the pursuit of commercial self-interest also seemed to threaten the selflessness and mutuality on which authentic bonds of friendship were traditionally assumed to be based. Bernard Mandeville’s provocative argument, in his Fable of the Bees (1723), that ‘private vices’ produce ‘public benefits’ was an enduring provocation for the next fifty years, in particular to the leading thinkers of the Scottish Enlightenment, almost all of whom wrestled with Mandeville in their attempts to reconcile a theory of beneficent friendship with a positive analysis of commercial society.5

Keywords

Eighteenth Century Commercial Society Queer Theory Philosophical Writing Dark Time 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    The synthetic literature on friendship and the Enlightenment remains thin, but two useful studies exist on France: A. Vincent-Buffault, L’Exercice de l’amitié (Paris: Seuil, 1995);Google Scholar
  2. F. Gerson, L’amitié au XVIIIe siècle (Paris: La Pensée Universelle, 1974).Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    M. de Montaigne, ‘De l’amitié’ [1580], in Oevres complètes (Paris: Gallimard, 1962), pp. 177–93.Google Scholar
  4. 3.
    M. Foucault, ‘Sex, Power and the Politics of Identity’ [1984], in his Essential Works, I: Ethics, Subjectivity and Truth (New York: The New Press, 1997), pp. 163–73, on p. 171.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    A. Bray, The Friend (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003), pp. 212–19.Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    See A.O. Hirschman, The Passions and the Interests (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997[1977]), pp. 17–19;Google Scholar
  7. L. and P. McCarthy, ‘Hume, Smith and Ferguson: Friendship in Commercial Society’, in P. King and H. Devere (eds), The Challenge to Friendship in Modernity (London: Frank Cass, 2000), pp. 33–49;Google Scholar
  8. A. Silver, ‘Friendship in Commercial Society: Eighteenth-Century Social Theory and Modern Sociology’, American Journal of Sociology, 95 (1990), 1474–1504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 6.
    For an excellent overview see J.B. Schneewind, The Invention of Autonomy: A History of Modern Moral Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).Google Scholar
  10. 7.
    For a range of approaches to this question see N.K. Badhwar (ed.), Friendship: A Philosophical Reader (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993).Google Scholar
  11. 8.
    See P. Cristofolini (ed.), The Spinozistic Heresy: The Debate on the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, 1670–77, and the Immediate Reception of Spinozism (Amsterdam: APA-Holland Press, 1995);Google Scholar
  12. W. van Bunge and W. Klever (eds), Disguised and Overt Spinozism Around 1700 (Leiden: Brill, 1996);Google Scholar
  13. J. Israel, Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity, 1650–1750 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 157–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 9.
    See M.L. Lussu, Bayle, Holbach e il dibatttito sull’ateo virtuoso (Genoa: ECIG, 1997), pp. 31–7.Google Scholar
  15. 10.
    See, most recently, Israel, Radical Enlightenment, pp. 563–703; M. Mulsow, Moderne aus dem Untergrund: Radikale Friihautklärung in Deutschland 1680–1720 (Hamburg: Felix Meiner, 2002);Google Scholar
  16. W. van Bunge (ed.), The Early Enlightenment in the Dutch Republic (Leiden: Brill, 2003).Google Scholar
  17. 11.
    See S. Nadler, Spinoza: A Life (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 12.
    For a development of this argument see A. Sutcliffe, Judaism and Enlightenment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 133–47.Google Scholar
  19. 13.
    W. Goetschel, Spinoza’s Modernity: Mendelssohn, Lessing, and Heine (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2004), pp. 23–81.Google Scholar
  20. 15.
    K.L. Berghahn (ed.), ‘On Friendship: The Beginnings of a Christian-Jewish Dialogue in the 18th Century’, in idem (ed.), The German-Jewish Dialogue Reconsidered (New York: Peter Lang, 1996), pp. 5–24, on p. 16.Google Scholar
  21. 16.
    On the friendship cult see ibid., pp. 6–11; for a full account of the ‘Lavater affair’ see A. Altmann, Moses Mendelssohn: A Biographical Study (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1973), pp. 194–263.Google Scholar
  22. 17.
    On Oppenheim’s painting see R.I. Cohen, Jewish Icons: Art and Society in Modem Europe (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1998), pp. 163–6.Google Scholar
  23. See also A. Altmann, ‘Moses Mendelssohn as the Archetypical German Jew’, in J. Reinharz and W. Schatzberg (eds), The Jewish Response to German Culture: From the Enlightenment to the Second World War (Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 1985), pp. 17–31.Google Scholar
  24. 23.
    On this play see R. Robertson, The ‘Jewish Question’ in German Literature 1749–1939: Emancipation and its Discontents (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), pp. 34–6.Google Scholar
  25. 24.
    A. Elon, The Pity of It All: A History of the Jews in Germany 1743–1933 (New York: Henry Holt, 2002), p. 62; Robertson, ‘Jewish Question’, p. 34.Google Scholar
  26. 35.
    H. Arendt (ed.), ‘On Humanity in Dark Times: Thoughts about Lessing’ [1959], Men in Dark Times (New York: Harcourt, 1968), pp. 3–31, on pp. 29–30.Google Scholar
  27. For a thoughtful analysis of this address see P. Fenves, ‘Politics of Friendship — Once Again’, Eighteenth-Century Studies, 32 (1998–9), 133–55, on 144–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 43.
    See S. Zac, Spinoza en Allemagne: Mendelssohn, Lessing et Jacobi (Paris: Méridiens Klincksieck, 1989);Google Scholar
  29. A. Sutcliffe, ‘Quarreling over Spinoza: Moses Mendelssohn and the Fashioning of Jewish Philosophical Heroism’, in R. Brann and A. Sutcliffe (eds), Renewing the Past, Reconfiguring Jewish Culture: From al-Andalus to the Haskalah (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), pp. 167–88, on pp. 175–81.Google Scholar
