Stets bereichernd, Ihnen zuzuhören und nicht nur das allein, ich genieße die kultivierte, Ruhe auströmende Atmosphäre des Raumes Ihrer Ansprachen immer wieder auf ein Neues in diesen so wirren Zeiten. Tiefen Dank.

@ThomasWangenheim

6 жыл бұрын

Das freut mich!

@michaeledward2862

Жыл бұрын

@@ThomasWangenheim Da kann ich mich anschließen. Ihre Videos sind immer bereichernd. Neugierfrage: würden Sie sich selbst als religiös/christlich bezeichnen?

@ThomasWangenheim

Жыл бұрын

Nein, das könnte ich nicht. Aber immerhin darf ich mich wohl als Kulturchristen bezeichnen.

Sehr spannendes Format & schöner Sekretär!

I thoroughly enjoyed your analysis. While I am in awe of Spengler's apprehension (and application) of the Ur-symbol, I have never accepted the absolutism of his system and his consequent pessimism. (I do, of course, recognize that anyone who would alter the course of that culture is up against mighty forces.) I had but a smattering of German at the polytechnic, and what I learned is largely lost. I think there are many other people in the English-speaking world who would be interested in what you have to say. Would you consider adding English subtitles to your other videos, particularly those that enunciate your own theory of Ingenium? Thank you for uploading this.

@ThomasWangenheim

5 жыл бұрын

That's a nice idea, thank you! But that will take a couple of days to add an English subtitle to the video kzread.info?o=U&video_id=nv0RPHVeF6s, although the book itself is only available in German.

@ThomasWangenheim

5 жыл бұрын

I just finished the subtitles.

@jeffkalb4032

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you. I will post a comment to that video. I also had a chance to listen to your analysis of the Tannhauser Overture, which happens to be one of my favorites. It gave me additional insight into your ideas.

Die ehemals hier zu findende Diskussion zwischen "Zukunftsphilantropie" und mir wurde privat fortgeführt und erscheint daher als Diskussionsrumpf unter diesem Video nicht mehr. Es ging um die Frage, ob Spengler zu recht die oströmische Späte als magische Kultur umdeutet oder nicht.

Will there be any other videos with English subtitles, as I thoroughly enjoy your comments and insights?

@ThomasWangenheim

8 ай бұрын

No, but you can turn on the German subtitles and then the automatic translation into English. This sometimes produces very odd results, but does its job quite well in general.

Sehr schöne Einrichtung. Die, wohl versilberten, Vasen sehen beeindruckend aus. Wer hat diese angefertigt? Wie sind die gestempelt? LG

@ThomasWangenheim

5 жыл бұрын

Die Vasen haben eine sehr abgenutzte Versilberung, sind aber nicht gestempelt. Angesichts der Größe, Gestaltung und Dopplung tatsächlich ein Glücksfund.

Excellent video, I wish I spoke German so I could enjoy your other videos. Your theory of ingenium reminds me of the theory of crisis put forward by Jose Ortega y Gasset in his book Man and Crisis; that is, when civilization becomes too built up in terms of religion, philosophy, and art, there is a consequent reaction and urgent need to return to simplicity, until civilization once again builds up and the cycle repeats once more. He used the theory in a much broader context though, referring only to the crises of the Renaissance and the modern age.

@ThomasWangenheim

3 жыл бұрын

I suppose you watched my video about Western architecture with the English subtitles. I'm glad you liked it! With respect to Ortega, it is the same thinking in a dichotomy, indeed. But there's a very important difference, though. Ortega still thinks in terms of moral distinctions or at least value judgements (like all the previous philosophers of history did). In the theory of "Culture and Ingenium" however, this is not the case. "Culture" is in no ways the better, higher or moral superior era compared to the times and historical conditions of "Ingenium" (as you might have guessed by the name). It is an opposite way of thinking, designing, behaving and living. So "overdone" is not only a term of one side of the equation, but of both. What Ortega does here, is the translation of the older philosophy of the rise and decline of cultures as a whole onto the scale of smaller periods, like the Renaissance (instead of 1000 years of Roman or Western culture). But to be honest this thinking had already been put forward by Ligeti in the 1920s and later by Düren in the mid 30s. The problem of these two is, that their plublications were not spread enough to call attention of the public, like e.g. Spengler did before.

