PHAENOMENOLOGICA COLLECTION FONDEE PAR H. L. VAN BREDA ET PUBLIEE SOUS LE PATRONAGE DES CENTRES D'ARCHlVES-HUSSERL Comite de redaction de la collection: President: S. Usseling (Leuven); Membres: M. Färber (Buffalo), E. Fink t (Freiburg i. Br.), L. Landgrebe, (Köln), W. Marx (Freiburg i. Br.), J. N. Mohanty (New York), P. Ricoeur (Paris), E. Ströker (Köln), J. Taminaux (Louvain), K. H. Volkmann-Schluck (Köln); Secretaire: J. Taminaux 15 ALFRED SCHUTZ II ALFRED SCHUTZ Collected Papers ii Studies in Social Theory EDITED AND INTRODUCED BY ARVID BRODERSEN tu A m < —— H ,o MN ©I MARTINUS N1JHOFF / THE HAGUE Photomechanical reprint 1976 First printing 1964 Second printing 1968 Third printing 1971 Fourth printing 1976 ©1976 by Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1976 All rights reserved, including the right to translate or to reproduce this book or parts thereof in any form ISBN-13; 978-94-010-1342-0 e-lSBN-13: 978-94-010-1340-6 DOI: 10.1007/978-94-010-1340-6 DON QUIXOTE AND THE PROBLEM OF REALITY "Under what circumstances do we think things real?" William James asks this question in one of the most remarkable chapters of his Principles of Psychology 1 and starts from there to develop his theory of various orders of reality. Any object, so he finds, which remains uncontradicted is ipso facto believed and posited as absolute reality. And a thing thought of cannot be contradicted by another, unless it begins the quarrel by saying something inadmissible about that other. If this is the case, then the mind must take its choice of which to bold by. All propositions, whether attributive or existential, are believed through the very fact of being conceived, unless they clash with other propositions believed at the same time, by affirming that their terms are the same with the terms of these other propositions. The whole distinction between real and unreal, the whole psychology of belief, disbelief, and doubt, is, always according to William James, grounded on two mental facts: first that we are liable to think differently of the same object; and secondly, that when we have done so, we can choose which way of thinking to adhere to and which to disregard. The origin and fountainhead of all reality, whether from the absolute or the practical point of view is thus, subjective, is ourselves. Consequently, there exist several, probably an infinite number of various orders of reality, each with its own special and separate style of existence, called by James "sub-universes." Among them is the world of the senses or physical "things" as experienced by common sense, which is the paramount reality; the world of science; the world of ideal relations; of "idols of the tribe"; the supernatural worlds, such as the Christian heaven and hell; the numerous worlds of individual 1 Vol. II, pp. 287H. 136 APPLIED THEORY opinion; and, finally, the worlds of sheer madness and vagary, also infinitely numerous. Every object we think of gets referred to at least one world or another of this or some similar list. Each world, whilst it is attended to, is real after its own fashion, and any relation to our mind at all in the absence of a stronger relation with which it clashes, suffices to make an object real. So far we have considered William James. This is not the place to investigate by what means mind bestows an accent of reality on one of these sub-universes and withdraws it from others; nor how the transition from one realm of reality to the other occurs; nor, finally, what features of consciousness characterize the various provinces or sub-universes of reality.2 The few sentences quoted from William James delimit our purpose, which is to analyze the problem of reality in Cervantes' Don Quixote. The thesis we want to submit is that Cervantes' novel deals systematically with the very problem of multiple realities stated by William James and that the various phases of Don Quixote's adventures are carefully elaborated variations of the main theme, viz. how we experience reality. This problem has many aspects, dialectically intertwined. There is the world of Don Quixote's madness, the world of chivalry, a sub-universe of reality incompatible with the paramount reality of daily life, in which the barber, the priest, the housekeeper and the niece simply live along, taking it for granted beyond question. How does it come that Don Quixote can continue to bestow the accent of reality on his sub-universe of phantasy if it clashes with the paramount reality in which there are no castles and armies and giants but merely inns and flocks of sheep and windmills? How is it possible that the private world of Don Quixote is not a solipsistic one, that there are other minds within this reality, not merely as objects of Don Quixote's experience, but sharing with him, at least to a certain extent, the belief in its actual or potential reality ? And, finally, neither Don Quixote's sub-universe of madness nor the paramount reality of the senses, as William James calls it, in which we Sancho Panzas live our daily lives, turns out to be as monolithic as it seems. Both contain, as it were, enclaves of experience 8 A first attempt to analyze these problems has been made in the writer's paper "On Multiple Realities," in Collected Papers I, The Problem of Social Reality, Phaeno-menologica, The Hague, 1962, pp. 