​

Recently, we have increasingly more often been hearing about a crisis of the West, its illness, decline or even its end. Some politicians (eager to use the rhetoric of an approaching disaster for current political purposes), publicists, artists and teachers, as well as many political scientists, cultural scientists and philosophers, talk about it. Conferences, debates and symposiums are organized to capture symptoms and diagnose the causes of an already lethal ailment. The West, as a certain type of cultural and civilization formation, as a set of historically developed, characteristic spiritual, moral, productive and socio-political practices (with a slightly different scope than geographical Europe, as it also includes the Byzantine areas), would, before our very eyes, inevitably and definitively exhaust its constitutive powers of creation and self-preservation, while at the same time succumbing to various external threats, especially the demographic pressure of the peoples of the South and the economic pressure of the powerful economies of Asia and the Far East. Therefore, the West, it is said, is collapsing as the once geopolitically and demographically exhausted, spiritually indifferent, and militarily and socially drained Roman Empire collapsed under the blows of the wild but vital and domineering Vandals, Alemanni and Longobards. Some will say that such predictions and prophecies are nothing new, that they have been the constant chorus of almost every reflection on Europe for at least a hundred years: after all, as early as 1917 Oswald Spengler published his famous The Decline of the West. And even he was not the first, because the deep crisis of European culture and its characteristic narratives were described meticulously and mercilessly by Fryderyk Nietzsche in the second half of the 19th century. Other "masters of suspicion" - Karl Marx and Zygmunt Freud - also referred to it in their own way. All these thinkers - and the countless number of their more or less efficient epigones - tirelessly convinced us that something ground-breaking has happened to the Western man and the world he had: he had lost faith in himself, in his founding myths and values, which meant that he had exhausted his vitality, his powers of determination and the imposition of sense and meanings that had made him reasonable, courageous, creative, expansive and self-confident, at least in his present form. Some noted this truth with undisguised satisfaction - seeing the structure of the West as the source of all evil or at least mediocrity - others noted it but not without regret or deep concern about the past. However they all agreed that whether we like it or not, the time of the West is passing. Spengler taught that after all Cultural and civilization formations are living organisms, which means that they have a limited life span. They are born in pain and struggle, develop for a while, reach their maximum vitality and creativity, and then, depending on many circumstances, age faster or slower, grow old, weaken and die. The civilization of Mesopotamia, ancient Egypt, powerful Assyria, Greece, Rome - all these once so powerful and, it would seem, invincible, eternal worlds, turned into ashes and sand of the desert. There's no reason why the West should be any different. The more so because it is old and tired, lazy, comfortable and sluggish. The period of heroic actions of the spirit and of the weapon is now over, at best - as Richard Rorty once proposed - with a glass of good whiskey to remember old glories, epic campaigns, spectacular conquests and heroic deeds - without leaving its own cosy terrace. It begins to fear for itself, to calculate, to withdraw, to "stop pursuing" its vital goals, even if it still has the advantage and could easily achieve them, while still maintaining its state of spiritual and material possession. However, the West has doubted its God, who is the necessary foundation and philosophical support for all values, powers, art, laws and customs, as well as for knowledge, science, political order and social achievements. It doubted God, who is the necessary source of will, deed and faith in the meaning necessary for action, both on an individual and a social level. On the other hand, the vacillation of cultural foundations, due to their constant relativization and acrimonious, destructive self-criticism, are terminal symptoms for a given formation. For a culture that does not believe in itself and in its historical mission cannot survive. An organism that turns against itself, that hates itself, that does not want to live, must die.

From today's perspective, it may seem that these critics' observations were premature and exaggerated. After all, the second half of the 19th century appears to us from today's perspective as almost the climax of the development of the Western world: science, technology, demographic development, urbanization, industrialization, power over non-European worlds - all this seems to indicate the climax of its power, with all the negative consequences, including the nightmares of two world wars. Yet, even then, deep cracks and fissures were seen that were supposed to lead the West to a terminal state. Although the world wars confirmed the technological, economic and military potential of the Western world, they also showed its spiritual and axiological crisis, its tendency towards a collective madness of bizarre, utopian ideologies. After the end of the Second World War, it became clear that Europe had become not only a material but also a spiritual hotbed, spread between the poles of paranoid mania of greatness and total indifference or even self-loathing. Probably only in this grey and barren landscape could the communists' made-up proposals, contrary to elementary social facts, appear to be attractive. The fascination of the intellectual elites of the Western European world with various variants of communism, socialism, positivist naturalism and atheism is probably the most glaring proof of the spiritual devastation of Western mentality - the Western world began to feed on pods (Luke 15:16). Really, how low do you have to fall to worship Lenin, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot as heroes? However, even today, there is no shortage of such believers.

However, is the situation really so bad? Is the world of the West actually dying in the midst of the growing rustle of emancipatory flags and the stomping of countless marches proclaiming its just and not premature death? Or maybe these are just the customary lamentations of traditionalists and nostalgic humanists who look back on the past and who always think that once they are gone it will only be barbarians, a world of man without qualities (as Musil would say) or chests (as C.S. Lewis would put it)?   

In order to answer these questions it is necessary to first consider what the essence of the West was and perhaps still is, and thus what the constitutive elements of the Western European cultural and civilization formation are. Only then will we be able to see whether this world is indeed dying or whether it is simply undergoing ordinary, inevitable social and cultural transformations, unnecessarily inflated by pessimists, catastrophists and self-proclaimed apocalyptics.

In my opinion, the traditional and right understanding defines the concept of "West" by referring to three basic historical and cultural categories. There are even three "pillars" of the Western world: Greek philosophy, Christian religion and Roman law. This is, of course, a schoolbook approach in its briefness and brevity. I am aware of the enormous simplification that has been applied here from the outset. Celtic, Germanic, Middle East, African, and finally Slavic and Hungarian elements also melted in the crucible of the West. All these peoples brought their own identity, mentality and many elements of cultural heritage into the European area, where the Western formation was to flourish. At the same time, the historical and spiritual truth is that the three pillars have become the proper foundation and, at the same time, the inner scaffolding of the Western world. We will then start from that historical fact, to check the truth of the belief that without them we simply cannot speak about the West in a meaningful way.

First of all, philosophy, of Greek origin. What does it mean for us today - if anything at all - when it is said that the true metaphysics, which is the heart of every philosophy, has ended with Hegel? What is its significance for the spiritual world of the West today? What news does the nearly thirty centuries of its duration convey to us? How can it still "bind" and sustain the "liquid" reality of the 21st century? First of all, therefore, no matter how, from the perspective of almost three thousand years, we evaluate the history of European philosophy and its current condition, it must be recognised that its emergence is at the same time the 'birth' of a strict and logical reason, and over time also of a scientific and technical reason. But not only and perhaps not primarily about pure logic and science in the modern sense. The birth of reason is something more authentic, it is a wonderful discovery that there is a Truth, and man not only can, but also should, discover this Truth, or at least strive to do so to the best of his ability. For he fulfils his humanity in so far as he approaches it and contemplates it in the act of theoria. Man is a cognitive being, animal rationale, as the Latin people will later say, so he has to get to know reality and live this cognition spiritually. This is his mental food, without which he internally deteriorates and dies. Aristotle's Metaphysics is opened by famous the words: "All men naturally desire knowledge. An indication of this is our esteem for the senses; for apart from their use we esteem them for their own sake, (…)."[1]. The ways of cognition can, and probably even must, be transformed in history - at least to some extent. This does not change the fact, however, that there is Truth, and thus there is a permanent and eternal foundation of reality and its whole order - this order is intelligent, not random, and even objective moral and aesthetic values are inscribed in it: things do not only seem good or beautiful, they really, in themselves, are so. Just as they are sometimes ugly and evil. The Truth exists, or the world is real, truly existing, it is neither a nightmare nor a dream, nor a delusion or the product of a sick mind--and therefore deserves to be treated seriously, fairly, respectfully. For " Can you then be Righteous," Thomas Traherne asks, " unless you be just in rendering to Things their due esteem? All things were made to be yours; and you were made to prize them according to their value”[2]. The Truth exists and we can and should know it, which means that there is not only an epistemic but also an ontological, inalienable bond between Truth and man: in man there is something of Truth. The cosmic Logos, "which orders everything, penetrates everything"[3] corresponds to the logos of the human soul. The Greeks tell us, therefore, that knowledge, though not only knowledge, somehow makes us better, more mature, more complete. It is all about clear and explicit knowledge, based on transparent, generally available rules, and not about sectarian, esoteric gnosis. Discussing Aristotle's thought, Voegelin summarizes the main elements of this mature cognitive ideal, which is the realization of human nature:

“The happiness of theoretic activity is highest because contemplation is the highest function in man; and it is the highest function because it is the function of the highest part in the soul of man, that is, of the intellect (nous) ... The meaning of 'highest' or 'perfect' is further elucidated by the designation of nous as the divinest part (to theiotaton) in man; the activity of the divinest part, thus, becomes the divinest activity; and the pleasure accompanying it becomes the divinest pleasure, the true eudaimonia. […]. The action of the nous (1) extends to the best of knowable things, in particular to things divine; (2) it is an activity that can be maintained more continuously than any other human activity; (3) is accompanied by a specific pleasure of marvellous purity and permanence, in contrast with activity of the practical life; (4) is less dependent on external instruments and on the help of other men, possessing to the highest degree the quality of self-sufficiency (autarkeia); (5) the theoretic life has no purpose beyond itself, and its activity is loved for its own sake, while in all other activities we work for some gain from our action; and (6) the theoretic life is a life of leisure (schole), and the scholastic, leisured life is the purpose for which we undergo the work of our practical life. […] We must therefore refrain from following the advice of those who would recommend that we think only of human things, because we are human and of mortal things, because we are mortal. It is our duty, if possible in life, to make ourselves immortal by cultivating the activity of our most perfect part, which can be described as our better or true self”[4].    

I took the liberty of quoting this longer quotation because it perfectly captures and defines the essence of the cognitive attitude of the Greeks, the one which we have been faithful guardians and heirs for centuries. For this is the ideal: in our knowledge we rise from the sensual to the ideal, from physics and mathematics to metaphysics, from effects to causes, and ultimately from the conditioned and impermanent to the absolute, the eternal, the unchangeable and the perfect. We understand and admire the world around us in its sensual and supra-sensory forms. This contemplation raises and perfects the imperfect human condition, allows it to reach the Divine areas of immutability and full existence. Although modernity has partly transformed and even rejected the contemplative ideal in favour of more and more profound and "invasive" action in the world through technology and industry, this pattern is still deeply rooted in us, also in the institutions of our knowledge - universities. And as long as it continues in universities, and thus as long as they remain temples of knowledge, acquired for itself and for the spiritual benefit of knowledge - and not in higher vocational schools - the idea of liberating, contemplative knowledge will not disappear and will continue to co-create a European identity. Even experiments, transforming reality according to our needs, the modern idea of manipulating in the structure of being, which seem so distant from the peaceful, contemplative cognition of the ancient Greeks, have grown out of it. And if cognition is more and more often incorporated into the service of economics, various political ideologies or the realization of current human needs or simply panicky desires, we are still aware somewhere that without the realization of the great ideal of rational, profound and selfless cognition the culture of the West will cease to be itself.