@MizterMoonshine

3 жыл бұрын

@@ThomasWangenheim Thanks for the response, very interesting. I did indeed watch your other video (I actually checked all your videos for English subs!). But I understand the audience is probably not large enough to warrant subs for every video. But to the point. I think on your graph we are heading into another epoch of Ingenium? Do you agree that we are now seeing the rise of Caesarism that Spengler spoke of in America and a Faustian "crisis of the late republic" (1st century BC/21st century AD) that will lead to Toynbee's universal state and popular military dictatorship? Also wondering what your final verdict on Spengler's prime symbol is. To me, it can be a useful sort of "masterkey" to understanding a culture, even though Spengler rather infamously does not allow for the interplay of cultural forms. I too have struggled with the so-called "problem of Arabian culture" because as you said it is the only area of history that does not neatly fit into Spengler's paradigm. Still, I cannot ignore the eyes being bored into late Roman sculpture, and other supposedly Arabian traits the Romans began to take on. But Spengler would have us believe that civilizations are almost born ex nihilo; his geographical determinism regarding the prime symbol has never sat right with me for reasons that are too lengthy to discuss here. I prefer the religious explanation of Vico or de Coulanges; that is, that the world feeling that Spengler dubbed the prime symbol arises from religious feeling. Also, Spengler never once entertained the idea, that seems somewhat obvious, that the Faustian weltanschauung is actually a deliberate inversion of the classical. The history of the last 1000 years is not just the triumph of man over God but also over ancient civilization. A translatio imperii, as you said.

