To the best of my knowledge, Schiller’s name rarely appears in studies devoted to Cassirer’s philosophy of science. This is unsurprising, as Schiller is not among Cassirer’s principal references in this domain. Nevertheless, I shall argue that if Schiller’s thought is essential for understanding the neo-Kantian reinterpretation of Kant1, it is reasonable to maintain that Schiller had bearing on Cassirer’s philosophy of science. This influence is evident in two of Cassirer’s central commitments: (i) the rejection of the copy theory of knowledge – that is, the notion that knowledge results from an abstract process aimed at reproducing reality ‘as it is’ –; and (ii) the development of Cassirer’s holism, arising from the generalisation of the understanding’s spontaneity in constructing representations of reality. Regarding methodology and structure, the paper offers a historical reconstruction and contextualisation of Cassirer’s explicit references to Schiller in his epistemological writings, drawing on Cassirer’s works on Schiller only as an auxiliary resource to illuminate these references. The discussion is organised into five sections. The first examines early mentions of Schiller, dating back to 1907. The second explores how Schiller’s ideas contribute to explaining theoretical holism. The third analyses the reference that provides the title of this paper, found in Cassirer’s work on Einstein’s theory of relativity. The fourth briefly considers Cassirer’s engagement with Schiller in Determinismus und Indeterminismus and his appeal to his thought in defending the moral autonomy of human agents. The fifth section presents the concluding remarks.
“The Realm of Shadows”: the Presence of Schiller in Cassirer’s Philosophy of Science / Laino, Luigi. - (2026). [10.6093/978-88-6887-393-6]
“The Realm of Shadows”: the Presence of Schiller in Cassirer’s Philosophy of Science
laino
2026
Abstract
To the best of my knowledge, Schiller’s name rarely appears in studies devoted to Cassirer’s philosophy of science. This is unsurprising, as Schiller is not among Cassirer’s principal references in this domain. Nevertheless, I shall argue that if Schiller’s thought is essential for understanding the neo-Kantian reinterpretation of Kant1, it is reasonable to maintain that Schiller had bearing on Cassirer’s philosophy of science. This influence is evident in two of Cassirer’s central commitments: (i) the rejection of the copy theory of knowledge – that is, the notion that knowledge results from an abstract process aimed at reproducing reality ‘as it is’ –; and (ii) the development of Cassirer’s holism, arising from the generalisation of the understanding’s spontaneity in constructing representations of reality. Regarding methodology and structure, the paper offers a historical reconstruction and contextualisation of Cassirer’s explicit references to Schiller in his epistemological writings, drawing on Cassirer’s works on Schiller only as an auxiliary resource to illuminate these references. The discussion is organised into five sections. The first examines early mentions of Schiller, dating back to 1907. The second explores how Schiller’s ideas contribute to explaining theoretical holism. The third analyses the reference that provides the title of this paper, found in Cassirer’s work on Einstein’s theory of relativity. The fourth briefly considers Cassirer’s engagement with Schiller in Determinismus und Indeterminismus and his appeal to his thought in defending the moral autonomy of human agents. The fifth section presents the concluding remarks.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Laino Schiller Cassirer.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
326.81 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
326.81 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


