Humboldt’s university ideal was not science for its own sake but national moral formation

Evidence

Reading Humboldt’s report, one may be tempted to reduce his entire approach to the politics of the scientific institution to the famous dictum: “Science for its own sake.” But this would be to misunderstood the ultimate aim of his policies, which is guided by the principle of legitimation we are discussing and is very close to the one Schleiermacher elucidates in a more thorough fashion. … Humboldt does indeed declare that science obeys its own rules, that the scientific institution “lives and continually renews itself on its own, with no constraint or determined goal whatsoever.” But he adds that the University should orient its constituent element, science, to “the spiritual and moral training of the nation.” How can thisBildung-effectresult from the disinterested pursuit of learning? Are not the State, the nation, the whole of humanity indifferent to knowledge for its own sake? What interests them, as Humboldt admits, is not learning, but “character and action.” — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 264

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies the German idealist principle of legitimation that Jameson’s account of the postmodern condition is responding against.
• XREF: This is the Bildung university ideal that Jameson positions as the ‘master narrative’ whose delegitimation Lyotard documents; connects to the reading purpose of tracking how Lyotard’s incredulity drives Jameson’s response. — connects to: Science became an autonomous value detached from its survival origins — Georg Simmel, The Sociology of Georg Simmel, 2032

Broader Connections

• Science became an autonomous value detached from its survival origins #contradicts (0.80) — Georg Simmel, The Sociology of Georg Simmel, 2032