@ThomasWangenheim

3 жыл бұрын

You are right, the English speaking viewers are very few. And you can’t blame them, as people want to hear their language spoken. Btw, as you are obviously a widely read man in this subject, may I ask, where you are from? As you know, my theory suggests many waves of different frequencies always running simultaneously. So, to determine the future out of this, we have to aks which “time scale” do we like to watch? But unlike Spengler I don’t see the purpose of philosophy of history in the prediction of the future (and if you read carefully, you will notice: he doesn’t either). But if we ask, the question always is: In which kind of era are we heading in the scale of e.g. 100 years, and in which in the scale of 500 years. Culturewise (maybe about 1000 years as Spengler says) we are heading in a new “culture”, because the West (Abendland) was an “Ingenium”. Stylewise we are in a “Culture” now, so we are heading into an “Ingenium” - but of course this will not only take one or two decades to show real effects (although one can already see some signs directing into a new era). Yet I wouldn’t emphazises the populism as much, but first and foremost the centralisation (which of course is an inherent feature of populism and Caesarism). Culture is where smaller entities (principalities, free cities, nations) work together or fight each other. Ingenium is where they are all unified (by force or “voluntarily”). The prime symbol is indeed one of the great or the greatest issue of the Spenglerian system. You are absolutely right that nobody but Spengler could trace this out of geography and climate as he sometimes states. But nevertheless his observations regarding the cultures as a whole are absolutely convincing. So he’s right, but maybe not for the right reason, or let’s say he claims to have a source from which he hasn’t actually taken it. But, to be honest, that’s Ok. He sometimes is more of a poet than a scolar. I don’t blame him. The Arabian traits you are referring to, that the Romans copied (of which one always has to ask, if they are late greek) beginn to lose their relevance if you do what I suggested in my video “Problems of the Arabian culture” (I don’t know, how the chapter title is translated): Watch for the Germanic influence and especially how the later Roman culture endured in the Germanic dominanted north of the Empire (another Pseudomorphosis if you will) and how the same happened in the south, where suddenly Spengler sees something different going on. He’s right about the fact, that Arabian culture was on another level at this time (not only by Greek influence). But in the end they represent the same thing happening to the dismantled Empire as the Germanic tribes do. They are both nothing more than occupants of an abandonned Empire and not much of their own (at this time). But I’m also sceptical about the religious explanation. You see, the problem of all attempts to explain a whole culture with one single trait of society, which religion is, seems to me like reconstructing a Greek temple out of some dust grains. In my point of view these are attempts, that will always fail. We cannot reach this by doing one or another “turn” like explaining the whole corpus of philophy and the world by doing a “linguistic turn” or a "religious turn". We have to acknowledge that we can only handle this complexity by refering to it as a whole. That’s why my terms are not describing a certain part of culture. My terms are referring to a state of society and mind that are - as a whole - existing in different ways. So “Ingenium” can be recognized in everything, in architecture, in politics, in poetry, in science, religion and so on. The same with “Culture”. But they are both very different states and shapes of society and thinking. As you can see, this is a totally different approach, that is not yearning for an explanation that nobody ever will be able to give, but to take the realities and try to figure out, how they are constituted, originating and developing. The last thing you mention, that Spengler didn’t see the opposition in which Antiquity and Faustian culture stood against each other, suprises me a little. Because actally he does. Or is it just me, who read this out of the “Decline”. But I think, if you read carefully, you can’t overlook how he (which was really not a nice way to put it at the time) slams the primitive Greek thinking about time and other things, that are in vast oposition to our thinking. He really does make a very clear distinction between our world and the classical times, which of course is part of his sharp segregation of the prime symbols. But you are right, that this does not automatically result in an opposition, but just in a simple distinction, which is quite another thing. And maybe this was a main part of his thinking that led me into not only separating the two, but treat them as contraries. (The translatio imperii on the other hand speaks rather to a continuation of the Roman empire. That’s why I use it to describe the situation of a pseudomorphosis not only valid to understand the Arabian culture, but also the rising Faustian world.)

@MizterMoonshine

3 жыл бұрын

@@ThomasWangenheim Ah, you speak of cycles within cycles. I will admit that, somewhat like Spengler, I am a determinist, and believe that the events of generations ago have set firm a broad outline of the future. While I don't at all see the sole purpose of philosophy of history as predicting the future, it is still of great interest to me, and a comprehensive philosophy of history does aid in peering through the mists of what has yet to come. "The historian is, on the reverse side, a prophet" wrote Ortega. Though like the trajectory of a bullet, any tentative outline of the future will be subject to changes in the winds. Centralization is indeed the larger picture than mere populism, along with what I see as the fading out of individualism and a now ubiquitous tribalistic groupthink, which I think will inexorably lead Western civilization down a similar transformative path as the last days of the Roman republic. I believe this is something like what you mean by a cycle of ingenium within the larger cycle - a change in the structure of things. In regard to the Arabian culture, you seem to morphologically equate the Islamic Golden Age with the scholastics in Western civilization. I had believed the Islamic Golden Age was the Islamic Enlightenment, so to speak, with the Ottoman empire being the following centralized "Roman" universal state. I particularly found Spengler's argument that Islam was a reformatory movement to be convincing. But you say the Arabian culture had not even began? I recall Spengler mentioning that the Magian mind was unable to detach itself from the divine, unlike most other cultures. This could explain the timidity of Islamic philosophy that you mention. The Arabian culture is certainly the most messy of Spengler's high civilizations. On Spengler's geographical determinism; I could never take it seriously, because why then does it take thousands of years for this new culture to arise if there are also people living there that long? Spengler's weak answer was that it was spontaneous. After I read "Inventing the Individual" by Larry Siedentop I became convinced that Christianity was mostly responsible for the germination of the Faustian world feeling. When Jesus says "flesh is born of flesh, but spirit is born of spirit", does this not sound characteristically Faustian? As Spengler noted, the home of the Faustian-Christian god is not on Earth. I believe this is significant. In Christianity the corporeal world becomes a mere mask for hidden machinations, the exact opposite of the Greek worldview which took every physical object at face value. Christianity took centuries of religious development to influence a new worldview in the Germanic kingdoms, (significantly with Boethius' Neoplatonism, which taught a Christian essentialism that reigned until Ockham's Nominalist revolution demolished it) until the religious reforms of the 9th and 10th centuries, which is when Western civilization begins. I suppose what I am saying is that Christianity made the European world think in a very different way which then heavily influenced its form languages (its prime symbol), but I agree that it cannot be the only contributor as there are other factors to consider, such as the pre-existing warlike temperament of the Germanic culture. Will to power + Christianity = Faustian civilization; this has been my understanding. On your last point you misunderstand me, I agree Spengler definitely set up the Faustian and Classical prime symbols as antipodes. But because of his geographical determinism, he believed this was basically due to random chance. He did not consider that the Christian revolution may have been an unconscious yet /deliberate/ inversion of the tired and stale Classical world feeling, and that Faustian civilization is thus a deliberate break away from the ancient world. I think you would agree with this as you describe the West itself as an "ingenium". I am from Ireland btw + thanks for the interesting conversation.

@ThomasWangenheim

3 жыл бұрын

The way you put the purpose of predictions of the future in a philosophy of history is absolutely fine with me: it's a mist and some guidance can be provided, nothing more, nothing less. I'm not talking about where the Arabic culture was at this point of time morphologically. Because this is hard to pinpoint. We can talk about these things in a profound way only in case of a distiguished cultural profile. I can't see this until the Arabic expansion. And this expansion is a mirror image of the Germanic conquest of the late Roman empire. If we look at it this way, then they may have been in their childhood, which is somewhat counterintuitive, because this cultures already existed for a long time nearly inside of the Persian and Greek culture. Their religion is a late copy of a relatively unsophisticated form of christianity, there are some indivualistic developements in architectur around 1000 A.D. and at the same time some philosophical achievements, as I mention in the video. But the latter doesn't surpass what they already knew from the Greeks (as it was the case with the early scholastic philosophy). The only field where they are inventors is mathematics (and some argue this was also just copied). So I'm struggeling with calling it a high culture at all, like the Greek culture e.g. Had there been a developement, like it happened in the north after the pseudo-antique Romanesque period, there would be no question, but this is the point, where their developement literally stalls. So, I just don't see enough material to make a clear proposition. I agree, that christianity had a pervasive influence on the "Faustian" culture. But as it is a developement of the late Roman empire (Ingenium of Rome), it is just one of many expressions of a new cultural entity to me, contrary to the ancient way of life. And this of course is, what I call Ingenium. I'm glad, that Spengler reached out to Ireland, too. Normally only Italians, Amercians and Russians are known as Spenglerians. So this is nice to know!

The background of books on shelves is in itself a form of pseudomorphosis. The library of books are not really authentic, no body reads just volumes which does not include ordinary single hard and softcover editions. Some interior designer has been commissioned to present a pleasant and charming appearance for a such a lecture as this. The touch of say a martini drink and Thomas's attire lends a sophisticated polish to the occasion. Still, I enjoyed the historical topic of Oswald Spengler's philosophy and Thomas Wangenheim erudite analysis.

@ThomasWangenheim

5 жыл бұрын

Don’t judge too fast, my friend. This is part of a library that I actually read and that I collected over years. But every time I am introduced to a new author, I look out for a pre-war edition of his collected works. That makes for the great advantage, that I’ll find any other work of his later on. So, the interior designer is just me and my selection of authors. Still, I am glad to read that you liked the talk.

Zur Ergänzung empfehle ich Arnold J Toynbee, Der Gang der Weltgeschichte. Ich bin überhaupt erst durch Toynbee zu Spengler gekommen.