  30. 44.
    T. Pinkard, German Philosophy 1760–1860: The Legacy of Idealism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 90–6;Google Scholar
  31. U. Goldenbaum, ‘Mendelssohns schwierige Beziehung zu Spinoza’, in E. Schürmann, N. Waszek and F. Weinreich (eds), Spinoza in Deutschland des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts (Stuttgart: Fromman-Holzboog, 2002), pp. 265–317, on pp. 310–12.Google Scholar
  32. 49.
    J.S. Librett, ‘Humanist Antiformalism as a Theopolitics of Race: F.H. Jacobi on Friend and Enemy’, Eighteenth-Century Studies, 32 (1998–9), 233–45, on pp. 239–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. See also C. Schmitt, The Concept of the Political [1932], trans. G. Schwab (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996).Google Scholar
  34. 52.
    F. Oz, Translating the Enlightenment: Scottish Civic Discourse in Eighteenth-Century Germany (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), p. 122.Google Scholar
  35. 54.
    On the place of friendship in nineteenth- and early twentieth-century German history see G.L. Mosse, ‘Friendship and Nationhood: About the Promise and Failure of German Nationalism’, Journal of Contemporary History, 17 (1982), 351–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 55.
    See F.C. Beiser, The Fate of Reason: German Philosophy from Kant to Fichte (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1987) pp. 44–5.Google Scholar
  37. 56.
    J.G. Herder, Gott: einige Gespräche [1787], cited in C. Schapkow, ‘Die Freiheit zu philosophieren’: Jüdische Identität in der Moderne im Spiegel der Rezeption Baruch de Spinozas in der deutschsprachiegn Literatur (Bielefeld: Aisthesis, 2001), p. 73.Google Scholar
  38. 58.
    M. Bollacher, Der junge Goethe und Spinoza (Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1969);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. I. Reimers-Tovote, ‘Schaffende Betrachtung: Zur Spinoza-Rezeption bei Friedrich von Hardenberg (Novalis)’, in E. Balibar, H. Seidel and M. Walther (eds), Freiheit und Notwendigkeit: Ethische und politische Aspekte bei Spinoza und in der Geschichte des (Anti-) Spinozismus (Würzburg: Königshausen, 1994), pp. 143–53; on Heine see Goetschel, Spinoza’s Modernity, pp. 253–76.Google Scholar
  40. 59.
    On Herder and Spinoza see M. Bollacher, ‘Der Philosoph und die Dichter: Spiegelungen Spinozas in der deutschen Romantik’, in H. Delf, J.H. Schoeps and M. Walther (eds), Spinoza in der europäischen Geistesgeschichte (Berlin: Hentrich, 1994), pp. 275–88, on pp. 276–80.Google Scholar
  41. 60.
    See D. Sorkin, The Transformation of German Jewry 1780–1840 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987).Google Scholar
  42. 61.
    See Schapkow, ‘Die Freiheit zu philosophieren’; Z. Levy, Baruch Spinoza: Seine Aufnahme durch die jüdischen Denker in Deutschland (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2001).Google Scholar
  43. 62.
    An extremely wide range of responses to Spinoza are anthologised in W.I. Boucher, ed., Spinoza: Eighteenth and Nineteenth-Century Discussions, 6 vols (Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 1999).Google Scholar
  44. 64.
    J. Derrida, Politics of Friendship [1994], trans. G. Collins (London: Verso, 1997), pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
  45. 70.
    See L. Lampert, Gender and Jewish Difference from Paul to Shakespeare (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. D. Boyarin, Border Lines: The Partition of Judaeo-Christianity (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 71.
    J. Geller, ‘Freud, Blüher, and the Secessio Inversa: Männerbünde, Homosexuality, and Freud’s Theory of Cultural Formation’, in D. Boyarin, D. Itzkovitz and A. Pellegrini (eds), Queer Theory and the Jewish Question (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), pp. 90–120, esp. pp. 104–8.Google Scholar
  48. See also M. Bunzl, ‘Jews, Queers and Other Symptoms: Recent Work in Jewish Cultural Studies’, GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 6 (2000), 321–41;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. D. Boyarin, Unheroic Conduct: The Rise of Heterosexuality and the Invention of the Jewish Man (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1997). pp. 189–270.Google Scholar
  50. 72.
    See M. Garber, Vested Interests: Cross Dressing and Cultural Anxiety (New York: HarperCollins, 1993), pp. 224–33; idem, Vice Versa: Bisexuality and the Eroticism of Everyday Life (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995).Google Scholar
  51. 73.
    See R. Tobin, Warm Brothers: Queer Theory and the Age of Goethe (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000), esp. pp. 35–9;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. A. Kuzniar, Outing Goethe and His Age (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996).Google Scholar
  53. 74.
    See D. Hertz, Jewish High Society in Old Regime Berlin (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988);Google Scholar
  54. more generally on women as regulators of Enlightenment discourse see D. Goodman, The Republic of Letters: A Cultural History of the French Enlightenment (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
  55. 75.
    Tobin, Warm Brothers, pp. 62–3; H. Arendt, Rahel Varnhagen: The Life of a Jewess, ed. L. Weissberg (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), esp. pp. 250–9.Google Scholar
  56. 77.
    On the ideal of detachment in nineteenth-century Britain, and its entwinement with Jewishness, see A. Anderson, The Powers of Distance: Cosmopolitanism and the Cultivation of Detachment (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001), esp. pp. 119–46.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Adam Sutcliffe 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adam Sutcliffe

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations