SPECIAL OPERATIONS: UNITS

October 11, 2006 at 6:01 pm | Posted in Military | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

history.gif

world.gif

compass.gif

loudspeaker.gif

globeinmoney.jpg

Albania

Reparti i Neutralizimit te Elementit te Armatosur (RENEA)

Reparti i Operacioneve Speciale (ROS)

Shqiponjat

Batalioni Special Commando

Regiment Commando

FNSH

Republican Guard Operative Company

Reparti Special i Farkes

Port Authority Security Force

Algeria

Groupe d’Intervention Spécial (GIS)

Argentina

Army

Special Operations Forces Group

601st Commando Company

602nd Commando Company

601st Air Assault Regiment

Rapid Deployment Force (FDR)

Navy

Tactical Divers Group (APBT)

Amphibious Commandos Group (APCA)

Air Force

Special Operations Group (GOE)

Australia

Special Operations Command

Australian Special Air Service Regiment (ASAS)

Tactical Assault Group (West) (TAG West)

4th (Commando) Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment (4RAR [Cdo])

Tactical Assault Group (East) (TAG East)

1st Commando Regiment

Regional Force Surveillance Units (RFSU’s)

Incident Response Regiment

171st Aviation Squadron

Navy

Clearance Diving Team

Austria

Einsatzkommando Cobra (EKO Cobra)

Jagdkommando

Bangladesh

Army Commandos

Para-Commandos

Presidential Guard Regiment

Rapid Action Battalion (RAB)

Special Security Forces

Belgium

Belgian Army Special Forces Group (SFG)

Belgian Army Para-Commandos

Federal Police Special Units (former SIE/ESI)

Bolivia

Polivalente

Bosnia

Crni Labudovi (Black Swans)

Patriotska Liga (Patriotic League)

Botswana

SSG

Brazil

Brigada de Operações Especiais

1º Batalhão de Forcas Especiais

1º Batalhão de Ações de Comandos

Centro de Instrução de Operações Especiais

Comando de Operações Táticas

Força de Ação Rápida

PELOPES

COMANF

GRUMEC

GERR

PARA-SAR

Grupo de Ações Táticas Especiais

Projeto Talon

Bulgaria

Naval specialized research and analysis division

Canada

Main article: Canadian special forces

Devil’s Brigade (World War II)

Canadian Airborne Regiment (Disbanded 1995)

Canadian Special Operations Forces Command (CANSOFCOM)

Canadian Special Operations Regiment (Formed summer 2006)

Joint Task Force 2 (JTF-2)

Joint Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defence Company (JNBCD Company)

427 Special Operations Aviation Squadron (427 SOAS)

China, People’s Republic of

Army

People’s Liberation Army Special Operations Forces

Air Force

15th Airborne Corps

Police

Immediate Action Unit (IAU)

Special Police Unit (SPU)

Colombia

Agrupación de Fuerzas Especiales Antiterroristas Urbanas (AFEUR)

Brigada de Fuerzas Especiales

Compañías Contra Guerrilleros Urbanos

Centro de Información Anti-Extorsión y Secuestros (CIAES)

Grupo Operacional Contra Extorsión y Secuestros (GOES)

Grupo Anti-Secuestro de Aviones (GASDA)

Grupo de Comandos Anfibios (GCA)

Grupos de Acción Unificada por la Libertad Personal (GAULA)

Comando de Operaciones Especiales (COPES)

Congo, Democratic Republic of the

10th Special Infantry Brigade

Costa Rica

Unidad de Intervención Especial (UIE)

Croatia

Bojna za specijalna djelovanja

Prvi hrvatski gardijski zdrug

Antiteroristicka jedinica Lucko

Czech Republic

7th Reconnaissance Battalion

Denmark

Frømandskorpset

Jægerkorpset

Slædepatruljen Sirius

Ecuador

Special Forces Brigade

Egypt

Unit 777

El Salvador

Comando Especial Anti-Terrorista (CEAT)

Grupo de Reacción Policial (GRP)

Grupo de Operaciones Especiales (GOE)

Eritrea

Eritrean Special Forces (accepts female members)

Estonia

K-Commando

Ethiopia

205th Commando Brigade

206th Commando Brigade

Agazi Commando Division

Fiji

Police Tactical Response Unit

Finland

Erillinen Pataljoona 4 (Continuation War)

Karhu Ryhmä (Bear Force)

Sissikomppaniat

Utti Jaeger Regiment

France

Army

Brigade des Forces Spéciales Terre (BFST)

13ème Régiment de Dragons Parachutistes (13ème RDP)

1er Régiment Parachutiste d’Infanterie de Marine (1er RPIMa)

Détachement ALAT des Opérations Spéciales (DAOS)

11éme Régiment Parachutiste d’Intervention (disbanded)

Escadrille des Operations Spéciales (EOS)

Groupement Spéciale Autonome (GSA)

Groupement des Commandos Parachutistes (GCP)

Air Force

Commando Parachutiste de l’Air (CPA 10, 20, and 30)

Escadrille des Helicopteres Speciaux (EHS)

Recherche et Sauvetage au Combat (RSC)

Navy

Naval Commandos

French Foreign Legion

Detachement d’Intervention Operationnelle Subaquatique (DINOPS)

Gendarmerie

Escadron Parachutiste d’Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale (EPIGN)

Groupe d’Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale (GIGN)

National Police

Recherche Assistance Intervention Dissuasion (RAID)

Direction Générale de la Sécurité Extérieure

Division des Operations Spéciales (DOS)

Germany

WWII

Brandenburgers

Army

Division Spezielle Operationen

Fernspählehrkompanie 200

Luftlandebrigade 26 (Airborne Brigade)

Luftlandebrigade 31 (Airborne Brigade)

Kommando Spezialkräfte (KSK)

Division Luftbewegliche Operationen

luftbewegliche Brigade 1 (Air Assault Brigade)

Navy

Spezialisierte Einsatzkräfte Marine (SEK M)

Kampfschwimmer (Combat Diver)

Minentaucher

Boarding-Spezialisten

Marineschutzkräfte (Fleet Protection Group)

Air Force

Objektschutzregiment

CSAR (planned)

Federal Police

Grenzschutzgruppe 9 (GSG-9)

State Police

Spezialeinsatzkommando (SEK)

Customs Police

Zentrale Unterstützungsgruppe Zoll (ZUZ)

Greece

Army

Eidiko Tmima Alexiptotiston (Special Paratrooper Unit, ETA)

Z Moira Amfivion Katadromon (Z Amphibious Raider Squadron, Z MAK)

575 Tagma Pezonavton (575 Marine Battalion, 575TPN)

Navy

Dioikisi Ypovrihion Katastrofon (Underwater Demolitions Command, DYK)

Air Force

31 Moira Eidikon Epiheiriseon (31st Special Operations Squadron, 31 MEE)

Police

EKAM (Special Anti-Terrorist Unit)

Coast Guard

OEA

Guatemala

Kaibiles

[edit]

Honduras

Batallon de Fuerzas Especiales

TESON

Iceland

Police

Víkingasveitin (Viking Squad / Special Operations Unit of the National Commissioner)

Coast Guard

Ordinance disposal Unit / Frogman team

India

Army

Para Commandos

Navy

Marine Commando Force

Air Force

Garud Commando Force

Counter-Terrorist Units

National Security Guard

Other units

Special Frontier Force

Special Protection Group

Indonesia

Army / TNI AD

Kopassus (Komando Pasukan Khusus / Army Special Force) TNI AD

Tontaipur (Peleton Intai Tempur / The combat and reconnaissance platoon) Kostrad TNI AD

Batalyon Raiders (Raiders Battalions) TNI AD

Navy / TNI AL

Kopaska (Komando Pasukan Katak / Navy combat swimer / UDTs) TNI AL

Marine Corp / Korps Marinir TNI AL

Denjaka (Detasemen Jala Mengkara / Maritime Anti Terror) TNI AL

Taifib (Intai Amphibi / Marine Reconnaissance) Korps Marinir TNI AL

Air Force / TNI AU

Detasemen Bravo (Modelled on the British SAS) Paskhas TNI AU

Police / POLRI

Detasemen Khusus 88 (National Police Special Detacement 88 Counter-terrorism)

Ireland

Emergency Response Unit (ERU)

Irish Army Rangers (accepts female members)

Israel

Defense Force (IDF)

General Staff (GS)

Unit 101 (disbanded)

Sayeret Matkal

Unit 8200

Combat Corps (CCH) (MAFHASH, Hebrew)

Sayeret Yahalom (Diamond)

Sayeret Egoz (Nut)

Sayeret Duvdevan (Cherry)

Sayeret Tsanhanim (Paratroopers)

Sayeret Golani (of the Golan [heights])

Sayeret Yael (Chamois)

Sayeret Shaked (Almond)

Duhifat

Unit Oketz (Sting)

Alpinistim (Alpinists)

Special Air Force Units (SAU) (KA’AM, Hebrew)

Sayeret Shaldag

Unit 5707 (TSASAM, Target Acquisition Unit)

Unit 669 (YEHIDAT HILUTZ, Extrication Unit)

Special Sea Corps Units (SSU) (SHAYETET, Hebrew)

Shayetet 13 (13th Flotilla)

YALTAM (Underwater Task Force)

Commandos Yamit

Police

YAMAM (Special Police Unit)

Force 100

Italy

Carabinieri

Gruppo di Intervento Speciale (GIS)

State Police

Nucleo Operativo Centrale di Sicurezza (NOCS)

Guardia di Finanza

AntiTerrorismo Pronto Impiego(AT-PI)

Army

9th Parachute Assault Regiment “Col Moschin”

185th Parachute Reconnaissance Regiment “Folgore”

4th Alpini Parachute Regiment “Monte Cervino”

Navy

Comando Raggruppamento Subacquei ed Incursori “Teseo Tesei” (COMSUBIN)

Air Force

Reparto Incursori dell’Aeronautica Militare (RIAM)

Fucilieri dell’Aria

Japan

Army

1st Airborne Brigade

Guide Unit

Special Operations Group

S Unit

Western Army Infantry Regiment

Ranger Platoon

Kazakhstan

Aristan

Spetznaz Brigade

Kenya

D Company, 20th Parachute Battalion

Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of

Light Infantry Training Guidance Bureau

Korea, Republic of

ROK Army Special Operations Command

ROK Army 707th Special Mission Unit (White Tiger)

ROKMC 1st Special Reconnaissance Battalion (Sharkmen)

ROKMC Force Reconnaissance

ROK Navy 56th Special Warfare Brigade

ROK Air Force 6th CCT/CSAR

Kuwait

10th Commando Battalion

Kyrgyzstan

Kyrgyz Special Forces (Scorpion)

Latvia

OMEGA

Specialo uzdevumu vieniba (SUV)

Lebanon

Army Commando Regiment

Marine Commando Regiment

Police

Fuhud (Panthers) (Special Police Unit)

Lithuania

Aras

Aitvaras

Pasienio SPB

Macedonia

Skorpii (Scorpions)

Volci (Wolfs)

Malaysia

Army

10 Paratrooper Brigade

Grup Gerak Khas (GGK (Special Strike Group))

11 Rejimen Gerak Khas

21 Regimen Komando

22 Regimen Komando

Navy/TLDM

Paskal

Air Force/TUDM

Paskau

Force Protection Team Paskau

Skuadron Sayap Tempur (Assault Wings Squadrons) Paskau

Police/PDRM

Pasukan Gerakan Khas (Malaysian Police SWAT, Special Counter Terrorism Police )

Malta

Armed Forces

C (Special Duties) Company (1st Regiment, Armed Forces)

Rapid Deployment Team (2nd Regiment, Armed Forces)

Police

Special Assignments Group

Mexico

Grupo Aeromóvil de Fuerzas Especiales (GAFE)

Fuerzas Especiales (FES)

Grupo Aeromóvil de Fuerzas Especiales del Alto Mando (High Command GAFE)

Grupo de Operaciones Especiales (GOPES)

Netherlands

Army

Korps Commandotroepen (KCT)

Marine Corps

Bijzondere Bijstands Eenheid (BBE)

7th Troop (integrated with British SBS)

Mountain Leader Platoon (integrated with British ML)

New Zealand

Special Air Service of New Zealand (NZSAS)

Norway

Army

Norwegian Army Special Forces (Hærens jegerkommando, HJK)

Norwegian Army Paratroopers (Fallskjermjegere)

Norwegian Special Force (Forsvarets spesialkommando, FSK)

Navy

Naval Ranger Branch (Marinens jegervåpen)

Norwegian Naval Special Forces (Marinejegerkommandoen, MJK)

Norwegian Coastal Ranger Command (Kystjegerkommandoen, KJK)

Norwegian Mine Diver Command (Minedykkerkommandoen)

Tactical Boat Squadron

Air Force

720 Squadron

Pakistan

Special Services Group

Peru

Navy

Fuerza de Operaciones Especiales (FOES)

Unidad Especial de Combate (UEC)

Agrupamiento de Comandos Anfibios

Philippines

Light Reaction Battalion

1st Special Forces Regiment (Airborne) (SFR “A”)

1st Scout Ranger Regiment (FSRR)

Philippine Marine Corps Force Recon Battalion

Special Warfare Group

710th Special Operations Wing

Special Action Force

Special Reaction Unit

Philippine National Police Aviation Security Command

National Bureau of Investigation Anti-Terrorist Division

Philippine Coast Guard Special Operations Group

Poland

1st Special Commando Regiment

GROM (Grupa Reagowania Operacyjno-Manewrowego)

6th Airborne Brigade (6 Brygada Desantowo-Szturmowa im. Gen. Sosabowskiego)

Grupa Specjalna Pletwonurków (GSP)

Pododdzialy Antyterrorystyczne (Zarzad Operacji
Antyterrorystycznych, ZOA KGP)

4101st Paratroop Battalion (LRRP units)

Portugal

Army

Comandos (Commandos)

Special Operations Troops (Portuguese Rangers)

Companhia de Precursores (Pathfinder Company, Precs)

Navy

Fuzileiros (Marines)

Destacamento de Acções Especiais (Special Actions Detachment, DAE)

Destacamentos de Mergulhadores Sapadores (Combat Divers Detachments)

Air Force

Portuguese Air Force Combat Rescue Teams (Rescom)

Police

Grupo de Operações Especiais (Police Special Operations Group, GOE)

Companhia de Operações Especiais da GNR (Portuguese National Republican Guard Special
Operations Company)

Russia/Soviet Union

Alpha Group (FSB).

Beta Group

Delfin (Dolphin)

Saturn

Kaskad (Cascade)

Grom (Thunder)

Vympel (Pennant, aka Group V) (FSB)

Spetsnaz (Spetsialnoje Naznachenie)

Spetsnaz GRU

Naval infantry Spetsnaz (black berets)

VDV

7th, 76th, 98th, 99th, 103rd, 104th, 105th, and 106th Airborne
Guard Divisions

Independent Air Assault Brigades

45th Distinct Reconnaissance Regiment

MVD

OSNAZ (Rus, Vityaz, Grom)

ODON (Separate Operational Purpose Division)

OMON

OMSN (SOBR)

Berkut (Golden Eagles)

Kondor

SVR

Zaslon

Romania

Detasamentul de Interventie Rapida (MApN)

Paratroopers Command

60th Paratroopers Battalion “Baneasa-Otopeni”

495th Paratroopers Battalion “Captain Stefan Soverth”

498th Paratroopers Battalion “Smaranda Braescu”

Recon

528th Reconnaissance Battalion

313th Reconnaissance Battalion

317th Reconnaissance Battalion

Special Operations Command

Batalionul 1 Operatii Speciale

Batalionul de Informatii (HUMINT)

Departamentul Operatiuni Psihologice (PSY OPS)

Navy

307th Marine Battalion

Scafandri de lupta (Combat Divers)

Saudi Arabia

Special Emergency Force

Serbia

63rd Paratroop Brigade (63. padobranska brigada)

72nd Assault Brigade (72. jurišna brigada)

Singapore

Naval Diving Unit (NDU)

Singapore Commandos

Singapore Special Operations Force (SOF)

Singapore Guards

Slovakia

5th PSU

Slovenia

MORiS

Enota za specialno delovanje

Specialna Enota Policije (SEP)

South Africa

Army

Special Forces Brigade (SFB), commonly known as “Recces” an abbvreviation for
“reconnaissance commandos”.

Police

Special Task Force (STF)

Spain

Army

Mando de Operaciones Especiales (MOE) (Army Special Operations Command)

Bandera de Operaciones Especiales de la Legión (BOEL)(disbanded)

Air Force

Escuadrilla de Zapadores Paracaidistas (EZAPAC)

Escuadrilla de Apoyo al Despliegue Aereo (EADA)

Navy

Unidad Especial de Buceadores de Combate (UEBC)

Unidad de Operaciones Especiales (Special Operations Unit, UOE)

Sri Lanka

Special Task Force (STF)

Special Force (SF)

Special Boat Squadron (SBS)

Sri Lankan Army Commandos

LRRP

Switzerland

Grenadiers

Fallschirmaufklärer (Kompanie 17)

Syria

Special Defence Companies

Republican Guard

Sweden

Särskilda Skyddsgruppen (Special Protection Group)

Fallskärmsjägarskolan (Airborne Rangers)

Svenska amfibiekåren (Marines)

Norrlandsjägarna (Arctic Rangers)

Nationella Insatsstyrkan (Police CT unit)

Taiwan (Republic of China)

Thunder Squad (Police CT unit)

Security Preservation Force

Nighthawks Force (Counter-decapitation unit, Military Police Command)

Aviation and Special Warfare Command

862nd Special Warfare Brigade

Airborne Special Services Company (ASSC)

101st Amphibious Reconnaissance Battalion (ROC Army Frogmen)

Underwater Demolitons Unit (UDU)

Thailand

Royal Thai Special Forces

Royal Thai Air Force Commando Company

Royal Thai Marine Corps Amphibious Reconnaissance Battalion

Royal Thai Navy SEALs

Thai Royal Guard

Tunisia

GCGN

USGN

Turkey

Bordo Bereliler

Ozel Jandarma Komando Bolugu

Su Alti Taaruz (SAT)

Su Alti Savunma (SAS)

Ukraine

Berkut (Golden Eagles)

United Arab Emirates

Commando Squadron

Police Special Unit

United Kingdom

Special Air Service (SAS)

Special Boat Service (SBS)

Special Reconnaissance Regiment (SRR)

Units in direct support of UKSF:

Special Forces Support Group (SFSG)

18 (UKSF) Signal Regiment

Special Forces Air Wing

United States

Counter-Terrorist Units

Special Operation Forces

United
States Army

United
States Navy

United States Air
Force

United States
Marine Corps

United States
Coast Guard

Intelligence Community Special Units

Other

Joint Task Forces

Former

U.S. Special Operations Centers, Schools, and Courses

Federal Law Enforcement Special Units

Vatican

Swiss Guard

Venezuela

Brigada de Acciones Especiales (BAE)

Grupo de Acciones Especiales (GAE, GAC)

JCEF

42 Brigada de Paracaidistas

5 División de Infantería de Selva

507 Batallón de Fuerzas Especiales “Coronel Domingo Montes”

107 Batallón de Fuerzas Especiales “General en Jefe José Gregorio Monagas”

Comando de Operaciones Especiales “Generalísimo Francisco de Miranda”

Unidad de Fuerzas Especiales

Vietnam

Ðc công (Special Attack)

Special Units

BUSINESS CYCLES: EURO AREA

October 11, 2006 at 5:04 pm | Posted in Economics | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

Research Notes
Business cycle synchronisation in the euro area: 
Developments, determinants and implications

Deutsche Bank Research

http://www.dbresearch.com

Dear reader,

We have just issued the following publication "Research Notes": 

Research Notes (engl.)

Business cycle synchronisation in the euro area: 
Developments, determinants and implications

The divergence of growth and inflation rates across EMU in recent years has
reignited the debate as to whether Europe is really an "optimum currency area"
in which monetary union yields net benefits. But answering this question is
complicated inter alia by the further controversy over whether economic
integration and monetary union tend to cause convergence or divergence of
business cycles. Anyway policy-makers need to do more to improve their
economies' flexibility, in order to make them better able to cope with the
remaining heterogeneity in output and inflation. 

Internet: http://www.dbresearch.com
Intranet: http://dbresearch.db.com
Pay us a visit!

In order to read our research you will require the Adobe Acrobat Reader which
can be obtained free of charge from their website:
http://www.adobe.de/products/acrobat/download/readstep.html

Would you prefer to receive e-mail notification with links to our reports or
subscribe to additional DB Research reports? Please register on our website:
http://www.dbresearch.com/login

If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us:

		Deutsche Bank Research
		Marketing
		marketing.dbr@db.com

DB Research – Business cycle synchronisation in the euro area:

Developments, determinants and implications

Attachment: Business_cycle_synchronisation_in_the_euro_area_Deve.pdf
(0.65 MB)

mailsystem.dbresearch@db.com

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

DAVOS SEMINARS: 1928-1930

October 11, 2006 at 2:00 pm | Posted in Philosophy, Science & Technology | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

Ernst Cassirer

…in the same year (1929) that the final volume of The Philosophy of Symbolic
Forms appeared, Cassirer took part in an historically significant encounter with Martin
Heidegger in Davos

Ernst Cassirer

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cassirer

Ernst Cassirer occupies a unique place in twentieth-century
philosophy. His work pays equal attention to foundational and epistemological issues in
the philosophy of mathematics and natural science and to aesthetics, the philosophy of
history, and other issues in the "cultural sciences" broadly conceived. More
than any other German philosopher since Kant, Cassirer thus aims to devote equal
philosophical attention both to the (mathematical and) natural sciences (Naturwissenschaften)
and to the more humanistic disciplines (Geisteswissenschaften). In this way,
Cassirer, more than any other twentieth-century philosopher, plays a fundamental mediating
role between
C. P. Snow’s famous "two
cultures."
He also plays a similarly mediating role between the
two major traditions in twentieth-century academic philosophy — the
"analytic" and "continental" traditions— whose radically
different (and often mutually uncomprehending) perspectives on the relationship between
scientific and humanistic elements in their subject gave rise to a fundamental split or
gulf between philosophy as it came to be practiced in the Anglo-American world, on the one
side, and as it was practiced in most of the rest of the world, on the other. Cassirer, by
contrast, had fruitful philosophical relations with leading members of both traditions
— with Moritz Schlick, the founder and guiding spirit of the Vienna Circle of logical
empiricists, whose work in logic and the philosophy of science had a decisive influence on
the development of philosophy in the United States, and with Martin Heidegger, the creator
of a radical "existential-hermeneutical" version of Husserlian phenomenology
which quickly became dominant in continental Europe.


1. Biography

Cassirer was born on July 28, 1874, to a wealthy and cosmopolitan
Jewish family, in the German
city of Breslau (now Wroclaw, Poland). Part of the family lived in Berlin, including
Cassirer’s cousin
Bruno Cassirer, the distinguished publisher, who later published most of Cassirer’s writings.
Cassirer entered the University of Berlin in 1892. In 1894 he took a course on Kant with
Georg Simmel, who recommended Hermann Cohen’s writings on Kant in particular. Cohen, the
first
Jew to hold a
professorship in Germany, was the founder of the so-called
Marburg School of neo-Kantianism, famous for interpreting Kant’s transcendental method as
beginning with the "fact of science" and then arguing regressively to the
presuppositions or conditions of possibility of this "fact." Kant was thus read
as an "epistemologist [Erkenntniskritiker]" or methodologist of science
rather than as a "metaphysician" in the tradition of post-Kantian German
idealism. After learning of Cohen’s writings from
Simmel, Cassirer (then nineteen years old) proceeded to devour them, whereupon he
immediately resolved to study with Cohen at Marburg. He studied at
Marburg from 1896 to 1899, when he completed his
doctoral work with a dissertation on Descartes’s analysis of mathematical and natural
scientific knowledge. This appeared, in turn, as the Introduction to Cassirer’s first
published work, a treatment of Leibniz’s philosophy and its scientific basis [Cassirer
1902]. Upon returning to Berlin in 1903, Cassirer further developed these themes while
working out his monumental interpretation of the development of modern philosophy and
science from the Renaissance through Kant [Cassirer 1906, 1907a]. The first volume of this
work served as his habilitation at the University of Berlin, where he taught as an
instructor or Privatdozent from 1906 to 1919.

In 1919 Cassirer was finally offered professorships at two newly founded universities
at Frankfurt and Hamburg under the auspices of the Weimar Republic. He taught at Hamburg
from 1919 until emigrating from Germany in 1933. During these years Cassirer completed his
three-volume Philosophy of Symbolic Forms [Cassirer 1923, 1925, 1929b], which
broke fundamental new ground beyond the neo-Kantianism of the Marburg School and
articulated his own original attempt to unite scientific and non-scientific modes of
thought ("symbolic forms") within a single philosophical vision. In 1928
Cassirer offered a defense of Weimar [Cassirer 1929a] at the University’s celebration of
the tenth anniversary of the Republic, and in 1929-30 he served as the rector of the
University, as the first
Jew
to hold such a position in Germany.
In the Spring of
1929 Cassirer took part in a famous disputation with Martin Heidegger in Davos,
Switzerland,
where Heidegger explicitly took Cohen’s neo-Kantianism
as a philosophical target and defended his radical new conception of an "existential
analytic of Dasein" in the guise of a parallel interpretation of the philosophy of
Kant [Heidegger 1929]. Cassirer, for his part, defended his own new understanding of Kant
in the philosophy of symbolic forms — against Heidegger’s insistence on the
ineluctability of human finitude — by appealing to genuinely objectively valid,
necessary and eternal truths arising in both moral experience and mathematical natural
science. Nevertheless, despite their deep disagreements, Cassirer and Heidegger enjoyed
friendly philosophical relations until Cassirer’s emigration in 1933 (see [Friedman
2000]).

After his emigration Cassirer spent two years lecturing at Oxford and then six years at
the University of Göteborg in Sweden. During this time he developed his most sustained
discussion of morality and the philosophy of law as a study of the Swedish legal
philosopher Axel Hägerström [Cassirer 1939] (see [Krois 1987, chap. 4]). He also
articulated his major statement on the relationship between the natural sciences and the
"cultural sciences" [Cassirer 1942], which contained, among other things, an
explicit rejection of Rudolf Carnap’s "physicalism" (see [Friedman 2000, chap.
7]). Cassirer, like so many German émigrés during this period (including Carnap) then
finally settled in the United States. He taught at Yale from 1941 to 1944 and at Columbia
in 1944-45. During these years he produced two books in English [Cassirer 1944, 1946],
where the first, An Essay on Man, serves as a concise introduction to the
philosophy of symbolic forms (and thus Cassirer’s distinctive philosophical perspective)
as a whole and the second, The Myth of the State, offers an explanation of the
rise of
fascism on the basis
of Cassirer’s conception of mythical thought. Two important American philosophers were
substantially influenced by Cassirer during these years: Arthur Pap, whose work on the
"functional a priori" in physical theory [Pap 1946] took shape under Cassirer’s
guidance at Yale, and Susanne Langer, who promulgated Cassirer’s philosophy of symbolic
forms in aesthetic and literary circles (see, e.g., [Langer 1942]). Cassirer’s American
influence thus embraced both sides of his philosophical personality. One can only
speculate on what this influence might have been if his life had not been cut short
suddenly by a heart attack while walking on the streets of New York City on April 13,
1945.

2. Early Historical Writings

As indicated above, Cassirer’s first writings were largely historical in character
— including a discussion of Leibniz’s philosophy in its scientific context [Cassirer
1902] and a large-scale work on the history of modern thought from the Renaissance through
Kant, Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit
[Cassirer 1906, 1907a]. The latter, in particular, is a magisterial and deeply original
contribution to both the history of philosophy and the history of science.
It is the first work, in fact, to develop a detailed reading of
the scientific revolution as a whole in terms of the "Platonic" idea that the
thoroughgoing application of mathematics to nature (the so-called mathematization of
nature) is the central and overarching achievement of this revolution. And Cassirer’s
insight was explicitly acknowledged by such seminal intellectual historians as E. A.
Burtt, E. J. Dijksterhuis, and Alexandre Koyré, who developed this theme later in the
century in the course of establishing the discipline of history of science as we know it
today (see, e.g., [Burtt 1925], [Koyré 1939], [Dijksterhuis 1959]).
Cassirer,
for his part, simultaneously articulates an interpretation of the history of modern
philosophy as the development and eventual triumph of what he calls "modern
philosophical idealism." This tradition takes its inspiration, according to Cassirer,
from idealism in the Platonic sense, from an appreciation for the "ideal" formal
structures paradigmatically studied in mathematics, and it is distinctively modern in
recognizing the fundamental importance of the systematic application of such structures to
empirically given nature in modern mathematical physics — a progressive and synthetic
process wherein mathematical models of nature are successively refined and corrected
without limit. For Cassirer, it is Galileo, above all, in opposition to both sterile
Aristotelian-Scholastic formal logic and sterile Aristotelian-Scholastic empirical
induction, who first grasped the essential structure of this synthetic process; and the
development of "modern philosophical idealism" by such thinkers as Descartes,
Spinoza, Gassendi, Hobbes, Leibniz, and Kant then consists in its increasingly
self-conscious philosophical articulation and elaboration.

In both the Leibniz book and Das Erkenntnisproblem, then, Cassirer interprets
the development of modern thought as a whole from the perspective of the basic
philosophical principles of Marburg neo-Kantianism: the idea that philosophy as
epistemology (Erkenntniskritik) has the articulation and elaboration of the
structure of modern mathematical natural science as its primary task; the conviction that,
accordingly, philosophy must take the "fact of science" as its starting point
and ultimately given datum; and, most especially, the so-called "genetic"
conception of scientific knowledge as an ongoing, never completed synthetic process (see
below). From a contemporary point of view, Cassirer’s history may therefore appear as both
"Whiggish" and "triumphalist," but it cannot be denied that his work
is, nevertheless, extraordinarily rich, extraordinarily clear, and extraordinarily
illuminating. Cassirer examines an astonishing variety of textual sources (including both
major and minor figures) carefully and in detail, and, without at all neglecting contrary
tendencies within the skeptical and empiricist traditions, he develops a compelling
portrayal of the evolution of "modern philosophical idealism" through Kant
which, even today, reads as extremely compelling and acute.

Cassirer must thus be ranked as one of the very greatest intellectual historians of the
twentieth-century — and, indeed, as one of the founders of this discipline as it came
to be practiced after 1900. He continued to contribute to intellectual history broadly
conceived throughout his career (most notably, perhaps, in his fundamental studies of the
Renaissance and the Enlightenment [Cassirer 1927a, 1932]), and he had a major influence on
intellectual history throughout the century. Aside from the history of science (see
above), Cassirer also decisively influenced intellectual historians more generally,
including, notably, the eminent intellectual and cultural historian Peter Gay and the
distinguished art historian Erwin Panofsky (see, e.g., [Gay 1977], [Panofsky 1939]). As we
shall see below, intellectual (and later cultural) history is an integral part of
Cassirer’s distinctive philosophical methodology, so that, in his case, the standard
distinction between "historical" and "systematic" work in philosophy
ends up looking quite artificial.

3. Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science

It was noted above that Cassirer’s early historical works interpret the development of
modern thought as a whole (embracing both philosophy and the sciences) from the
perspective of the philosophical principles of Marburg neo-Kantianism, as initially
articulated in [Cohen 1871]. On the "genetic" conception of scientific
knowledge, in particular, the a priori synthetic activity of thought — the activity
Kant himself had called "productive synthesis" — is understood as a
temporal and historical developmental process in which the object of science is gradually
and successively constituted as a never completed "X" towards which the
developmental process is converging. For Cohen, this process is modelled on the methods of
the infinitesimal calculus (in this connection, especially, see [Cohen 1883]). Beginning
with the idea of a continuous series or function, our problem is to see how such a series
can be a priori generated step-by-step. The mathematical concept of a differential shows
us how this can be done, for the differential at a point in the domain of a given function
indicates how it is to be continued on succeeding points. The differential therefore
infinitesimally captures the rule of the series as a whole, and thus expresses, at any
given point or moment of time, the general form of the series valid for all times,

Cassirer’s first "systematic" work, Substance and Function [Cassirer
1910], takes an essential philosophical step beyond Cohen by explicitly engaging with the
late nineteenth-century developments in the foundations of mathematics and mathematical
logic that exerted a profound influence on twentieth-century philosophy of mathematics and
natural science. Cassirer begins by discussing the problem of concept formation, and by
criticizing, in particular, the "abstractionist" theory characteristic of
philosophical empiricism, according to which general concepts are arrived at by ascending
inductively from sensory particulars. This theory, for Cassirer, is an artifact of
traditional Aristotelian logic; and his main idea, accordingly, is that developments in
modern formal logic (the mathematical theory of relations) allows us definitively to
reject such abstractionism (and thus philosophical empiricism) on behalf of the genetic
conception of knowledge. In particular, the modern axiomatic conception of mathematics, as
exemplified especially in Richard Dedekind’s work on the foundations of arithmetic and
David Hilbert’s work on the foundations of geometry, has shown that mathematics itself has
a purely formal and ideal, entirely non-sensory and thus non-intuitive meaning. Pure
mathematics describes abstract "systems of order" — what we would now call
relational structures — whose concepts can in no way be accommodated within
abstractionist or inductivist philosophical empiricism. Cassirer then employs this
"formalist" conception of mathematics characteristic of the late nineteenth
century to craft a new, and more abstract, version of the genetic conception of knowledge.
We conceive the developmental process in question as a series or sequence of abstract
formal structures ("systems of order"), which is itself ordered by the abstract
mathematical relation of approximate backwards-directed inclusion (as, for example, the
new non-Euclidean geometries contain the older geometry of Euclid as a continuously
approximated limiting case). In this way, we can conceive all the structures in our
sequence as continuously converging, as it were, on a final or limit structure, such that
all previous structures in the sequence are approximate special or limiting cases of this
final structure. The idea of such an endpoint of the sequence is only a regulative ideal
in the Kantian sense — it is only progressively approximated but never in fact
actually realized. Nevertheless, it still constitutes the a priori "general serial
form" of our properly empirical mathematical theorizing, and, at the same time, it
bestows on this theorizing its characteristic form of objectivity.

In explicitly embracing late nineteenth-century work on the foundations of mathematics,
Cassirer comes into very close proximity with early twentieth-century analytic philosophy.
Indeed, Cassirer takes the modern mathematical logic implicit in the work of
Dedekind and Hilbert, and explicit in the
work of
Gottlob Frege and the early Bertrand Russell, as providing us with our primary tool for moving beyond the empiricist
abstractionism due ultimately to Aristotelian syllogistic. The modern "theory of the
concept," accordingly, is based on the fundamental notions of function, series, and
order (relational structure) — where these notions, from the point of view of pure
mathematics and pure logic, are entirely formal and abstract, having no intuitive
relation, in particular, to either space or time. Nevertheless, and here is where Cassirer
diverges from most of the analytic tradition, this modern theory of the concept only
provides us with a genuine and complete alternative to Aristotelian abstractionism and
philosophical empiricism when it is embedded within the genetic conception of knowledge.
What is primary is the generative historical process by which modern mathematical natural
science successively develops or evolves, and pure mathematics and pure logic only have
philosophical significance as elements of or abstractions from this more fundamental
developmental process of "productive synthesis" aimed at the application of such
pure formal structures in empirical knowledge (see especially [Cassirer 1907b]).

Cassirer’s next important contribution to scientific epistemology [Cassirer 1921]
explores the relationship between Einstein’s general theory of relativity and the
"critical" (Marburg neo-Kantian) conception of knowledge. Cassirer argues that
Einstein’s theory in fact stands as a brilliant confirmation of this conception. On the
one hand, the increasing use of abstract mathematical representations in Einstein’s theory
entirely supports the attack on Aristotelian abstractionism and philosophical empiricism.
On the other hand, however, Einstein’s use of non-Euclidean geometry presents no obstacle
at all to our purified and generalized form of (neo-)Kantianism. For we no longer require
that any particular mathematical structure be fixed for all time, but only that the
historical-developmental sequence of such structures continuously converge. Einstein’s
theory satisfies this requirement perfectly well, since the Euclidean geometry fundamental
to Newtonian physics is indeed contained in the more general geometry (of variable
curvature) employed by Einstein as an approximate special case (as the regions considered
become infinitely small, for example). Moritz Schlick published a review of Cassirer’s
book immediately after its first appearance [Schlick 1921], taking the occasion to argue
(what later became a prominent theme in the philosophy of logical empiricism) that
Einstein’s theory of relativity provides us with a decisive refutation of Kantianism in
all of its forms. This review marked the beginnings of a respectful philosophical exchange
between the two, as noted above, and it was continued, in the context of Cassirer’s later
work on the philosophy of symbolic forms, in [Cassirer 1927b] (see [Friedman 2000, chap.
7]).

Cassirer’s assimilation of Einstein’s general theory of relativity marked a watershed
in the development of his thought. It not only gave him an opportunity, as we have just
seen, to reinterpret the Kantian theory of the a priori conditions of objective experience
(especially as involving space and time) in terms of Cassirer’s own version of the genetic
conception of knowledge, but it also provided him with an impetus to generalize and extend
the original
Marburg view in
such a way that modern mathematical scientific knowledge in general is now seen as just
one possible "symbolic form" among other equally valid and legitimate such
forms. Indeed, [Cassirer 1921] first officially announces the project of a general
"philosophy of symbolic forms," conceived, in this context, as a philosophical
extension of "the general postulate of relativity." Just as, according to the
general postulate of relativity, all possible reference frames and coordinate systems are
viewed as equally good representations of physical reality, and, as a totality, are
together interrelated and embraced by precisely this postulate, similarly the totality of
"symbolic forms" — aesthetic, ethical, religious, scientific — are
here envisioned by Cassirer as standing in a closely analogous relationship. So it is no
wonder that, subsequent to taking up the professorship at Hamburg in 1919, Cassirer
devotes the rest of his career to this new philosophy of symbolic forms. (Cassirer’s work
in the philosophy of natural science in particular also continued, notably in [Cassirer
1936].)

4. The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms

At Hamburg Cassirer found a tremendous resource for the next stage in his philosophical
development — the Library of the Cultural Sciences founded by
Aby Warburg. Warburg was an eminent art historian
with a particular interest in ancient cult, ritual, myth, and magic as sources of
archetypal forms of emotional expression later manifested in Renaissance art, and the
Library therefore contained abundant materials both on artistic and cultural history and
on ancient myth and ritual. Cassirer’s earliest works on the philosophy of symbolic forms
appeared as studies and lectures of the Warburg Library in the years 1922-1925, and the
three-volume Philosophy of Symbolic Forms itself appeared, as noted above, in
1923, 1925, and 1929 respectively. Just as the genetic conception of knowledge is
primarily oriented towards the "fact of science" and, accordingly, takes the
historical development of scientific knowledge as its ultimate given datum, the philosophy
of symbolic forms is oriented towards the much more general "fact of culture"
and thus takes the history of human culture as a whole as its ultimate given datum. The
conception of human beings as most fundamentally "symbolic animals," interposing
systems of signs or systems of expression between themselves and the world, then becomes
the guiding philosophical motif for elucidating the corresponding conditions of
possibility for the "fact of culture" in all of its richness and diversity.

Characteristic of the philosophy of symbolic forms is a concern for the more
"primitive" forms of world-presentation underlying the "higher" and
more sophisticated cultural forms — a concern for the ordinary perceptual awareness
of the world expressed primarily in natural language, and, above all, for the mythical
view of the world lying at the most primitive level of all. For Cassirer, these more
primitive manifestations of "symbolic meaning" now have an independent status
and foundational role that is quite incompatible with both
Marburg neo-Kantianism and Kant’s original
philosophical conception. In particular, they lie at a deeper, autonomous level of
spiritual life which then gives rise to the more sophisticated forms by a dialectical
developmental process. From mythical thought, religion and art develop; from natural
language, theoretical science develops. It is precisely here that Cassirer appeals to
"romantic" philosophical tendencies lying outside the Kantian and neo-Kantian
tradition, deploys an historical dialectic self-consciously derived from Hegel, and comes
to terms with the contemporary
Lebensphilosophie
of Wilhelm Dilthey, Henri Bergson, Max Scheler, and
Georg Simmel — as well as with the
closely related philosophy of Martin Heidegger.

The most basic and primitive type of symbolic meaning is expressive meaning,
the product of what Cassirer calls the expressive function (Ausdrucksfunktion) of
thought, which is concerned with the experience of events in the world around us as
charged with affective and emotional significance, as desirable or hateful, comforting or
threatening. It is this type of meaning that underlies mythical consciousness, for
Cassirer, and which explains its most distinctive feature, namely, its total disregard for
the distinction between appearance and reality. Since the mythical world does not consist
of stable and enduring substances that manifest themselves from various points of view and
on various occasions, but rather in a fleeting complex of events bound together by their
affective and emotional "physiognomic" characters, it also exemplifies its own
particular type of causality whereby each part literally contains the whole of which it is
a part and can thereby exert all the causal efficacy of the whole. Similarly, there is no
essential difference in efficacy between the living and the dead, between waking
experiences and dreams, between the name of an object and the object itself, and so on.
The fundamental Kantian "categories" of space, time, substance (or object), and
causality thereby take on a distinctive configuration representing the formal a priori
structure, as it were, of mythical thought.

What Cassirer calls representative symbolic meaning, a product of the
representative function (Darstellungsfunktion) of thought, then has the task of
precipitating out of the original mythical flux of "physiognomic" characters a
world of stable and enduring substances, distinguishable and reidentifiable as such.
Working together with the fundamentally pragmatic orientation towards the world exhibited
in the technical and instrumental use of tools and artifacts, it is in natural language,
according to Cassirer, that the representative function of thought is then most clearly
visible. For it is primarily through the medium of natural language that we construct the
"intuitive world" of ordinary sense perception on the basis of what Cassirer
calls intuitive space and intuitive time. The demonstrative particles (later articles) and
tenses of natural language specify the locations of perceived objects in relation to the
changing spatio-temporal position of the speaker (relative to a "here-and-now"),
and a unified spatio-temporal order thus arises in which each designated object has a
determinate relation to the speaker, his/her point of view, and his/her potential range of
pragmatic activities. We are now able to distinguish the enduring thing-substance, on the
one side, from its variable manifestations from different points of view and on different
occasions, on the other, and we thereby arrive at a new fundamental distinction between
appearance and reality. This distinction is then expressed in its most developed form, for
Cassirer, in the linguistic notion of propositional truth and thus in the propositional
copula. Here the Kantian "categories" of space, time, substance, and causality
take on a distinctively intuitive or "presentational" configuration.

The distinction between appearance and reality, as expressed in the propositional
copula, then leads dialectically to a new task of thought, the task of theoretical
science, of systematic inquiry into the realm of truths. Here we encounter the third and
final function of symbolic meaning, the significative function (Bedeutungsfunktion),
which is exhibited most clearly, according to Cassirer, in the "pure category of
relation." For it is precisely here, in the scientific view of the world, that the
pure relational concepts characteristic of modern mathematics, logic, and mathematical
physics are finally freed from the bounds of sensible intuition. For example, mathematical
space and time arise from intuitive space and time when we abstract from all demonstrative
relation to a "here-and-now" and consider instead the single system of relations
in which all possible "here-and-now"-points are embedded; the mathematical
system of the natural numbers arises when we abstract from all concrete applications of
counting and consider instead the single potentially infinite progression wherein all
possible applications of counting are comprehended; and so on. The eventual result is the
world of modern mathematical physics described in Cassirer’s earlier scientific works
— a pure system of formal relations where, in particular, the intuitive concept of
substantial thing has finally been replaced by the relational-functional concept of
universal law. So it is here, and only here, that the generalized and purified form of
(neo-)Kantianism distinctive of the
Marburg School gives an accurate characterization of human thought. This
characterization is now seen as a one-sided abstraction from a much more comprehensive
dialectical process which can no longer be adequately understood without paying equal
attention to its more concrete and intuitive symbolic manifestations; and it is in
precisely this way, in the end, that the Marburg "fact of science" is now firmly
embedded within the much more general "fact of culture" as a whole. (The final
volume of The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms, The Phenomenology of Knowledge
[1929b], articulates this embedding most explicitly, where the significative function of
symbolic meaning is depicted as dialectically evolving — in just the sense of Hegel’s
Phenomenology of Spirit — from the expressive and representative functions.)

5. Cassirer and Twentieth-Century Philosophy

As noted above, in the same year (1929) that the final volume of The Philosophy of
Symbolic Forms
appeared, Cassirer took part in an historically significant encounter
with Martin Heidegger in Davos
— where, in particular, Cassirer
challenged Heidegger’s radical "finitism" by reference to the presumed necessary
(and eternal) universal validity found in both the mathematical sciences and human moral
or practical experience. Heidegger had already distanced his own "existential
analytic of Dasein" from Cassirer’s analysis of mythical thought in Being and
Time
(see [Heidegger 1927, §§ 10, 11]), and he had then published a respectful but
critical review of Cassirer’s volume on mythical thought [Heidegger 1928]. Cassirer, for
his part, added five footnotes on Being and Time before publication of his final
volume in 1929, and he then published a similarly respectful but critical review of
[Heidegger 1929] alluding to the
Davos disputation at the end [Cassirer 1931]. Unlike in his remarks at the Davos disputation itself, Cassirer here
places his primary emphasis on the practical and aesthetic dimensions of Kant’s thought,
as expressed in the Critique of Practical Reason and the Critique of
Judgement
. His main point is that, whereas the transcendental analytic of the Critique
of Pure Reason
may indeed be written from the point of view of human temporality or
finitude, the rest of the Kantian system embeds this particular theory of human cognition
within a much wider conception of "the intelligible substrate of humanity."
Cassirer’s remarks here thus mirror his own attempt to embed the
Marburg genetic conception of
mathematical-scientific knowledge within a much wider theory of the development of human
culture as a whole, and thereby reflect, as indicated at the beginning, his distinctive
mediating role between the Naturwissenschaften and the Geisteswissenschaften
— and thus between the analytic and continental philosophical traditions.

The Logic of the Cultural Sciences [Cassirer 1942] presents Cassirer’s most
developed and systematic articulation of how it is possible to achieve objective and
universal validity in both the domain of the natural and mathematical sciences and the
domain of practical, cultural, moral, and aesthetic phenomenon. Cassirer argues, in the
first place, that an ungrounded prejudice privileging "thing perception [Dingwahrnehmen]"
— based on the representative function (Darstellungsfunktion) of thought
— over "expressive perception [Ausdruckswahrnehmen]" is a primary
motivation for the widespread idea that the natural sciences have a more secure evidential
base than do the cultural sciences (and it is here, in particular, that he presents his
criticism of Rudolf Carnap’s "physicalism" alluded to above). In reality,
however, neither form of perception can be reduced to the other — both are what
Cassirer calls "primary phenomena [Urphänomene]." Thus, whereas the
natural sciences take their evidential base from the sphere of thing perception, the
cultural sciences take theirs from the sphere of expressive perception, and, more
specifically, from the fundamental experience of other human beings as fellow selves
sharing a common intersubjective world of "cultural meanings." In the second
place, moreover, whereas intersubjective or objective validity in the natural sciences
rests ultimately on universal laws of nature ranging over all (physical) places and times,
an analogous type of intersubjective or objective validity arises in the cultural sciences
quite independent of such universal laws. In particular, although every "cultural
object" (a text, a work of art, a monument, and so on) has its own individual place
in (historical) time and (geographical-cultural) space, it nevertheless has a
trans-historical and trans-local cultural meaning that emerges precisely as it is
continually and successively interpreted and reinterpreted at other such times
and places. The truly universal cultural meaning of such an object only emerges
asymptotically, as it were, as the never to be fully completed limit of such a sequence.
In the end, it is only such a never to be fully completed process of
historical-philosophical interpretation of symbolic meanings that confers objectivity on
both the Naturwissenschaften and the Geisteswissenschaften — and
thereby reunites the two distinct sides of Kant’s original synthesis

Bibliography

Selected works by Cassirer:

(fuller bibliographies may be found in [Schilpp 1949], [Krois 1987]; many of Cassirer’s
German writings are reprinted by the Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt)

  • (1902) Leibniz’ System in seinen wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen. Marburg:
    Elwert.
  • (1906) Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit.
    Erster Band
    . Berlin: Bruno Cassirer.
  • (1907a) Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit.
    Zweiter Band.
    Berlin: Bruno Cassirer.
  • (1907b) "Kant und die moderne Mathematik." Kant-Studien 12, 1-40.
  • (1910) Substanzbegriff und Funktionsbegriff: Untersuchungen über die Grundfragen
    der Erkenntniskritik
    . Berlin: Bruno Cassirer. Translated as Substance and
    Function
    . Chicago: Open Court, 1923.
  • (1921) Zur Einsteinschen Relativitätstheorie. Erkenntnistheoretische Betrachtungen.
    Berlin: Bruno Cassirer. Translated as Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. Chicago:
    Open Court, 1923.
  • (1923) Philosophie der symbolischen Formen. Erster Teil: Die Sprache. Berlin:
    Bruno Cassirer. Translated as The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Volume One: Language.
    New Haven: Yale University Press, 1955.
  • (1925) Philosophie der symbolischen Formen. Zweiter Teil: Das mythische Denken.
    Berlin: Bruno Cassirer. Translated as The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Volume Two:
    Mythical Thought
    . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1955.
  • (1927a) Individuum und Kosmos in der Philosophie der Renaissance. Leipzig:
    Teubner. Translated as The Individual and the Cosmos in Renaissance Philosophy.
    New York: Harper, 1964.
  • (1927b) "Erkenntnistheorie nebst den Grenzfragen der Logik und
    Denkpsychologie." Jahrbücher der Philosophie 3, 31-92.
  • (1929a) Die Idee der republikanischen Verfassung. Hamburg: Friedrichsen.
  • (1929b) Philosophie der symbolischen Formen. Dritter Teil: Phänomenologie der
    Erkenntnis
    . Berlin: Bruno Cassirer. Translated as The Philosophy of Symbolic
    Forms. Volume Three: The Phenomenology of Knowledge
    . New Haven: Yale University
    Press, 1957.
  • (1931) "Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik. Bemerkungen zu Martin Heideggers
    Kantinterpretation." Kant-Studien 36, 1-16. Translated as "Kant and the
    Problem of Metaphysics." In M. Gram, ed. Kant: Disputed Questions. Chicago:
    Quadrangle, 1967.
  • (1932) Die Philosophie der Aufklärung. Tübinen: Morh. Translated as The
    Philosophy of the Enlightenment
    . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1951.
  • (1936) Determinismus und Indeterminismus in der modernen Physik. Göteborg:
    Göteborgs Högskolas Årsskrift 42. Translated as Determinism and Indeterminism in
    Modern Physics
    . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1956.
  • (1939) Axel Hägerström: Eine Studie zur Schwedischen Philosophie der Gegenwart.
    Göteborg: Göteborgs Högskolas Årsskrift 45.
  • (1942) Zur Logik der Kulturwissenschaften. Göteborg: Göteborgs Högskolas
    Årsskrift 47. Translated as The Logic of the Humanities. New Haven: Yale
    University Press, 1961.
  • (1944) An Essay on Man. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • (1946) The Myth of the State. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Note: Cassirer’s unpublished writings are now appearing in volumes edited by J. Krois
and E. Schwemmer, Nachgelassene Manuskripte und Texte. Hamburg: Meiner.

Secondary and Other Relevant Literature:

  • Aubenque, P., L. Ferry, E. Rudolf, J.-F. Courtine, F. Capeillières (1992)
    "Philosophie und Politik: Die Davoser Disputation zwischen Ernst Cassirer und Martin
    Heidegger in der Retrospektive." Internationale Zeitschrift für Philosophie
    2, 290-312.
  • Burtt, E. (1925) The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science.
    London: Paul, Trench, Trubner.
  • Cassirer, T. (1981) Mein Leben mit Ernst Cassirer. Hildesheim: Gerstenberg.
  • Cohen, H. (1871) Kants Theorie der Erfahrung. Berlin: Dümmler.
  • Cohen, H. (1883) Das Princip der Infinitesimal-Methode und seine Geschichte: ein
    Kapitel zur Grundlegung der Ekenntnißkritik
    . Berlin: Dümmler.
  • Dijksterhuis, E. (1959) De Mechanisering van get Wereldbeeld. Amsterdam:
    Uitgeverif Meulenhoff. Translated as The Mechanization of the World Picture.
    Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961.
  • Friedman, M. (2000) A Parting of the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer, and Heidegger.
    Chicago: Open Court.
  • Gay, P. (1977) The Enlightenment: An Interpretation, 2 vols. New York: Norton.
  • Heidegger, M. (1927) Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. Translated as Being
    and Time
    . New York: Harper, 1962.
  • Heidegger, M. (1928) "Ernst Cassirer: Philosophie der symbolischen Formen. 2. Teil:
    Das mythische Denken." Deutsche Literaturzeitung 21, 1000-1012. Translated
    as "Book Review of Ernst Cassirer’s Mythical Thought." In The Piety
    of Thinking
    . Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1976.
  • Heidegger, M. (1929) Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik. Bonn: Friedrich
    Cohen. Translated (together with a protocol of the Davos disputation with Cassirer) as Kant
    and the Problem of Metaphysics
    . Bloomington: Indiana University Press: 1990.
  • Kaegi, D. and E. Rudolph, eds. (2000) 70 Jahre Davoser Disputation. Hamburg:
    Meiner.
  • Koyré, A. (1939) Etudes galiléennes. 3 vols. Paris: Hermann. Translated as Galileo
    Studies
    . Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1978.
  • Krois, J. (1987) Cassirer: Symbolic Forms and History. New Haven: Yale
    University Press.
  • Langer, S. (1942) Philosophy in a New Key: A Study in the Symbolism of Reason, Rite
    and Art
    . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
  • Paetzold, H. (1995) Ernst Cassirer — Von Marburg nach New York: eine
    philosophische Biographie
    . Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
  • Panofsky, E. (1939) Studies in Iconology: Humanistic Themes in the Art of the
    Renaissance
    . New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Pap, A. (1946) The A Priori in Physical Theory. New York: King’s Cross Press.
  • Schilpp, P., ed. (1949) The Philosophy of Ernst Cassirer. La Salle: Open Court.
  • Schlick, M. (1921) "Kritizistische oder empiristische Deutung der neuen
    Physik?" Kant-Studien 26, 96-111. Translated as "Critical or Empiricist
    Interpretation of Modern Physics?" In H. Mulder and B. van de Velde-Schlick, eds. Moritz
    Schlick: Philosophical Papers
    . Vol. 2. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1979.
  • Schwemmer, O. (1997) Ernst Cassirer. Ein Philosoph der europäischen Moderne.
    Berlin: Akademie.

Other Internet Resources

Einstein & Tillich at Davos

The place is Davos in Switzerland, and the time is Sunday, the 18th of March
1928.

Paul Tillich, Albert Einstein, and the Quest for the Ultimate

Gerald Holton

The Paul Tillich Lecture, April 12, 2004, Harvard University

http://phys2.harvard.edu/holton/Tillich.pdf

Page 1

13 April 2004

My aim, in this brief hour, is to share with you a glimpse I was privileged to get of
the landscape of two great minds,
Tillich and
Einstein
. In different but parallel ways, they both reached out to
the limits of human understanding, driven by what
Tillich
called Ultimate Concerns
. Their ambitions were so enormous that, in
the end, neither had fully succeeded. Yet, each left us an invaluable legacy, and perhaps
also a lesson for the great challenges of today, so poorly attended to. These two men had
much in common, and might therefore have become close comrades. But because they looked at
the world from different perspectives, they came eventually into conflict. That is a rough
sketch of the architecture of my lecture. But this being formally a Tillich Lecture, let
me reassure you right away that my credentials for giving it do not rest on any claim that
I am an intimate student of Tillich’s theology, or that I have come to clarify some
puzzles in his writings. Others here, including Mr. William Crout, who has kindly shared
with me his recollections and sources, are much more familiar with Tillich’s work,
with his vast Archive in the Theological Library at our Divinity School, with his official
Collected Works in fourteen volumes, in addition to his many other books, and the more
than 1200 entries in the catalog of the Harvard Libraries that refer to works by or about
him.

——————————————————————————–

Page 2

2

What I can claim is that I enjoyed Tillich’s generous intellectual company during
the nearly seven years while we were faculty colleagues at Harvard. We had many
discussions, and appeared together at invited presentations on science and religion.
Hannah and Paulus were frequent guests in Nina’s and my house, and we in theirs. He
accepted my invitation to be a consulting editor of the journal Daedalus, and in its first
volume, for the year 1958, he let me publish his essay entitled "The Religious
Symbol". At this point I think I am expected to tell you how I first met Tillich. It
was a revealing meeting. In my case this encounter, in 1955, had been prepared by
Harvard’s president, Nathan Pusey. Mr. Pusey had the good habit of inviting, to a
fine dinner, a dozen or more of his professors, those of us who were giving the various,
large introductory courses in the General Education program of those years. On each of
those occasions, some topic of general interest to this group’s common task was
discussed, in a spirit of gentle amity. But one evening, this amity came to an abrupt end.
One of the professors there remarked in passing that he doubted the Divinity School might
have anything valuable to contribute to the College’s program. Mr. Pusey became
visibly upset. Since his arrival as president about two years before, the Divinity School
had been one of his main preoccupations. "Just wait," he said. "At one of
our next meetings you will see an outstanding theologian, who has been attracted to our
Divinity School." Not long after, the new star joined us. It was Paul Tillich. Even
during the casual dinner conversation before his talk, one sensed his special quality, his
membership in the great European tradition of culture, his familiarity with high-level
intellectual….

——————————————————————————–

Page 3

3controversies, and also his liveliness at age 69. As his student and assistant, Paul
Lee, said later, Paul Tillich was, "as a scholar, a one-man theological
symphony," yet also, unlike some other academics, "passionate, full of desire,
vibrant with vitality." Indeed, one was immediately drawn to him. [2.5 min. videotape
of Tillich interview] Tillich had just come to Harvard from the Union Theological Seminary
in New York, where he had found refuge after being forced to leave Germany, dismissed
there from his professorship at the University of Frankfurt in 1933, in the first weeks of
the Nazi regime. He had been one of its outspoken opponents. In 1951 he had published the
first volume of his master work,
Systematic Theology, and was working on the other two volumes, issued in 1958 and 1963. He had just
given lectures at the University of Virginia on "Biblical Religion and the Search for
Ultimate Reality". There he had said: "The God who is a Being is transcended by
the God who is Being itself, the ground and abyss of every Being. And the God who is a
person is transcended by the God who is the Person-Itself, the ground and abyss of every
person. …. Against Pascal I say: ‘The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the
God of the philosophers is the same God. He is a person, and the negation of himself as a
person." I have selected these passages for two reasons: to prepare us for the
conflict over the concept of the Personal God, which will become important later in this
account, and to alert you to the dialectical style in Tillich’s thinking, a style
which James Luther Adams, arguably his most eminent commentator, called "a philosophy
of paradox". To return to the dinner: When Tillich’s presentation began, he
turned to us with a question: Would we like him to outline two of his central ideas, which
were, as he put it, …..

——————————————————————————–

Page 4

4

"God is the infinite ground of Being," and "Mankind’s highest duty
is to focus on Ultimate Concerns"? There was a long, awkward silence. What might have
troubled my colleagues in their silence? Surely, no problemwith the word "God."
It was the first thing you expected to hear from a theologian. And in any case, even the
scientists there knew that some of their kind had been practically on first-name terms
with God. A famous example was the great experimental physicist, I. I. Rabi. He wrote
once, "[Physics] filled me with awe, put me in touch with the sense of original
causes, brought me closer to God….Whenever one of my students came to me with a
scientific project, I asked only one question: ‘Will it bring you nearer to
God’?". For his part, Einstein had said memorably: "What really interests
me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world." And to this day,
Stephen Hawking, among others, is
implicating the deity in his research findings . So, if the assembly was not puzzling over
the word "God," perhaps it might be pondering over the word "Being,"
in the phrase "God is the infinite ground of Being." That word in English is
such a pale reflection of the complex and historically fought-over concept, Sein, or
Seiendes, concepts Tillich had been using since his earliest days in Germany, not only
because there he had to study books like Hegel’s Die Lehre von Sein , and also for a
time had been a faculty colleague of
Martin
Heidegger (in Marburg).
Or perhaps Tillich’s audience was
trying to adjust mentally to the phrase "ultimate concerns," one of his favorite
terms ["ultimate" in his German was "das Unendliche, das Unbedingte"].
But each of us there should have thought immediately of victors and victims in pursuit of
ultimate concerns, their grand challenges. Among

——————————————————————————–

Page 5

5scientists, history records that many of the best were driven to depression and even
suicide. And of course, history, literature, song and myth are full of those ecstatic or
inconsolable seekers of the ultimate, all those desperate lovers, for whom the words
"yes" or "no" are the "whole world" [ think of young
Werther, or Schubert’s Wanderer], or those explorers at the extremes, or the worlds
great prophets , their ascetic religious devotees, or the many others in the grip of some
all-consuming goal –and not least, to turn to the demonic side on which Tillich also
wrote much, think of the vast number of humans on our unhappy globe, for whom the quest
for the ultimate has spiraled down to the frantic search for survival for another day.
Howard Nemorov, in his article "The Quester Legend," traced the lives of the
luckier ones, the heroes in the Holy Grail romances, calling them "the seekers, the
questers, who range heaven and hell ….[The Quester] is forever searching for the
grail—that is to say, the Highest: knowledge, wisdom, consecration…." Well,
when the awkward silence at the table was broken at last, it turned out thatthe problem
felt by some with Tillich’s topic was focused on another matter entirely: One of the
puzzled scientists asked Tillich if he would care to define in what sense he was using the
word "infinite." Was it perhaps in the sense of the actual infinite of the great
mathematician Georg Cantor, in his theory of transfinite sets? Or in the sense closer to
other theorists, from Aristotle’s Potential Infinity to our day?Many around the table
must have felt embarrassed. But not Paul Tillich. A smile came over his face: "Dear
Colleagues," he said, "This is exactly why I have been looking forward so much
to join you at Harvard. In my last position and in others before, I was

——————————————————————————–

Page 6

6surrounded mostly by theologians; so I had no opportunity to learn from them what I
can learn from you. I would love to do that now." He had us in the palm of his hand.
Of course, a few of us there, including myself, gladly agreed to set up an informal
workshop, meeting with Tillich several times, and learning from him and one another. To
preview one thing we quickly learned from Tillich: He told us that he thought of the
meaning of ultimates and especially of infinity by means of visual metaphors.
Visualization and symbolism in art were important to him. He routinely included pictures
in his lectures, in order to show, as he put it once, "the possibility of breaking
the surface of reality in order to dig into its depth….and you cannot understand
theology without understanding symbols." Such a symbolic use of an image, he said,
would help us to understand how he perceived the "symbol" of infinity. Thus
Tillich said that sitting at the edge of an ocean and gazing out, the view was for him a
symbol of the infinite, hinting at an infinite depth before him, but also bordering on the
finite, as he was positioned on the beach, the boundary between the two. Here I remembered
Friedrich Schiller’s famous couplet, "Only
fullness leads to clarity, and truth lies in the abyss" [Nur die Fuelle fuehrt
zurKlarheit, und im Abgrund wohnt die Wahrheit].
Let us look now
more closely at some of Tillich’s key ideas and how they originated, and then compare
these with Einstein’s own main motivating concept. For this purpose it would of
course be interesting to know whether and when our two protagonists actually met. They
might very well have done so early, in Berlin. Einstein was in Berlin from 1914 until
1932. Tillich came there in 1919, a time of great chaos, and

——————————————————————————–

Page 7

7until 1924 was Privatdozent at the University. He lectured on "A Theory of
Culture", on a vast range of fields– politics, art, philosophy, psychology, and
sociology—a grand, multidimensional mission , and specifically in the service of
relating religion to the restof culture and—being both pastor and social democrat–
to real life. While in a way they were colleagues, whether Einstein and Tillich actually
met in person then in Germany remains a rumor. However, they can be said to have met there
in another way important to our story, namely by sharing much of the then currentworldview
and cultural background , as well as being, each of them, possessed by essentially the
same ultimate goal, as we shall see shortly. Because our own cultural barometer has,
during the past decades, swung fromunity to diversity, we may be puzzled how the passion
for generalization, for synthesis,came to each of our two protagonists. But Einstein,
Tillich, and intellectuals of their generation, born in the late decades of the
19thcentury, were exposed, in their schooling, reading, discussions, to similar forces
during their cultural formation. In their impressionable years they would each have read
the standard classical authors, and above all one figure of whom both Einstein and Tillich
frequently wrote and quoted in their correspondence: Immanuel Kant. One of the lessons
many of Kant’s 19thcentury followers had taken from his Metaphysical Foundations of
Natural Science was that two opposing forces determined all natural phenomena, but that
this polarity only masked a "hidden [versteckte] identity." That had allowed
Kant to hypothesize the existence of a "Grundkraft," one fundamental force of
which all other forces are variants. It is of course a thematic line that goes back

——————————————————————————–

Page 8

8to antiquity, to Thales the Ionian, who looked for one substance or essence to explain
all phenomena of the material world. A version of the old Ionian Enchantment possessed
Kant, who put Unity first among his Categories. To those who regarded themselves as his
pupils, Immanuel Kant provided the well-springs from which issued two main directions of
thought. One is exemplified in the scientific work of major 19th-century scientists such
as Hermann von Helmholtz, Emil du Bois-Reymond, and Rudolf Virchow. On the other side,
Kant could be read, or misread, as the father of a very different view of science, one
infused with the Romanticism of the "Nature Philosophers." They included
Friedrich Schelling; the brothers Schlegel; Novalis; and all their influential
followers.The Danish Naturphilosoph Hans Christian Oersted had even proved experimentally
in 1820 that the existence of a fundamental force was plausible. For Oersted showed that
an electric current produces around itself a magnetic field. That was the first part of a
synthesis of different fields, expanded by Maxwell in the 1870s to include light, by Hertz
to verify for radio waves, and finally by Einstein, to include all ofthese, and more.
Parallel unifications were developed by others, such as the Law of Conservation of Energy
applicable to all sciences. The password for the sciences at the time was
"Holism." And outside the sciences, the nostalgia for Gesamtkunstwerke was also
pursued. As to Tillich, in his essay entitled "Autobiographical reflections", he
told how he became infected with the synthesizing passion. It is as remarkable story. He
passed his earliest years in small towns in East Germany, built around the Gothic church,
all within…

——————————————————————————–

Page 9

9 the medieval town walls. His father was an authoritarian Lutheran minister and his
mother, as he wrote, was also morally rigid. Young Tillich found refuge in what he called
a "romantic", "aesthetic meditative attitude toward nature",
reinforced by the "deeply moving" nature mysticism in beloved German
poetry—Goethe, Hoelderlin, Novalis, Nietzsche, George, Rilke. Such readings led him
to a vision, as he put it, of the presence of the infinite in the finite, which he
regarded as also theologically affirmed. Eventually it came to confrontations with his
stern father, the "angry" supporter of "the conservative point of
view". Tillich rebelled against it both philosophically and politically, eventually
becoming a prominent supporter of Germany’s Religious Socialism. Here Tillich
added," The two strong motives I received", were "the romantic and the
revolutionary. The balance of these two motivations has remained the basic problem of my
thought and of my life ever since".
In his
Gymnasium years, he adored ancient Greek and Greek culture, especially the pre-Socratic
philosophers, Heraclitus and Parmenides, of whom he wrote later (The Future of Religion,
1966) nothing in all of philosophy written since then has surpassed them.
At that point in his autobiography, Tillich suddenly writes: "The way to
synthesis was my own way. It followed the classical German philosophers from Kant to
Hegel, and remained a driving force all my theological work". On his own, starting
when still in high school, young Tillich studied works of Kant, Fichte, Schleiermacher,
Hegel and Schelling. When he came to do his doctoral dissertation, it was on
Schelling’s philosophy of religion. Later he turned to the period when Schelling
broke with Hegel’s "system of reconciliation" and pointed toward
existentialism.

——————————————————————————–

Page 10

10 That turn, Tillich told elsewhere, was furthered by two factors. One, surprisingly,
was that, when still in his teens, Tillich came upon a book he regarded as the most
important of all: Shakespeare’s Hamlet, in August
Wilhelm von Schlegel’s translation.He learned the whole play by heart, and was
completely taken with its central existential question of the meaning of life, which
Hamlet summarized of course in his phrase, "To Be or Not To Be", or rather, in
Schlegel’s words, "Sein oder Nichtsein, das ist hier die Frage". It may not
be an accident that in the first volume of Tillich’s Systematic Theology there is a
chapter headed "Sein und Nichtsein". The second factor was an event that,
Tillich said in an interview, was for him a crucial life-changing experience. During the
whole First World War, Tillich was a chaplain with the troops, often at the front. One
night, in a terrible battle, he saw all around him his friends and comrades die miserably
of their wounds. He said about this. "My eyes were opened forever to the negative
side of life. My philosophical thinking went from idealism to existentialism…. [I now
saw] the human predicament, with its despair, guilt, anxiety, emptiness, meaninglessness,
death, as seen by modern novelists and artists." " My world and idealist
philosophy collapsed." His reading now included Marx and Freud. And he realized that
his work was drawing on "competitive motives ofthought", on both his earlier and
his later sensibilities, resulting in "a certain inconsistency and indefiniteness of
terminology." During his years in Berlin, Tillich published in 1923, at age 37, his
first large book,
Das System der Wissenschaften ,
nach Gegenstaenden und Methoden ( The System of the Sciences according to Objects and
Methods),
with the accent strongly on the "Das". Not only
was it a step to his later, second system, that of theology. We can see….

——————————————————————————–

Page 11

11 here already Tillich in the firm grip of a synthesis on behalf of a great mission.
Intending to encompass all knowledge under three headings—Denken, Sein and Geist –
Tillich deals here essentially with the systematization of all cognitive disciplines, as
he had been doing in his lectures. Therefore the book deals with logic, mathematics,
phenomenology, the empirical sciences from physics to geology and the life sciences, on to
psychology, sociology, history, art, law, metaphysics, ethics, philosophy, and of course
theology. Amain purpose of the book was to find the place for theology, and to show that
every field can have a theological component. In his introduction to the book, Tillich
explained that he saw it as his duty to provide "an overview of the whole of
knowledge", and also to put it in the service of necessary social change. No wonder
some of his colleagues lashed out at him.As we are about to turn now to Einstein’s
analogous passions, we come upon a happy surprise. I said earlier that we have no sure
evidence that Einstein and Tillich met personally in Berlin. But there happily exists at
least one documentable joint appearance of those two at another place, a meeting that had
important and unexpected consequences for each of them. There exists a photograph in the
Tillich Archive at our Divinity School library. It shows both of these men at a pleasant
gathering of about two dozen persons.Among them is Tillich at age 41, and Einstein who
just had entered his 50th year. [PHOTO]
The
place is Davos in Switzerland, and the time is Sunday, the 18thof March 1928
. This is a group of well recognized intellectuals from many fields of study.
They had come from Germany, France, Austria and Switzerland, during the spring break at
their…

——————————————————————————–

Page 12

12 universities. It is still a year before the start of the Great Depression, a time
when one could still hope for a civilized century. That town was still small, not yet
today’s fashionable sports and congress center for the Masters of the Universe. This
group had gone there on a humanitarian mission.
Davos was then, as it had been for decades, the site for many sanatoria, for patients
suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. Those patients lingered there in the belief that
they would be cured by the good mountain air and the sunlight, at this altitude of 5000
feet. The place had already gained extra attention since the publication, four years
earlier, by the book,
The Magic Mountain, by Thomas Mann (later to become another refugee of the class of 1933). In
short, we are looking at the
Zauberberg, to which came Hans Kastorp and his doomed cousin, Joachim
Zimmens, two typical young students whose general isolation in the sanatoria, far from the
outside world of action and ideas, only worsened their condition. That general fate of the
patients was precisely why this group of prominent academics had come there in 1928. They
were starting a month-long Alpine University. Their unselfish mission was to give lectures
and hold discussions, hoping thereby to enlighten and cheer up those young people from the
sanatoria. The lectures, in German and French, were on science, philosophy, literature,
jurisprudence, and sociology: six or seven of these every day, six days a week, from
forty-five lecturers when all had arrived, including people like
Lucien Levy-Bruhl and Jean Piaget. The audience
consisted of some 360 students and 400 others from the environs, all crowding into the
Grand Hotel Curhaus.

——————————————————————————–

Page 13

13 Einstein gave the inaugural lecture, on "The Fundamental Concepts of Physics in
its Development," and he remained fully engaged during the time of his stay–perhaps
too much so. He attended other professors’ lectures assiduously, met with individuals
and small groups, even played his violin at a chamber concert, to help raise funds for
this new university. Tillich gave two lectures, one on "Religion and Culture,"
and the other on "The Religious Knowledge". Little did Tillich and Einstein know
that this meeting would, for each of them, be a turning point in his life. Tillich had
come from his professorship, now at the University of Dresden. He had by now published
about a dozen books and many articles, ranging from Schelling and Schleiermacher to
religious socialism. This last was to be understood as socialism studied from a religious
point of view, and intended to lead to activities improving the social situation, unlike
other prominent Protestants such as Karl Barth, who, Tillich complained, "virtually
ignored the social situation." Einstein, on his side, was now at the height of his
fame, chiefly thanks to his general relativity theory; but, like Tillich, he too was
always ready to throw himself into the social problems of the day, often to the dismay and
disapproval of his nearer colleagues. At
Davos, Tillich was in high demand, surrounded by students and colleagues. His former
teacher, Fritz Medicus, saw and heard him, and wrote that Tillich was clearly "the
coming man in philosophy. One of Tillich’s talks at
Davos was scheduled to follow upon one by a speaker
who had given the rather pessimistic prediction that civilization was declining on an
exhausted soil in Europe. Upon that, Tillich rose and objected. The religious person, he
held, is used to finding himself in a crisis. That may even help him…..

——————————————————————————–

Page 14

That may even help him to avoid false certainties, and lead him to turn to the
necessary and reliable certainty in God. In the audience were two psychologists from the
University of Frankfurt. They decided right then and there to propose that Tillich be
called to the University of Frankfurt—and that in fact happened the next year, to
Tillich’s joy. Frankfurt was then a great place for a theologian, since it was the
home also for the outstanding
Jewish theologians,
Martin Buber, Franz Rosenzweig, and their brilliant student, Nahum Glatzer.
In terms of intellectual production and influence, Tillich’s years at
Frankfurt were to be arguably his best so far. As Adams remarked about Tillich’s
works during those days, "We see here the fundamental impulses that pervaded
Tillich’s whole career. He wished to make the prophetic and sacramental, the
theological and the philosophical relations relevant to the present historical situation,
and he did this by means of a constant dialogue with the creative and critical figures of
past and present." In short, when Tillich left
Davos and went on to his post in Frankfurt, he could consider that his kindness to the
Davos students well rewarded.
As to Einstein, his vigorous participation in
Davos had also long-term consequences, but of a very different kind. His biographer
and son-in-law Rudolf Kaiser wrote later, that Einstein had been persuaded to come to
Davos because of his concern for those sick
students, lying there without intellectual challenges. But Einstein himself did not feel
physically well in the beginning of that year. As Rudolf Kaiser revealed, "In
Davos started [Einstein’s] severe
heart disease, which kept him chained to his bed for a long time." It was a debility
that he had to suffer from later on.

——————————————————————————–

Page 15

15 I have said nothing yet about the inaugural lecture Einstein
gave at
Davos. The body of the lecture was essentially a deep bow to
Schopenhauer’s determinism, which Einstein had accepted from first to last
. Einstein in that year was preoccupied by the current debate about the role of
causality, a debate caused by the rise of the so-called Copenhagen interpretation of
quantum mechanics, of Bohr, Heisenberg, Born, etc. The remarkable success of their new
physics was based on their thematic belief that natural phenomena at the atomic scale were
not classically causal but indeterminate, probabilistic. Einstein then, and for the rest
of his life, was certain that he could rely on what he called in that
Davos lecture "my scientific
instinct," namely, that the new quantum mechanics was a temporary phase, that
ultimately, one would interpret "events as necessary and fully under the law of
causality," a program which he noted to have been "divined by the great
materialists of Greek antiquity." Indeed, his own theory ofrelativity was, he said,
"nothing more than a further consequential development of the [older] field
theory," based on causality. So far, so good. Einstein too had been a builder of a
system, now to be defended against the swarm of probabilists. And if Einstein had not said
anything else in that lecture, which Tillich surely attended, all might have been well
between them. But in his lecture, Einstein had another paragraph. In fact, he had started
the whole talk with one of his persistent opinions, namely that the scientific triumphs
throughout history, based on strict causality, showed the uselessness of seeking "to
refer all that happens to the exercise of will on the part of invisible spirits."
Moreover, he characterized that belief as worthy only of "primitive man."

——————————————————————————–

Page 16

16

We can only speculate what Tillich thought about this, perhaps an early version of a
paragraph in his later book,
Dynamics of Faith: "Scientific truth and the truth of faith do not belong to the same
dimension of meaning. Science has no right and no power to interfere with faith, and faith
has no power to interfere with science. One dimension ofmeaning is not able to interfere
with another dimension". Let us now take a few minutes to look more closely at
Einstein, in preparation for the coming conflict with Tillich. Einstein’s urgent
mental and metaphysical compunction, his own ultimate concern, were hinted at in an
article of 1916, where Einstein had written: "What goal will and can be reached by
the science to which I am dedicating myself?" And he answered: "To dedicate
oneself to what is essential, as against what is based only on the accident of
development." Under this self-demand, he had turned to extending his original theory
of relativity of 1905 into his general theory, or rather, as he significantly called it at
first in print, to his "generalized" theory of relativity. I have written about
the great significance to Einstein of this term, "generalized." Here I need only
summarize by noting that in his publications, and especially in his letters from 1899 on,
Einstein spoke again and again of what he confessed to be the strongest moving force in
his intellectual life.
"I am driven by my need
to generalize,"
he wrote to his friend W. De Sitter. His
relativity theory of 1905, stunning though it was, and is to this day, was unsatisfactory
for Einstein himself, because it did not apply to accelerated frameworks and gravitation.
Therefore, working himself for many years to near physical breakdown in order to
generalize the special relativity theory, he produced by 1916 what has ever since been
widely acknowledged to be an almost superhuman …

——————————————————————————–

Page 17

17

accomplishment, the General Theory. Now Einstein was able to apply the theory to the
whole cosmos. One section of his popular book of 1917 on the theory had the heading
"Consideration about the World as a Whole." Nothing less. In an article of the same year, applying his theory to cosmology,
he found that the theory allowed him to calculate the density and size of the universe
itself. Upon the success of the experimental test ofthe theory in 1919, one could almost
feel that with his theory Einstein could answer the key question, "what holds the
world together in its innermost," the challenge that had obsessed Goethe’s
Faust. Compared to what Einstein had done, most problems of other scientists, their other
concerns, seemed to sink into relative insignificance. Einstein was confident of his
success even before the 1919 test of his theory. He had declared, in a widely read speech
in 1918 that the supreme task, the highest duty, of physicists is to seek the most
universal elementary laws from which, by pure deduction, the whole world picture can be
achieved. And he confessed there that "the longing to behold this pre-established
harmony, requiring inexhaustible patience and perseverance, can only come from a
‘state of feeling’ akin to that of a religious worshipper or one who is in
love." On this, Tillich would have agreed. On the final page of his book of 1923 he
had called the pursuit of the Wissenschaften to be a spiritual act. He repeatedly used the
trio of Eros, passion, and scientific sobriety to describe the necessary mindset for
reachingtoward the ultimate. Indeed, to Tillich, the pursuit of such exalted aims was what
he called the "religious element in the whole intellectual enterprise," and he
defined religion as "the state of being grasped by an ultimate concern."
Einstein, for his part, analogously

——————————————————————————–

Page 18

18 wrote that the perception in the universe of "profound reason and beauty
constitute true religiosity." After the publication and successful test of the
General Theory, scientists and much of the public made Einstein into a veritable icon of
genius and of almost mystic revelation. So it was inevitable that, just as for
Tillich’s early work, a backlash would not be far behind. I leave aside, in
Einstein’s case, the vicious anti-Semitic attacks which in fact made him flee from
Berlin in 1922 for a round-the-world trip. After Nazi gangs had assassinated his friend, Foreign Minister Walther Rathenau, Einstein’s own name was
found on their list, to be the next one to be killed for his so-called Jewish physics and
his social views.Among those who objected to Einstein’s work, though less violently,
were also conservative theologians, who thought Einstein had brashly invaded their
territory. To them, the proper answer to the Faustian question what holds the world
together was not to be found in Einstein’s bunch of tensor calculus equations, but in
the presence and grace of God. Most famously, Boston’s Cardinal O’Connell
charged that Einstein’s view of space and time is "a cloak beneath which lies
the ghastly apparition of atheism." The journal Commonweal
published numerous articles and editorials against Einstein. It may have been such attacks
that decided Einstein to write his remarkable series of essays on science and religion,
beginning in 1930. Another reason for the backlash against Einstein’s work was a
semantic sort oftime bomb, ticking away ever since his theory’s early form of 1905. I
am speaking of the term relativity itself. Einstein in fact had not called his publication
initially a relativity theory, and he did not use the term himself for years in the titles
of his publications. He….

——————————————————————————–

Page 19

19

adopted it eventually only after most scientists, starting with Max Planck in 1906, had
freely used that term to refer to Einstein’s work. Einstein himself had thought his
theory from the beginning to be not a revolutionary act, but merely, as he put it to his
friend Habicht in 1905, a point of view "making use of a modification of the theory
of space and time." He saw his work as an act of simplification, of generalization,
hence an aesthetically more pleasing way to think about physics. He called it
significantly his
"Maxwellian Program." And he complained in letters to friends that a correct term for his work would
at best have been
Invariantentheorie, a theory not
of relativity at all, but of the opposite, of invariance, of constancy
. After all, the whole point of his theory was that Einstein had found a way to
rewrite the known laws of physics so as to make them for the first time independent of the
relative points of vantage of different observers. Moreover, a key postulate in it was
Einstein’s declaration of the absoluteness of the speed of light, regardless of the
relative motion of the observer. So it would have been not unreasonable for physicists to
call Einstein’s work the theory of absolutes. Of course, as he later said in
resignation, it was now too late to change the terminology. The semantic time bomb
exploded in the 1920s, with collateral damage to this day. The very existence of the
theory of relativity has been often and wrongly held to illustrate, and in extreme cases
even to be responsible for, the perceived relativization of ethics and other common
values. Einstein’s long struggle with religion has been amply documented, starting
with his remark on the very first page of his Autobiography that as a child, although
"the son of entirely irreligious [Jewish] parents," he came "to a deep
religiosity up to the age of….

——————————————————————————–

Page 20

20

twelve." One may surmise that we have here a rebellion against his parental
beliefs, ironically analogous to Tillich’s case. While Einstein soon turned his back
on any organized religion, the seeds of young religiosity in Einstein flourished greatly
in his later years, partly under the influence of Spinoza’s
Ethics, one of his favorite books. His religious
views are thought even to have penetrated into choices he made in his physics. Up to about
1930, this part of his concerns kept a low profile. Then, between 1930 and 1948, he
published several widely discussed articles on religion and science, with the first of
these called simply "Religion and Science", setting forth his idea that what he
called "the cosmic religious feeling" is the most advanced and only acceptable
stage of religion. Elaborating in these essays onhis earlier remarks, such as his brief
ones at
Davos, Einstein
explained that the concept of a Personal God was an anthropomorphic remnant of primitive
times, of a religion of fear. It had to be abandoned in favor of a Spinozistic feeling of
awe and "sense of ‘wonder’" at the rationality and beauty of the
universe. Moreover, as one who believed in the "universal operation of the law of
causation", Einstein could not entertain "for a moment", as he said,
"the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events"—such as
causing prayers to be answered, or miracles to occur. And Einstein concluded that
"serious scientific workers are the only profoundly religious people." More
ideas along this line were to come from his pen shortly. A key event in our story is
Einstein’s essay entitled "Science and Religion." It appeared as part of a
remarkable symposium on the topic "Science, Philosophy and Religion in their Relation
to the Democratic Way of Life". That symposium, held in New York, was convoked by a
stellar group of intellectuals from a wide range of fields. Both Einstein and Tillich
signed

——————————————————————————–

Page 21

21

the call for the meeting. The main hope of this exercise was to arrive at some sort of
unity among all their different fields of knowledge, in the service of preventing
civilization from being undermined by unnecessary disputes, just when totalitarianism was
sweeping over Europe. That Symposium volume is a fascinating document. This is where
Tillich re-enters in our story. For when Tillich read Einstein’s essay in that
volume, he felt deeply troubled by it. Einstein had reemphasized his concept ofcosmic
religion. As he had put it there, a main source of the conflicts between the spheres of
religion and of science lies in this concept of a personal God. Because Einstein believed
that the law of causality applied to all physical events, it was inconceivable to him that
a "Divine Will exists as an independent cause of natural events". He called on
all "teachers of religion" to "have the stature to give up the outdated
doctrine of a Personal God, that is, give up that source of fear and hope which in the
past placed such vast powers in the hands of priests." He added that it was only the
perception of the "grandeur of reason incarnate in existence" which
"appears to bereligious in the highest sense of the word." In this way, science
"purifies the religious impulse of the dross of its anthropomorphism," and
"contributes to a religious spiritualization of our understanding of life."
Strong words. While Tillich was of course by no means of the conservative camp, he thought
that some response was called for. Within two months of the publication of Einstein’s
essay, Tillich issued his reply, entitled "Science and Theology: A Discussion with
Einstein" [not "discussion" but
Auseinandersetzung, to put apart, to separate, to dissolve a partnership, in the German of
G.W.v.XII,p.300]. Precisely because that negative critique of the notion of a Personal God
had been propagated by a man whom Tillich

——————————————————————————–

Page 22

22

regarded as the great transformer of our physical worldview, and to whom he had often
referred in admiring terms, these remarks could not be left unchallenged. In his published
reply, Tillich said rather sharply that Einstein had not understood the meaning of his own
words. For when Einstein had written about that awe at the "grandeur of reason
incarnate in existence," Einstein had failed to notice that modern theology calls
this "experience of the numinous" simply "the manifestation of the ground
and abyss of being and meaning." And in attacking the conception of the Personal God,
Einstein was only railing against an old, out-of-date mixture of mythological and rational
elements, even an unclean one. "No criticism of this distorted idea of God can be
sharp enough." Einstein had not noticed, Tillich added, that "God" is a
symbol, that the predicate "personal" can be said of the Divine "only
symbolically or by analogy, or if affirmed and negated at the same time." And that
symbol of God was needed for man’s existence: "For as the philosopher Schelling
says
: ‘Only a person can heal a person.’ This is the reason that the symbol of the Personal God is indispensable for
living religion. It is a symbol, not an object". And there was more. Tillich’s
suspicion now focused also on the concept of relativity itself. Traces of that suspicion
in Tillich’s mind can be found years before the
Davos meeting, for example in Tillich’s essay of 1924, entitled "The Tension
of the Absolute versus the Relative in the Philosophy of History." There, Tillich
condemned relativism in history, along with Marxism and positivism. And four years after
Davos (in "The Religious
Situation," 1932), Tillich had referred directly to the "modern theory of
relativity," which eliminates "every absolute point of reference." To be
sure, he said, the theory of relativity "has revealed more clearly than was
previously apparent the infinity….

——————————————————————————–

Page 23

23

of existence." But Tillich warned the theory "shrouds the true nature in
deeper mystery than before." Toward the end of his life, Tillich wrote a set of
essays, published posthumously in 1967 with the forthright title My Search for Absolutes.
One chapter has the heading "Absolutes in human knowledge and the idea of
truth", going back to a basic theme in the writings of Schelling. In that chapter,
Tillich confides as follows: "My choice of this subject was made out of a feeling of
uneasiness—uneasiness about the victory of relativism in all realms of thought and
life today…a total victory." "The sea of relativities…threatens to
overwhelm us." While Tillich did not refer there directly to Einstein’s work, he
was bothered by what he called "the great spectacle of scientific
relativism….But what we have here is a game," because scientists are now dealing
not with reality but with "models." The same relativism, Tillich said, can be
found in contemporary positivistic philosophy and "in the growth of ethical
relativism….[Also], there is the great and increasing relativism
in…religion,…in the secularist criticism of religion." Against this
"stream" of relativisms, Tillich wrote, he stood for Absolutes. They "make
language possible, understanding possible, and truth possible." Absolutes are at the
bottom of "the moral imperative". Indeed, "the experience of the
Absolute-itself is experience of the holy, the sacred." When I read this, and
considered that these two men had met in Davos, and that
Tillich had thought for a long time about Einstein and relativity, for better or worse, I
decided to look into the Einstein Archive. That collection contains, among its 45,000
documents, Einstein’s correspondence with a huge number of scholars, scientists
and…..

——————————————————————————–

Page 24

24

other intellectuals. I searched there for any letter exchange between Tillich and
Einstein. But there are only three mailings, all from Tillich, and none addressed to
philosophical issues. One is an appeal to join in helping yet another refugee from Nazism,
another is a request to join an organization of Self-help for German Émigrés, which
Tillich headed for 15 years, and the third is Tillich’s analysis in 1942 of the war
aims of the Allies. The content of all those mailings were fully in accord with
Einstein’s well-known views. But we do not know whether Einstein replied to any of
them. On that, the Archive is silent. * * * It had started so auspiciously, with those
great minds assembled on that meadow on the
Zauberberg
in 1928
, having come there with a common sense of service. Our two
protagonists had so much in common. They had been exposed to the same holistic cultural
inheritance, as well as the same dangers. Each worked seriously in his own way on an
integration, unification and reconciliation of different areas of culture, including
science and religion. Each had produced a commanding system in his field. Each had
carefully and with much pain developed his system over a long period, making this
self-appointed task the very center of his life. And when we look at their main legacies,
there stands out forcefully one common theme: The quest for the unification of
apparentirreconcilables. For Einstein it was, as we have seen, to try to bring together
the major fields of physics, and from there to construct for himself even a religion that
was fused with his cosmological thoughts. Tillich, author of several synthesis-seeking
works, wrote in the Foreword of the first edition of his
1923 book, Das System der Wissenschaften, as
follows: "All Wissenschaften function in the service of one truth, and Wissenschaft
collapses if it loses….

——————————————————————————–

Page 25

25

the sense of connection of the whole." One of his courses at Harvard had the
breathtaking title "Religion, Art, and Science." In his search for a synthesis,
Tillich was trying to develop a theological and religious position as ambitious and
advanced as what Einstein was attempting in his own field. Tillich called his work once
"the experiment to which my whole life is dedicated, the reunion of what eternally
belongs together but what has been separated in history". So we may be tempted,
finally, to think that these two kindred spirits might well have developed a mutual
Elective Affinity, if only they had been brought together for heart-to-heart discussions.
One can imagine what they could have said to each other, being both culture-carriers of
the old sort, deeply admiring many of the same classic philosophers, above all Spinoza,
and also having inherited much of 19th-century sensibilities, including sensitivity to
what has been called the vocabulary of the scientific sublime, "reverence and awe,
reason and progress." That a Personal God is a symbol instead of a mere
anthropomorphic fantasy might have been acceptable to Einstein. He might not have objected
to Tillich’s definition, "The ultimate concern is
unconditional…total…." In turn, it would have appealed to Tillich that
Einstein’s relativity was as much a search for Absolutes as was Tillich’s Systematic Theology; and conversely, Einstein would of
course have agreed to oppose the false uses of the word "relativity."But we must
avoid imagining such a "Happy Ending". Protagonists at such exalted levels tend
to persist in their life’s program with a certain stubbornness. They tend to cling
fiercely to their thematic presuppositions. In fact, that is part of their…

——————————————————————————–

Page 26

26

strength. Einstein and Niels Bohr, too, while deeply respecting each other, never
deviated, during their long debates, from their divergent views. The differences we saw
between Einstein and Tillich are for us in fact an advantage: They have sharpened our
understanding of their respective intellectual landscapes. And the similarities in their
ambitious programs gave us two exemplars of true Questers, who devoted their lives to
complementary searches, each animated by his own
ultimate
concern.

HISTORICAL BOARD GAMES & FORECASTING

October 11, 2006 at 12:29 pm | Posted in Globalization, History | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

games.jpg

Struggle of Empires

http://www.funagain.com/control/product/~product_id=015283

Struggle of Empires

There is little doubt that, for me, the most anticipated game to be released at each Essen Spiele Faire is the new release from Warfrog. The last three years has produced
a steady stream of winners from the jolly British lads:
Liberté, Age of Steam, and Princes of the Renaissance. All of those games have great depth and are personal favorites.

After praising Princes of the Renaissance, designer Martin Wallace teased me a bit by saying that if I
enjoyed Princes, I would REALLY enjoy his next design. Unfortunately, I had to wait the
better part of a year before having the opportunity to affirm or contradict his
prediction.

After playing Struggle of Empires several times, I am pleased to say that Martin was absolutely correct. Struggle of Empires is a thing of beauty, a
true gamer’s game. The game is overflowing with tough choices, rich flavor, and
numerous strategic options. Further, all of this is wrapped in a game that is not
difficult to learn, and plays in less than four hours. Sometimes it can be difficult to
assess a game after only one playing, but I feel confident enough here to declare that
this is yet another winner from Mr. Wallace and the Warfrog team.

Struggle of Empires is set in the 18th century, when the European powers were vying to
spread their influence and power not only throughout the continent, but around the world
as well. Players struggle to find the most successful combination of military, diplomatic,
economic and expansion policies that will carry them past their formidable opponents.
Creating an empire is the ultimate goal, and this usually must be achieved at the expense
of one’s rivals.

Up to seven players lead the powers of Britain, France, Spain, Russia, Austria, Prussia
and the United Provinces. I’ve now played with 5, 6, and 7 players, and the game
works equally well. Yes, playing with a full contingent of 7 players does add a bit of
length to the game, but it also adds even more tension and decision-making.

In addition to the seven major powers listed above, the colorful board also depicts
numerous other areas, both within Europe and overseas. These additional areas are the
focal point of the players’ expansionist efforts, as they will award victory points
to the players who establish control or a strong presence in those areas. Some areas will
award points to the three most influential nations, while others will only grant points to
the top two powers present in the area. Deciding on where to concentrate your efforts, and
how best to accomplish those tasks, are main decisions to be made throughout the game.

Before beginning the game, the board is seeded with ten “country” counters,
which are placed directly into the country named on the counters. These country counters
list an inherent defense strength of the area, and once defeated, allow a player to place
one of his own control markers into the area. Control markers are vital when determining
the awarding of victory points following each of the three turns (known as
“wars” in game parlance). Ten more country counters will be placed at the
beginning of both turns 2 and 3.

Players then each seed the board with five of their control markers and five of their
military units. The location of these initial control markers is determined randomly,
while players do control where their initial military units begin. Some players may opt to
send their military units to the areas where they have already established control in
order to protect their interests, while others may send them to new areas in order to
begin efforts to gain influence in those territories.

Each of the three turns follows the following sequence of play:

1. Place Country Counters. Ten new country counters are drawn at random and placed into
their respective territories. This provides the players with new areas in which to expand.
This is NOT performed on turn one since the seeding of the board prior to the beginning of
the game serves this purpose.

2. Determine Alliances and Play Order. Yes, the auction mechanism is present here, but
the twist is somewhat different. During this phase, alliances are determined. In the
bidding round, players will have the opportunity of nominating two nations which will be
in different alliances. Each player can accept this suggestion, or change it by bidding a
higher amount. Ultimately, the player who bids the most will have his nomination approved.

This is a very important aspect of the game as it will split the players into two
alliances. Players who are allied CANNOT attack each other during the current turn. Thus,
players are faced with tough choices. No doubt, there is an incentive to force a rival
into an alliance so that he cannot attack your possessions, but then you must also realize
that you cannot attack his possessions! Of course, each player will have their own
designs, so this alliance phase can be quite spirited.

Another consideration is that this division of powers also determines the player order
for the current turn. Turn order can be critical, so it is yet another aspect to consider
when participating in the bidding.

The currency being bid is gold, which is usually in precious short supply. However, a
player can bid more gold than he possesses, and simply raises the excess amount by taxing
the population. The bad news is that people generally don’t enjoy being taxed (that
sure hasn’t changed in 250 years!), so the player must increase his unrest by taking
1 unrest counter for each 2 gold he secures in taxes. Unrest can come back to haunt a
player in numerous ways …

3. Player Actions. Here is where most of the time in each turn will be spent. Players
may perform two actions per round, and they will each have five (or six, depending upon
the number of players) rounds per turn. So, players will have a total of 10 (or 12)
actions to perform during each war.

a) Buy a Tile. A player may only select one action tile each round (5 total per turn).
While there really aren’t many different actions from which to choose, there are
dozens of different action tiles a player can select, including, temporary alliance tiles,
which grant the player combat aid in specific territories, and “company” tiles,
which grant extra income in the specified areas, and wide variety of special tiles. Each
of these provides different advantages and powers, and understanding each of them can
… and will … take time. In fact, it will likely take several games before a
player is familiar enough with each of the tiles before he can make his selections in a
timely fashion.

Deciding upon which tiles to choose during the course of the game is extremely
critical. Players can formulate long-term strategies and choose their tiles accordingly.
However, changing situations often require players to alter their strategies and react to
various threats or opportunities. This will likely alter a player’s tile selections.
Further, many of the tiles are extremely limited in quantity, so there is an urgency to
grab those tiles early so as not to be left out. These decisions can be tough, as players
often would love to have many of the available tiles, but can only choose one per round.
It is the acquiring of these tiles in the correct combination so as to maximize one’s
performance and effectiveness that helps make this game so rich.

b) Build Unit. Players may build an army, navy or fort. Each unit causes the player to
lose a population point, as citizens are in-scripted into the services. Population is
usually very limited, meaning players do not have the ability to build huge military
forces.

A unit is constructed in one’s home country, then immediately shipped to a foreign
land. There are dangers, however, when shipping to overseas areas, which will be explained
in a bit.

Some action tiles (militia, mercenaries, trained natives, press gangs) allow players to
construct extra units each turn, but many do cost an extra population point. Ouch.

c) Move Two Units. For one action, a player may move two of his units already on the
map. Movement within Europe is fairly easy, with a few restrictions dealing with where a
player already has control or adjacency. Movement overseas, however, is a bit more risky.

In order to move a unit to the colonies, a player must first roll a die to see if the
unit is able to complete the journey. Only a ‘1’ is dangerous, as that requires
another roll, with a ‘1’ or ‘2’ resulting in the unit being lost at
sea. A ‘3’ or ‘4’ on the second roll forces the unit to remain in its
place of origin. Thus, the risk isn’t that great … but disaster can occur. In
one of my games, I lost two units to the perils of the deep.

The other restriction involves the transportation of an army unit overseas. A player
must have a ship present in the area where he wishes to transport the army unit.

d) Attack. Attacking is the only way to expel foreign troops, or place or replace a
control marker. Attacking is often a two-step process, and requires the expenditure of two
gold pieces.

Before combat begins, both players may call for assistance from their allies, provided
those allies have military units present in the area. Usually, calls for alliance result
in bribes being offered in order to entice the wary … and greedy … allies into
the fray. The danger for allies is that they incur any military losses in the ensuing
conflict. Thus, extortion usually occurs before anyone comes to the aid of a beleaguered
ally.

First, if both players have naval units present in the area, a naval battle must occur.
The victor of that battle will have naval supremacy in the ensuing land combat, which
equates to a +1 modifier when rolling the dice. Either opponent may opt to not participate
in the naval conflict and automatically cede naval supremacy to his opponent.

The combat procedure is fairly simple. If fighting an active player, each player
tallies the number of army units present in the area. The player who has naval supremacy
receives a +1 modifier. Further, the player who possesses the most “Army
Training” tiles receives an additional +1 modifier. Finally, if the defender has a
fort present, he receives a +2 modifier.

Both opponents then roll two dice and add the DIFFERENCE between their dice to their
combat total. High value wins. For example, if Keith had 2 army units and a fort in an
area, and had the most Army Training tiles, his base value is ‘5’ (2 + 2 (fort)
+ 1 (army training) = 5). If Keith rolls a “2” and a “5”, he adds
‘3’ to this amount, giving him a total of ‘8’. Jim’s total must
be higher than ‘8’ if he is to win this battle.

The losing player must remove one of his army units and he receives an unrest marker,
as the population back-at-home doesn’t take too kindly to military defeats. Further,
the victor gets to replace on of the vanquished opponent’s control markers with his
own.
Since control is the name of the game, this is critical.

If the result was a tie, both players lose an army unit and must take an unrest marker.
No control markers are replaced. Further, if any or both players dice roll totals
‘7’, they lose an additional army unit and take an additional unrest token.
Since ‘7’ is the most common roll on two dice, this is a frequent occurrence,
causing the players unrest tokens to creep steadily upwards.

Combat against the neutral country counters is held in a similar fashion, with the
exception that no players can form an alliance with the neutral country. The neutral
country’s defense strength is listed on its counter.

e) Colonization / Enslavement. Here is the controversial part of the game. Some neutral
country counters will have the word “pop” or “slave” listed on it. No
problem with “pop”, as players may simply replace one of these counters with
their own control marker by losing a point of population. The controversy erupted over the
“slave” counters.

A player may convert a “slave” neutral country counter into one of his own
control markers IF he has a ship present in Africa. There is no loss of
population due to this action. The
simulation, of course, is the shipping of slaves from Africa into the region. There is no
escaping that this was a historical fact and a major aspect of colonial policy for many
European powers. The game system in no way glorifies or condones slavery. However, it
includes it since it was a vital aspect of this time period and the colonization process.
Some folks have taken exception to the inclusion of slavery into the game system. It is
certainly there right not to purchase or play the game. Personally, I think omitting the
subject would have been a more grievous affront, and the matter is treated here in a very
inoffensive manner.

f) Pass. Do nothing. Sometimes, a player will execute this option if he has previously
selected a tile and does not wish to perform any of the other actions.

4. Income and Maintenance. After all players have performed – two-at-a-time –
their two actions, player will then receive income based upon the number of control
markers they have on the board, one gold piece for each marker. However, they then must
pay one gold piece for maintenance for each military unit they possess on the board. Many
times, a player’s large army will require more upkeep than the income a player’s
possessions are generating. That, of course, leads to unrest.

Finally, each player restores five points of population. The only other way to acquire
new population is by securing a
“Improved
Agriculture”
tile, which gives the player one new population
point each turn.

5. Victory Points. Players then tally their victory points, examining each country and
earning points as indicated on the board and described above. Certain areas are more
valuable than others (German States, Central Europe and Mediterranean), but it is critical
to secure a strong control presence in as many areas as possible. This aspect of the game
is kin to many other ‘majority control’ games, but all of the surrounding
features elevate it above most of its brethren.

There are a few other methods by which players can earn victory points during the
course of the game. Some neutral country counters grant a victory point when defeated, and
the ‘Industry’ tiles award three victory points, but at the cost of two
population points and two unrest markers.

6. End of War. This is the “clean-up” phase. Players return any
“alliance” tiles, which are temporary, to the available stock, and the formal
alliances between the players are dissolved. The same procedure detailed above is
conducted for Wars 2 & 3, after which point the game ends with a final accounting.

After victory points are earned following the third war, players reveal the unrest
counters they have acquired during the course of the game. If any player has 20 or more
points of unrest, his country collapses in revolution and that player is out of contention
for the victory. The player with the most unrest loses 7 victory points, while the player
with the second-most unrest loses 4 victory points. After these deductions, the player
with the most victory points is declared the victor.

Wow! What a game! In all of my matches, I have been completely and thoroughly enamored.
This is a very rich, and very deep game, with loads of strategic options and difficult
choices. Every action seems critical and often has profound impact upon the options and
actions of one’s opponents. However, an early misstep is not fatal, as each player
has 30 actions in a typical game.

Although Wallace does borrow some ideas from other games, including several of his own
titles, the alliance mechanism seems highly original. The struggle to maneuver certain
players into alliance status, while slotting others into the opposition faction, is a
vital aspect of the game and often evokes quite a bit of diplomatic discussions and tense
atmosphere. It helps gives the game a boost to a higher level.

Problems? Perhaps, but it really depends upon the individual gamers’ tastes. A
full game will take nearly four hours to play to completion, perhaps a bit more with seven
players. I certainly don’t mind such length, particularly when the game in question
is engaging and challenging.
Struggle of Empires is certainly in that category. Folks accustomed to traditional German-style
games, however, may balk at this time frame.

Another possible bone of contention with some folks will be the downtime between turns.
Since there are so many action tiles to consider, and so many strategic options to ponder,
players will often take several minutes or more on each of their turns. One of our players
… and the only one out of nine different people with whom I’ve played to rate
the game poorly … cited this downtime as the primary reason for his poor rating. This
downtime doesn’t bother me, however, as I am keenly interested in the actions of my
opponents as it usually has a direct impact upon my subsequent actions and overall
strategy. Apparently it didn’t bother the rest of the players, either, as all of the
remaining ratings were 8.5 or higher.

Aside from these two very subjective factors, the game is very tightly constructed and
appears to have been thoroughly play- tested. In what is quite likely a first for the
Warfrog crew, the rules are concise and
easy to understand with few, if any, ambiguities. Martin and his crew have constructed a
mighty fine game here, one that will have great appeal to those folks who enjoy sinking
their teeth into meatier fare.

Note: this review refers to a different
edition
of this title.

Struggle of Empires:

Designer(s): Martin Wallace

Manufacturer(s): Eagle Games

Year: 2005

Players: 2 – 7

Time: 180 – 240 minutes

Ages: 13 and up

Est. time to learn: 30+ minutes

Weight: 1,339 grams

Other resources for Struggle of Empires:

Board Game Geek is an incredible compilation of information about
board and card games with many descriptions, photographs, reviews, session reports, and
other commentary.

The Luding Database is a
game database that contains several thousand games, authors and publishers. There are also
links to discussion of games at more than 60 sites around the WWW.

The Game Cabinet is the
original online game resource. While it has not been updated in several years, it remains
a valuable archive of information about older games.

GLADSTONE VERSUS DISRAELI

October 11, 2006 at 4:58 am | Posted in Books, Globalization, History, Middle East | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

The British Imperial Experience from 1765 to the Present

by Denis Judd, p. 83.

Britain Overseas 1865-1885

Revolt in Jamaica

In 1865 in British-ruled Jamaica, a crowd of some 400 African-Caribbeans, who disliked
the decision of a local magistrate, attacked a local courthouse and rescued a fellow black
from prosecution. Britain’s governor on the island, Edward John Eyre, sought the arrest of
some of those involved, and people resisting arrest killed a few of the white volunteers
sent against them. Martial law was proclaimed. A white-controlled
militia burned down nearly 1,000 homes of blacks and flogged hundreds of captured.
Court-martials of captured blacks resulted in the summary execution of 354.
NOTE
The whites
targeted a
"colored" (half-black and
half-white) leader, G.W. Gordon, a Baptist minister and political spokesman for grievances
of black peasants, as the man responsible for the rebellion. The white settlers and
authorities were afraid of a revolt similar to the massacres that had occurred earlier in
the century in Haiti. They believed in British order and justice, but their fear and
excitement led them to a hasty and false judgment, and within a few hours of his trial,
Gordon was hanged.

The rebellion was defeated, but in England an investigation was held. Eyre was widely
condemned and was called to London. Some demanded that he be tried for murder. He was
removed from office but a grand jury refused to indict him.

Britain in Africa and Afghanistan

Britain’s experiences with colonies, including the thirteen colonies that became the
United States, had not been altogether pleasing or of lasting benefit to Britain. In
government was substantial opposition to expansion in Africa, and in 1865, a Select
Committee of the British House of Commons commented that "all further extension of
territory or assumption of government, or new treaties offering protection to native
tribes would be inexpedient." As for territory in West Africa that Britain already
ruled, the committee recommended preparations for independence. What Britain wanted in
Africa was free trade.

In eastern Africa, the British were in conflict with Tewodros II, emperor of Ethiopia (Abyssinia) since 1855. Tewodros sent a letter to
Queen Victoria asking for British help in removing the Turks from the Red Sea. For two
years his letter went unanswered, and when the reply came it was negative. Tewodros
responded by arresting British subjects servingin the British consulate. Britain demanded
their release, and when this did not happen they sent 30,000 troops. Tewodros was able to
put together an army of no more than 4,000. The British troops freed their consulate
personnel. Tewodros killed himself on the battlefield with his pistol, and the British
left Ethiopia – uninterested in absorbing Ethiopian territory or natural resources.

It was in Egypt that Britain developed an interest, after penetration there by
the French. Egypt was one of the areas of frequent investment of money by French
capitalists, and the French and Egyptians had been digging a 106-mile long canal (171
kilometers) between the Mediterranean and Red seas, employing around 1.5 million Egyptian
workers – a ten year project that cost 125,000 lives. The canal was a largely French-owned
company, with some shares owned by the Ottoman Empire’s viceroy (khedive) in Egypt, Ismail
Pasha. Late in 1869 the canal was opened for navigation, with access promised the ships
from all nations, for a fee. It provided British merchant and warships a shorter route to
India and farther east, including Australia. Giuseppe Verdi wrote an opera for the opening
celebration – Aida.

The British were already established in South Africa, with its Cape
Colony
. Diamond deposits had been discoveredin southern Africa – at Kimberley in the
land of the Griqua, or Griqualand, on the northern frontier of
the British colony. In 1870 diamond diggers were rushing there – Africans, whites from
Europe, Australia and the Americas. Britain persuaded the Griqua chieftain Waterboer to
accept British protection from the nearby Dutch Boers, and in 1881 Britain annexed the
territory , which became Griqualand West.

Economic Fears

With the arrival of economic depression in 1873, British concerns over their ability to
trade internationally increased. The first to industrialize, Britain was holding to older,
or outmoded, machinery compared to what was being used by more recently developed
economies. The British felt threatened by the rising economies of Germany, France and the
United States. German textile and metal industries had become better organized and more
technically efficient than those in Britain. British businesses were suffering from
reduced profits and price deflation. London financial houses grew in their fear that
French and German investments in international markets would depress interest rates, and
they were increasingly concerned about government consistency in its willingness to
protect British investments abroad. And the
British were concerned about inadequate sales of their commodities abroad
creating an unfavorable balance of trade. The British believed that they should continue
as "the workshop of the world," in other words as the world

leader in manufacturing and commerce – a source of
their nation’s strength and therefore grandeur.

Financial houses favored more control by Britain in international affairs. Some
manufacturers involved in large-scale exports, such as metals and textiles, turned to
their government for help. And there were missionaries and religious organizations
advocating for more British control in the form of interventions in non-European
societies.

Britain was concerned about its influence in the world against a newly united Germany,
against the weakness of its ally the Ottoman Empire, and fear of Russia expanding eastward
into Asia and southward against the Ottomans, the Persians, toward Afghanistan and India.
Agitation for independence among the Irish was also disturbing, and trade unions were
growing in strength.

West Africa

The British had bought out the last of the Dutch and Danish trading forts and in the
early 1870s had acquired a trading monopoly along the Gold Coast.
In 1874 the British turned that coastal area, about a 100 kilometers deep and 400
kilometers wide, into a colony – the beginnings of a colony that would be called Ghana.
The British fought a war against the kingdom of Asante, whose
kings had claimed jurisdiction over the coast and had challenged the British there.
(Rather than their red and green coats, the British commander, Wolseley, had his troops
wear brown jackets and khaki trousers – a move toward the modern habit of camouflage.) The
British defeated the Asante army, burned the Asante capital, Kumasi, and withdrew. The
British force was about 50,000 strong, the Asante force about 60,000, the British losing
about a 1,000 men, the Asante about 2,000. The Asante were shocked that their military had
been defeated. The Asante king was deposed by his subjects, and areas that had been
dominated by the Asante kingdom were inspired to revolt against Asante rule. The inland
region in and near Asante had become destabilized, with civil wars and rebellions to
follow in the years to come.

Disraeli and the Suez Canal

In 1874, the Conservative Party’s leader, Benjamin Disraeli became prime minister
again, the Conservative victory made possible by splits among the major opposition party,
the Liberals. The Conservative Party was also split on a lot of issues, while Disraeli’s
government was under pressure to vigorously pursue British interests abroad, and it did so
appealing to the grandeur of empire and the patriotism of common people, including those
attracted to trade unionism. The conservatives were posing as the guardian of
working-class interests against unscrupulous industrialists and lesser bourgeoisie.

In 1875 Britain became part owners in of the Suez Canal enterprise, the British
government, through Disraeli’s manipulations, managing to acquire the shares of Ismail
Pasha, who, while trying to Europeanize Egypt, had borrowed from international bankers and
had exhausted his credit, and in 1876 Ismail Pasha declared his government bankrupt. In
response, Britain and France set up a Joint Control Board to regulate Egypt’s economy,
creating cost-saving measures for Egypt such as reducing the size of its army. Many
Egyptian army officers lost their jobs – precipitating resentment against the British and
French.

South Africa

Southern Africa was similar in ways to the west in America. Bantu tribal peoples in
southern Africa had been on the move, southward to wherever better grazing land was
available, and sometimes running from rival tribes. And they were also bumping into white
settlers, who were pushing onto lands that the tribal peoples had come to consider as
theirs.

Both whites and blacks in southern Africa were dependent on raising animal herds and
growing crops, exporting skins, ivory and ostrich feathers. Then diamonds were discovered,
and by 1875 southern Africa became the largest diamond producing area in the world.
Company owned mines were replacing individual diggers, and the companies were employing
black migrant labor. They came from surrounding kingdoms and earned enough money to buy
guns, which they took with them back to their tribal areas. The blacks were becoming
better armed in their perennial conflicts with their Dutch neighbors, the Boers, conflicts
that, along with financial mismanagement, were bankrupting the Boer government – the
Republic of South Africa – in the Transvaal. Better armed, the Pedi tribe in their
mountain stronghold drove the Boers the Boers out of their territory. The Xhosa, who had
acquired guns on the diamond fields, were eager to regain lost lands, and they made war on
the whites and their black allies, the Mfengu.

The British rallied some support among the Boers, stressing the dangers from the
republic’s bankruptcy and from hostile Zulus and Pedi. The British promised to put the
Boer territory back on a sound financial footing while allowing a degree of local
self-rule, and they promised to rid the Boers of the menace of the Zulus. Acting on the
supposition that a majority of the Boers were in favor of British rule and that the Boers
at any rate were too divided to resist, Britain annexed the Boer republic in April 1877.
More than 6,500 Boers, in a nation of around 20,000,signed a petition protesting the
annexation, but the British government was adamant that the annexation would remain.

In 1878 the British ordered the King of the Zulus, Cetshwayo, to disband his army of
40,000 to 60,000. When the king did not respond, British troops advanced into Zulu
territory, without precautionary scouts. The Zulu army attacked, at Isandhwana, killing
800 British and capturing 1,000 rifles, with ammunition – an historic defeat for the
British. The British overcame that defeat and overpowered the Zulu, at the Battle of
Ulundi, on July 4, 1879. Queen Victoria urged "kind and generous treatment of
Cetshwayo," who was captured and exiled to Cape Town. The Queen worried that in
disarming the Zulus of their guns, should they be attacked "we are bound to defend
them." The British left the Zulus to rule themselves but divided and therefore
weakened, under thirteen separate chiefdoms.

Afghanistan

Russia’s advance into Turkistan and Samarkand alarmed Disraeli, and he pressed British authorities in
India to secure a defense against Russian expansion into Afghanistan. The Afghanis
admitted a Russian envoy but Afghan troops refused entry to a British envoy, Neville
Chamberlain. On the throne in Afghanistan was Amir Sher Ali Khan, the son of the former
ruler, Dost Mohammad Khan, who had been imprisoned by the British. Sher Ali Khan shared
his father’s hostility to the British. The British responded by launching the Second
Afghan War, sending troops over Afghanistan’s high passes. Sher Ali Khan fled. The British
occupied Kabul, and the war begun in 1878 ended in 1880 with Abdur Rahman as the new amir,
Rahman agreeing to British control of Afghanistan’s foreign relations. The British decided
where Afghanistan’s borders would be – borders that would eventually be recognized by the
Russians and remain into the 21st century.

War in South Africa and Egypt

Benjamin Disraeli supported the spread of empire and the glories of British power, but
he lost the elections of 1880. Many had been unhappy with him for having raised taxes and
unhappy over the cost of military operations. Those supporting Disraeli because of his
favor towards empire were not enough to keep him and his conservatives in office. The
champion of Britain’s Liberal Party, William E. Gladstone, presented himself as favoring
peace, liberty and fairness. The Liberals won a substantial majority in Parliament, and
Gladstone returned as prime minister.

Gladstone kept British gains in southern Africa, including rule over the Boers, and the
Boers rebelled. In early 1881 they defeated the British at Majuba Hill, the British losing
93 killed, 133 wounded and 58 taken prisoner. The Boers lost only one killed and five
wounded. Gladstone surrendered British rule over the 20,000 or so Boers but maintained
control over the foreign affairs of the Boer republic.

In Egypt the British and French were still in control of the Suez Canal and still with
the power over Egypt’s government, in cooperation with their ally, the Ottoman Turks. The
Ottoman sultan was still the nominal ruler of Egypt.
A member of the Egyptian army Ahmad Arabi (or Urabi), led a
revolt against Turkish rule and took control over Egypt’s government. He was a nationalist
and hostile also toward Europeans in Egypt. The British looked to a collective effort
against the threat to their interests in Egypt and demanded that Arabi’s government
resign. The British and French sent naval squadrons to Egypt’s coast, at Alexandria, which
offended Egyptians, and in Alexandria people rioted and killed about 50 Europeans in one
day – June 11, 1882. British ships bombarded coastal forts at Alexandria, and, to quell
the disorder, Gladstone sent an army into Egypt. In September that army defeated Arabi’s
army at the Battle of Tell al-Kabir, thirty miles south of Cairo. The British lost 57
killed, 382 wounded and 30 missing. The British then occupied Cairo, where they captured
the Arabi. They tried him on December 3 and sentenced him to death, butthe sentence was
changed to exile in Ceylon.

The British stationed troops at the Suez Canal. They re-established Tewfiq Pasha as
Egypt’s Khedive, and they made themselves responsible for Egypt’s external relations. As
Egyptians saw it, their country became an economic colony, totally dependent upon the
import of British manufactured goods and the export of its raw cotton.

Queen Victoria spoke of the Khideve having no army and with only a few utterly
unreliable police. There was concern in Britain over the protection of Christians in
Egypt. Exercising her power to consult with and advise "her government" on
matters of war and peace, Victoria complained that for the sake of a "more dignified
position" for Britain, its troops should remain in Egypt. "Once any troops are
withdrawn," she complained, "we shall have no pretext for replacing them."

On October 11, 1882, Victoria wrote,

… short of annexation, our power in Egypt and control over it ought to be great
and firm,
and we ought to show to otherPowers that we shall maintain this
position, though without detriment to them. We should maintain a large force there
for a long time.
NOTE

A letter by Queen Victoria to William Gladstone, dated September 30, 1882.

Gladstone wanted to withdraw British troops from Egypt as soon as possible, but the
British never found the time right for withdrawal, and the British would remain there into
the 20th century.

The Sudan

In the Sudan in 1881, Muhammad Ahmad led a pan-Islamic
rebellion amid cries for war against infidels. He proclaimed himself the Mahdi (Messiah)
– a person who was to rid the world of evil. With Britain responsible for Egypt’s external
relation and Egypt the nominal authority in the Sudan, Gladstone exercised his preference
for peace and ordered Egyptian forces in the Sudan to withdraw, and he sent a British
force to the Sudan, led by the military hero and evangelical Christian, Charles Gordon, to
supervise the evacuation. Gordon arrived at Khartoum in
February 1884 and took charge of 2,500 women and children and the sick and wounded, but
before he could evacuate them, Ahmad’s force surrounded the city. Gordon requested
approval from Glandstone’s governement for military help from a Sudanese slave trader and
warlord, Zubayr Rahama Pasha, but the government rejected the idea, seeing an alliance
with Zubayr Rahama Pasha as too controversial. Gordon and his people remained in Khartoum
behind weak fortifications and with insufficient food. The British were reading news of
Gordon’s heroic defense against Ahmad. Then, after ten months, Gladstone’s government sent
a relief column, but it arrived 48 hours after Ahmad’s forces had overrun Gordon’s
position, leaving
Gordon dead and the British public angry and humiliated.

A few months later, in June 1885, following the defeat his 1885
Budget in parliament, Gladstone resigned.
But he was back again in 1886, his
Liberal Party in alliance with Irish nationalists replacing the Conservative Party led by
Lord Salisbury.

Discontent in Ireland

In the Middle Ages and later, England had absorbed Scotland, Wales and Ireland – empire
of sorts. And in Ireland resistance remained strong. There in the nineteenth century
English and Scottish landlords had been dominant, with Roman Catholics – a majority among
the Irish – prevented from acquiring land. The landlords raised their rent, and when an
agricultural depression began in the 1870s those rents remained. Many tenant farmers were
evicted and became homeless. In response a movement grew that sought reduced power for the
landlords and freedom for Catholics to own land. Also in the 1870s a Home Rule movement
arose mainly among the mainly middleclass Irish of Dublin. It sought something less than
full independence – a return of an Irish parliament with the power to decide domestic
issues while Parliament in England continued to decide foreign policy.

A Land League formed that appealed to Irish nationalism and aimed at more rights for
tenant farmers and reduced evictions. The Land League boycotted peasants who moved onto
lands where tenant farmers had been evicted, trying to force the new tenant to leave and
deny the landlord new rent. This created violence and became known as the Land War.

Britain’s parliament created rent controls, which lowered rents for many of Irish by 20
percent but did not help the more impoverished farmers, and the violence and the struggle
for more rights and reduced evictions for tenants continued.

The leader of the Liberal Party, William
Gladstone
, committed the party to Home Rule for the Irish, while
some in the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party remained opposed to Home Rule. The
House of Lords killed the Home Rule bill, believing it would weaken the United Kingdom and
encourage others in the empire to seek to break away.

Protestants in northern Ireland remained anti-Catholic and passionately in favor of
union with Britain – 50 people having been killed in Belfast alone in 1886, while many
Catholic Irish remained against anything less than complete independence and for
independence of all of Ireland. A division remained in Ireland between nationalists in the
countryside and people in Ireland’s major city, Dublin. Many in Dublin looked upon the
land movement as something for peasants, and nationalists from the countryside entered
Dublin to promote their cause with rallies, pretending to be locals and committing
violence against opponents.

Recommended Books

Empire: The British Experience from 1765 to the Present by Denis Judd.

European imperialism in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries by Woodruff D Smith,
1982.

RAMAN SPECTROSCOPY

October 11, 2006 at 1:37 am | Posted in Research, Science & Technology | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

raman.jpg

Raman Spectroscopy

Raman Spectroscopy is a spectroscopic

technique used in condensed matter physics

and chemistry to study vibrational, rotational, and other

low-frequency modes in a system. It relies on inelastic scattering, or Raman scattering of monochromatic light, usually from a laser in the visible, near infrared, or near ultraviolet

range. Phonons or other excitations in the system are absorbed

or emitted by the laser light, resulting in the energy of the laser photons being shifted

up or down. The shift in energy gives information about the phonon modes in the system. Infrared spectroscopy yields similar, but complementary information.

Typically, a sample is illuminated with a laser beam. Light from the illuminated spot

is collected with a lens and sent through a monochromator. Wavelengths close to the laser line (due to elastic Rayleigh scattering) are filtered out and those in a certain spectral window away from the laser line are dispersed onto a detector.

Spontaneous Raman scattering is typically very

weak, and as a result the main difficulty of Raman spectroscopy is separating the weak

inelastically scattered light from the intense Rayleigh scattered laser light. Raman spectrometers typically use holographic diffraction gratings and multiple dispersion stages

to achieve a high degree of laser rejection. A photon-counting photomultiplier tube (PMT) or, more commonly, a CCD camera is used to detect the Raman scattered light.

Raman spectroscopy has a stimulated version, analogous to stimulated emission, called stimulated Raman scattering.

Basic theory

The Raman effect occurs when light impinges upon a molecule

and interacts with the electron cloud of the bonds of that molecule. The amount of

deformation of the electron cloud is the polarizability of the molecule. The amount of the

polarizability of the bond will determine the intensity and frequency of the Raman shift.

The molecule must be symmetric to observe the Raman shift. The photon

(light quantum), excites one of the electrons into a virtual state. When the photon is

released the molecule relaxes back into vibrational energy state. The molecule will

typically relax into the first vibration energy state, and this generates Stokes Raman

scattering. If the molecule was already in an elevated vibrational energy state, the Raman

scattering is then called Anti-Stokes Raman scattering.

Applications

Raman spectroscopy is commonly used in chemistry, since vibrational information is specific to the chemical bonds and symmetry of molecules. Therefore, it provides a fingerprint by which the molecule can be identified. For instance, the vibrational frequencies of SiO, Si2O2, and Si3O3 were identified and assigned on the basis of normal coordinate analyses using infrared and Raman spectra.[3] The fingerprint region of organic molecules is in the (wavenumber

) range 500–2000 cm−1. Another way that the technique is used to study changes in chemical bonding, e.g., when a substrate is added to an enzyme.Raman gas analyzers have many practical applications. For instance, they are used in medicine for real-time monitoring of anaesthetic and respiratory gas mixtures during surgery.

In solid state physics, spontaneous Raman spectroscopy is used to, among other things, characterize materials, measure temperature, and find the crystallographic orientation of a sample. As with single molecules, a given solid material has characteristic phonon modes that can help an experimenter identify it. In addition, Raman spectroscopy can be used to observe other low frequency excitations of the solid, such as plasmons, magnons, and superconducting gap excitations. The spontaneous Raman signal gives information on the population of a given phonon mode in the ratio between the Stokes (downshifted) intensity and anti-Stokes (upshifted) intensity.

Raman scattering by an anisotropic crystal gives information on the crystal orientation. The polarization of the Raman scattered light with respect to the crystal and the polarization of the laser light can be used to find the orientation of the crystal, if the crystal structure (to be specific, its point group) is known.

Raman active fibers, such as aramid and carbon, have vibrational modes that show a shift in Raman frequency with applied stress. Polypropylene fibers also exhibit similar shifts. The radial breathing mode is a commonly used technique to evaluate the diameter of carbon nanotubes. In nanotechnology, a Raman microscope can be used to analyze nanowires to better understand the composition of the structures.

Spatially-offset Raman spectroscopy (SORS), which is less sensitive to surface layers than conventional Raman, can be used to discover counterfeit drugs without opening their internal packaging, and for non-invasive monitoring of biological tissue.[4] Raman spectroscopy can be used to investigate the chemical composition of historical documents such as the Book of Kells and contribute to knowledge of the social and economic conditions at the time the documents were produced.[5] This is especially helpful because Raman spectroscopy offers a non-invasive way to determine the best course of preservation or conservation treatment for such materials.

Raman spectroscopy is being investigated as a means to detect explosives for airport security.[6]

Raman spectroscopy has also been used to confirm the prediction of existence of low-frequency phonons [7] in proteins and DNA (see, e.g., [8] [9] [10] [11] greatly stimulating the studies of low-frequency collective motion in proteins and DNA and their biological functions.[12][13]

Microspectroscopy

Raman spectroscopy offers several advantages for microscopic analysis. Since it is a scattering technique, specimens do not need to be fixed or sectioned. Raman spectra can be collected from a very small volume (< 1 µm in diameter); these spectra allow the identification of species present in that volume. Water does not generally interfere with Raman spectral analysis. Thus, Raman spectroscopy is suitable for the microscopic examination of minerals, materials such as polymers and ceramics, cells and proteins. A Raman microscope begins with a standard optical microscope, and adds an excitation laser, a monochromator, and a sensitive detector (such as a charge-coupled device (CCD), or photomultiplier tube (PMT)). FT-Raman has also been used with microscopes.

In direct imaging, the whole field of view is examined for scattering over a small range of wavenumbers (Raman shifts). For instance, a wavenumber characteristic for cholesterol could be used to record the distribution of cholesterol within a cell culture.

The other approach is hyperspectral imaging or chemical imaging, in which thousands of Raman spectra are acquired from all over the field of view. The data can then be used to generate images showing the location and amount of different components. Taking the cell culture example, a hyperspectral image could show the distribution of cholesterol, as well as proteins, nucleic acids, and fatty acids. Sophisticated signal- and image-processing techniques can be used to ignore the presence of water, culture media, buffers, and other interferents.

Raman microscopy, and in particular confocal microscopy, has very high spatial resolution. For example, the lateral and depth resolutions were 250 nm and 1.7 µm, respectively, using a confocal Raman microspectrometer with the 632.8 nm line from a Helium-Neon laser with a pinhole of 100 µm diameter. Since the objective lenses of microscopes focus the laser beam to several micrometres in diameter, the resulting photon flux is much higher than achieved in conventional Raman setups. This has the added benefit of enhanced fluorescence quenching. However, the high photon flux can also cause sample degradation, and for this reason some setups require a thermally conducting substrate (which acts as a heat sink) in order to mitigate this process.

By using Raman microspectroscopy, in vivo time- and space-resolved Raman spectra of microscopic regions of samples can be measured. As a result, the fluorescence of water, media, and buffers can be removed. Consequently in vivo time- and space-resolved Raman spectroscopy is suitable to examine proteins, cells and organs.

Raman microscopy for biological and medical specimens generally uses near-infrared (NIR) lasers (785 nm diodes and 1064 nm Nd:YAG are especially common). This reduces the risk of damaging the specimen by applying higher energy wavelengths. However, the intensity of NIR Raman is low (owing to the ω4 dependence of Raman scattering intensity), and most detectors required very long collection times. Recently, more sensitive detectors have become available, making the technique better suited to general use. Raman microscopy of inorganic specimens, such as rocks and ceramics and polymers, can use a broader range of excitation wavelengths.[14]

Polarized analysis

The polarization of the Raman scattered light also contains useful information. This property can be measured using (plane) polarized laser excitation and a polarization analyzer. Spectra acquired with the analyzer set at both perpendicular and parallel to the excitation plane can be used to calculate the depolarization ratio. Study of the technique is useful in teaching the connections between group theory, symmetry, Raman activity, and peaks in the corresponding Raman spectra.

The spectral information arising from this analysis gives insight into molecular orientation and vibrational symmetry. In essence, it allows the user to obtain valuable information relating to the molecular shape, for example in synthetic chemistry or polymorph analysis. It is often used to understand macromolecular orientation in crystal lattices, liquid crystals or polymer samples.[15]

Variations

Several variations of Raman spectroscopy have been developed. The usual purpose is to enhance the sensitivity (e.g., surface-enhanced Raman), to improve the spatial resolution (Raman microscopy), or to acquire very specific information (resonance Raman).

References

1.      a b Gardiner, D.J. (1989). Practical Raman spectroscopy. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-0387502540.

2.      Placzek G.: “Rayleigh Streeung und Raman Effekt”, In: Hdb. der Radiologie, Vol. VI., 2, 1934, p. 209

3.      Khanna, R.K. (1981). “Raman-spectroscopy of oligomeric SiO species isolated in solid methane”. Journal of Chemical Physics 74 (4): 2108. doi:10.1063/1.441393.

4.      “Fake drugs caught inside the pack”. BBC News. 2007-01-31. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6314287.stm. Retrieved 2008-12-08.

5.      Irish classic is still a hit (in calfskin, not paperback) – New York Times, nytimes.com

6.      Ben Vogel (29 August 2008). “Raman spectroscopy portends well for standoff explosives detection”. Jane’s. http://www.janes.com/news/transport/business/jar/jar080829_1_n.shtml. Retrieved 2008-08-29.

7.      Kuo-Chen Chou and Nian-Yi Chen (1977) The biological functions of low-frequency phonons. Scientia Sinica, 20, 447-457.

8.      Urabe, H., Tominaga, Y. and Kubota, K. (1983) Experimental evidence of collective vibrations in DNA double helix Raman spectroscopy. Journal of Chemical Physics, 78, 5937-5939.

9.      Chou, K.C. (1983) Identification of low-frequency modes in protein molecules. Biochemical Journal, 215, 465-469.

10.                         Chou, K.C. (1984) Low-frequency vibration of DNA molecules. Biochemical Journal, 221, 27-31.

11.                         Urabe, H., Sugawara, Y., Ataka, M. and Rupprecht, A. (1998) Low-frequency Raman spectra of lysozyme crystals and oriented DNA films: dynamics of crystal water. Biophys J, 74, 1533-1540.

12.                         Kuo-Chen Chou (1988) Review: Low-frequency collective motion in biomacromolecules and its biological functions. Biophysical Chemistry, 30, 3-48.

13.                         Chou, K.C. (1989) Low-frequency resonance and cooperativity of hemoglobin. Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 14, 212.

14.                         Ellis DI, Goodacre R (August 2006). “Metabolic fingerprinting in disease diagnosis: biomedical applications of infrared and Raman spectroscopy”. Analyst 131 (8): 875–85. doi:10.1039/b602376m. PMID 17028718.

15.                         Khanna, R.K. (1957). Evidence of ion-pairing in the polarized Raman spectra of a Ba2+CrO doped KI single crystal. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. doi:10.1002/jrs.1250040104.

16.                         Jeanmaire DL, van Duyne RP (1977). “Surface Raman Electrochemistry Part I. Heterocyclic, Aromatic and Aliphatic Amines Adsorbed on the Anodized Silver Electrode”. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry (Elsevier Sequouia S.A.) 84: 1–20. doi:10.1016/S0022-0728(77)80224-6.

17.                         Lombardi JR, Birke RL (2008). “A Unified Approach to Surface-Enhanced Raman Spectroscopy”. [Journal of Physical Chemistry C] (American Chemical Society) 112: 5605–5617. doi:10.1021/jp800167+CCC.

18.                         Chao RS, Khanna RK, Lippincott ER (1974). “Theoretical and experimental resonance Raman intensities for the manganate ion”. J Raman Spectroscopy 3 (2-3): 121. doi:10.1002/jrs.1250030203.

19.                         Kneipp K, et al. (1999). “Surface-Enhanced Non-Linear Raman Scattering at the Single Molecule Level”. Chem. Phys. 247: 155–162. doi:10.1016/S0301-0104(99)00165-2.

20.                         Matousek P, Clark IP, Draper ERC, et al. (2005). “Subsurface Probing in Diffusely Scattering Media using Spatially Offset Raman Spectroscopy”. Applied Spectroscopy 59 (12): 393. doi:10.1366/000370205775142548. PMID 16390587.

21.                         Barron LD, Hecht L, McColl IH, Blanch EW (2004). “Raman optical activity comes of age”. Molec. Phys. 102 (8): 731–744. doi:10.1080/00268970410001704399.

22.                         B. Schrader, G. Bergmann, Fresenius. Z. (1967). Anal. Chem.: 225–230.

23.                         P. Matousek, A. W. Parker (2006). “Bulk Raman Analysis of Pharmaceutical Tablets”. Applied Spectroscopy 60 (12): 1353–1357. doi:10.1366/000370206779321463. PMID 17217583.

24.                         P. Matousek, N. Stone (2007). “Prospects for the diagnosis of breast cancer by noninvasive probing of calcifications using transmission Raman spectroscopy”. Journal of Biomedical Optics 12 (2): 024008. doi:10.1117/1.2718934. PMID 17477723.

External links

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com. | The Pool Theme.
Entries and comments feeds.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 266 other followers