@ThomasWangenheim

3 жыл бұрын

In diesem Vortrag behandle ich ein historisches Phänomen anhand geschichtsphilosophischer Überlegungen. Toynbee hat mit Geschichtsphilosophie aber nichts am Hut, hat sich sogar sehr deutlich dagegen verwehrt. „Der Gang der Weltgeschichte“ ist eine rein historische Nacherzählung auf der Basis der Spenglerschen Zyklenvorstellung und hat damit keine ergänzende Funktion.

Ich würde es anzweifeln, dass es zwischen 0 und 1000 nach Christus eine einheitliche, germanische Kultur gab. Selbst heute gibt es regional bedeutende Unterschiede. Zumal eine Abhängigkeit von der antiken Kultur nicht gegeben ist, da die römische Kultur zwar über den Rhein hinaus ging, jedoch diversen Abwandlungen unterlag und nicht überall angenommen wurde. Außerdem gab es slawische und zentralasiatische Einflüsse und später welche durch die Nordmänner. Es wird wohl kaum einen studierten Experten für das Mittelalter geben der die These vertritt, Mitteleuropa habe keine eigenenständigen Leistungen in Kultur hervorgebracht, sondern nur auf der Antike aufgebaut. Große Teile des antiken Wissens und des Wesens gingen verloren und wurden erst später erneut entdeckt.

@ThomasWangenheim

Жыл бұрын

Es tut mir leid, aber das ist trivial. Es gab auch keine einheitliche römische Kultur im Reich. Jede Region hatte ihre Götter, ihre Sprache, ihre Bräuche, ihre architektonischen Eigenheiten. Trotzdem sagen wir römische Kultur und so sage ich hier germanische. Solche Pseudokritik ist sehr langweilig. Ich habe auch nie behauptet "Mitteleuropa habe keine eigenständigen Leistungen in Kultur" hervorgebracht. Ich habe lediglich gesagt, daß hier keine HOCHkultur entstanden ist. Und um das zu sehen, muß man nur einmal die "Architektur", die "Malerei", die "Plastik", die "Literatur" der germanischen Kultur vor dem Eindringen der antiken Kultur ansehn. Wer da keinen qualitativen Unterschied zur Hochkultur Roms und Griechenlands erkennen kann, tut mir dann doch herzlich leid.

So trinken's doch mal und bleiben s' nicht ewig mit erhobenem Waßerglas !

Herrn Wangenheim ich bewundere sie sehr können sie verraten wie hoch ihr IQ ist, falls sie mal einen Intelligenztests gemacht haben ?

@ThomasWangenheim

5 жыл бұрын

Ich habe vor über zehn Jahren mal einen Fernsehtest mitgemacht, aber nie einen wissenschaftlich kontrollierten absolviert. Und das einzig hätte Aussagekraft.

@skyhawkpilot3608

5 жыл бұрын

Verstehe vielen Dank für Ihre Antwort, könnten sie vielleicht mal ein Video über die Intelligenz Unterschiede der unterschiedlichen Ethnien drehen !

@ThomasWangenheim

5 жыл бұрын

Das ist nicht mehr nötig, da ich es bereits ausführlich auf meinem Blog getan habe.

@ZenReise

5 жыл бұрын

@@ThomasWangenheim Was war das Ergebnis, unabhängig von seiner Aussagekraft?

@ThomasWangenheim

5 жыл бұрын

@@ZenReise Ich kann mich nicht entsinne, ob es 132 oder 138 war. Und wie gesagt: ein Fernsehspiel, dem man folgen konnte, nicht mehr.

Die antike abendländische Kultur ist eine indogermanische Kultur.

@ThomasWangenheim

3 жыл бұрын

In der Spenglerschen Theorie gibt es keine "antike abendländische Kultur". Entweder abendländisch (faustisch) oder antik. Das sind hier scharf getrennte Begriffe.