74
Subtle Agroecologies
process is visible to us once we shift our attention from static form to fuid process. This insight he
attributes to encountering the discontinuous metamorphosis in the shape of leaves, which he frst
noticed with the dwarf palm (Chamaerops humilis L.) in the botanical gardens in Padua in 1786
(Arber, 1950: 42).
THE ROLE OF THE HUMAN BEING
The third aspect of Goethe’s approach to science that needs some explication is the role the human
being plays in scientifc investigation. As Goethe says, to understand the whole as a metamorphosing possibility we need to ‘remain as quick and fexible as nature and follow the example she gives’
(von Goethe, 1995: 64). What does he mean by this exactly? The bridge that Goethe uses to make
the sequential connection from one instance to another, from one leaf to another, from one plant to
another, etc., is that of the human imagination. Rather than seeing human faculties such as imagination, or indeed intuition, as impairing scientifc objectivity, Goethe sees these human faculties
as the means to really understand nature. By allowing nature to work with the human faculties, he
thought we can begin to see with the mind’s eye and thus make connections and reveal the workings of nature that are not initially or easily apparent. For Goethe, the supersensible dimension
would be that which we can see once we know how to look and bring that looking into our thinking, to contemplate and use the mind’s eye (Stephenson, 1995: 13). He is resistant to the notion of
a free-foating idea or concept that is not tied to, or indeed given by, the sense perceptible to the
human mind through what seems like a shared contemplation (Stephenson, 1995). The observation
and identifcation of key aspects of nature and an open contemplation of them helps to reveal nature
as a whole, and this activity, in Goethe’s view, is crucial for the progress of science. His use of the
term Anschauung captures this well although it is not directly translatable. Agnes Arber, 2 commenting on Goethe’s work, renders it as ‘intuitive knowledge gained directly through contemplation of
the visible aspect’ (Arber, 1954: 122).
Goethe’s lively discussion of philosophical problems with the activity of scientifc investigation helps to fll out the picture of how he worked and what he thought was possible. Accounts of
Goethe’s own perceptual abilities abound (Amrine et al., 1987: 379), and he acknowledges that he
was naturally very perceptive, but also believes in the development of one’s faculties. It is clear
that he thought the human sensorium was capable of improvement when he discusses the idea of
scientifc work opening ‘new organs of perception’. ‘The human being knows himself only insofar as he knows the world; he perceives the world only in himself, and himself only in the world.
Every new object clearly seen, opens up a new organ of perception in us’ (von Goethe, 1995: 39).
The means to improvement was the exercise of looking at nature. He seems to invoke a cycle
of looking at nature, examining oneself, looking at nature again and so on. The procedure then
becomes a spiral of enhancing capabilities through experience and closer and closer relationship
with the aspect of nature studied. For Goethe, this is the activity of science, he says: ‘Insofar as
he makes use of his healthy senses, man himself is the most exact scientifc instrument possible’
(von Goethe, 1995: 331). That sense of having to live into, to merge with, the thing studied comes
through in his writing.
Thus, we have a scientist very alive to the problem of presuppositions and human tendencies to
shape the world to themselves and yet endorsing faculties such as imagination and intuition to arrive
at insights about the workings (or rather the being) of nature. To highlight that seeming conundrum,
he talks of the kind of approach that is needed as a ‘delicate empiricism’. He says, ‘There is a delicate empiricism which makes itself utterly identical with the object, thereby becoming true theory.
But this enhancement of our mental powers belongs to a highly evolved age’ (von Goethe, 1995:
307). This delicate empiricism is Anschauung: where contemplation leads to intuitive insights by
2 Agnes Arber was a twentieth-century botanist and philosopher/historian of biology who was an insightful interpreter of
Goethe’s scientifc work.
Subtle Agroecologies
process is visible to us once we shift our attention from static form to fuid process. This insight he
attributes to encountering the discontinuous metamorphosis in the shape of leaves, which he frst
noticed with the dwarf palm (Chamaerops humilis L.) in the botanical gardens in Padua in 1786
(Arber, 1950: 42).
THE ROLE OF THE HUMAN BEING
The third aspect of Goethe’s approach to science that needs some explication is the role the human
being plays in scientifc investigation. As Goethe says, to understand the whole as a metamorphosing possibility we need to ‘remain as quick and fexible as nature and follow the example she gives’
(von Goethe, 1995: 64). What does he mean by this exactly? The bridge that Goethe uses to make
the sequential connection from one instance to another, from one leaf to another, from one plant to
another, etc., is that of the human imagination. Rather than seeing human faculties such as imagination, or indeed intuition, as impairing scientifc objectivity, Goethe sees these human faculties
as the means to really understand nature. By allowing nature to work with the human faculties, he
thought we can begin to see with the mind’s eye and thus make connections and reveal the workings of nature that are not initially or easily apparent. For Goethe, the supersensible dimension
would be that which we can see once we know how to look and bring that looking into our thinking, to contemplate and use the mind’s eye (Stephenson, 1995: 13). He is resistant to the notion of
a free-foating idea or concept that is not tied to, or indeed given by, the sense perceptible to the
human mind through what seems like a shared contemplation (Stephenson, 1995). The observation
and identifcation of key aspects of nature and an open contemplation of them helps to reveal nature
as a whole, and this activity, in Goethe’s view, is crucial for the progress of science. His use of the
term Anschauung captures this well although it is not directly translatable. Agnes Arber, 2 commenting on Goethe’s work, renders it as ‘intuitive knowledge gained directly through contemplation of
the visible aspect’ (Arber, 1954: 122).
Goethe’s lively discussion of philosophical problems with the activity of scientifc investigation helps to fll out the picture of how he worked and what he thought was possible. Accounts of
Goethe’s own perceptual abilities abound (Amrine et al., 1987: 379), and he acknowledges that he
was naturally very perceptive, but also believes in the development of one’s faculties. It is clear
that he thought the human sensorium was capable of improvement when he discusses the idea of
scientifc work opening ‘new organs of perception’. ‘The human being knows himself only insofar as he knows the world; he perceives the world only in himself, and himself only in the world.
Every new object clearly seen, opens up a new organ of perception in us’ (von Goethe, 1995: 39).
The means to improvement was the exercise of looking at nature. He seems to invoke a cycle
of looking at nature, examining oneself, looking at nature again and so on. The procedure then
becomes a spiral of enhancing capabilities through experience and closer and closer relationship
with the aspect of nature studied. For Goethe, this is the activity of science, he says: ‘Insofar as
he makes use of his healthy senses, man himself is the most exact scientifc instrument possible’
(von Goethe, 1995: 331). That sense of having to live into, to merge with, the thing studied comes
through in his writing.
Thus, we have a scientist very alive to the problem of presuppositions and human tendencies to
shape the world to themselves and yet endorsing faculties such as imagination and intuition to arrive
at insights about the workings (or rather the being) of nature. To highlight that seeming conundrum,
he talks of the kind of approach that is needed as a ‘delicate empiricism’. He says, ‘There is a delicate empiricism which makes itself utterly identical with the object, thereby becoming true theory.
But this enhancement of our mental powers belongs to a highly evolved age’ (von Goethe, 1995:
307). This delicate empiricism is Anschauung: where contemplation leads to intuitive insights by
2 Agnes Arber was a twentieth-century botanist and philosopher/historian of biology who was an insightful interpreter of
Goethe’s scientifc work.