229-234. DON QUIXOTE AND THE PROBLEM OF REALITY I37 transcending the sub-universes taken for granted by either Don Quixote or Sancho Panza and referring to other realms of reality not compatible with either of them. There are enigmatic and frightful nocturnal noises, there is death and dream, vision and art, prophecy and science. How does Don Quixote, how do we Sancho Panzas succeed in maintaining the belief in the reality of the closed sub-universe once chosen as the home base in spite of the various irruptions of experiences which transcend it? Let us look first at Don Quixote's world of chivalry. Doubtless it is a closed sub-universe, and doubtless he bestows upon it the accent of reality. Again and again the ingenious knight refutes any doubt on the part of outsiders that the heroes of whom the books of chivalry give an account have ever lived and that their adventures occurred as described in the books. He has good arguments to proffer. The institution of knights errant, he explains to the canon of Toledo,3 is universally acknowledged and authenticated. The story of Fierrabras took place in the time of Charlemagne, the deeds of King Arthur are recorded in the histories and annals of England, in the King's Armory in Madrid Roland's horn can be seen even to this day. Furthermore, the books which deal with the life and history of the knights describe in all details the family, time, place, action of this or that knight day by day. Based on these reports, Don Quixote can describe Amadis of Gaul with all his features, characteristics and actions so that he may say he has seen him with his own eyes. He calls this an "evidence infallible" for their existence.4 In addition, is it thinkable that books printed by royal license lie ? And how can one possibly doubt that giants existed in reality ? In the island of Sicily shinbones and shoulder blades have been discovered of a size which show their owners were giants as tall as towers. Also the Holy Scriptures, which cannot depart from the truth by so much as an inch, know giants such as Goliath.5 If we examine why, within the reality of our natural attitude, we believe in historical events we can only refer to arguments similar to those of Don Quixote: to documents, monuments, authenticated accounts by witnesses and uninterrupted tradition. And there may 3 PP- 436-440. All quotations refer to the translation by J. M. Cohen, published by Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1950. * Ibid., p. 478. 5 Ibid., p. 479. i38 APPLIED THEORY be well-founded disputes among the historians of the world of Don Quixote, such as his controversy with the crazy Cardenio over the question whether Master Elisabat was or was not Queen Madasima's lover.6 Knight errantry is first of all a way of life. It fulfills a heavenly mission. Knights errant are "God's ministers on earth, and the arms by which His justice is executed here." 7 In this iron age it is their profession to roam the world, righting wrongs and relieving injuries.8 But chivalry is not only a way of life, it is a science, more, the queen of all sciences, which comprises all or most sciences in the world. He who professes knight errantry must be a jurist and know the laws of person and property; he must be a theologian so that he may give the reasons for the Christian rules he professes; a physician and especially a herbalist in order to prepare a flask of the balsam of Fierrabras, of which a few drops heal a knight cut through the middle, provided the parts are fitted together before the blood congeals; 9 an astronomer to know by the stars how many hours of the night have passed and in what part of the world he is; he must know how to shoe a horse, how to mend a saddle, how to swim. And above all, he has to be a maintainer of truth, although its defense may cost him his life.10 This world of chivalry has its own legal and economic system. Knights errant are exempt from all jurisdiction, their law is their sword, their charter their courage, their statutes their own will.11 Where have you ever heard of a knight errant being brought before a judge, however many homicides he may have committed ?12 What knight errant ever paid taxes, customs or toll ? What tailor was ever paid by him for a suit of clothes? What warden who received him in his castle ever made him pay his score? 13 And most certainly they did not pay wages to their squires. They made them governors of some islands or rulers of one or the other conquered kingdom.14 • Op. cit., p. 198. 7 Ibid., p. 98. 8 Ibid., p. 158. 9 Ibid., p. 80. 10 Ibid., p. 582f. 11 Ibid., p. 410. 12 Ibid., p. 80. 13'Ibid., p. 410. 14 Ibid., p. 511. DON QUIXOTE AND THE PROBLEM OF REALITY I39 This sub-universe is characterized by peculiar modifications of the basic categories of thought, namely space, time, and causality. The kingdom of Micomicona in Ethiopia,15 the Empire of Trape-zunt 16 are well determined geographic concepts; the second region of air, where hail and snow is born, and the third of fire, where lightning and thunderbolts are made 17 are established by celestial physics. And all these places can easily be brought within reach: the sage, necromancer or magician who looks after the knight's affairs - and certainly every knight, to be a true one, has such a friend 18 - picks him up in his bed and next day he will be a thousand miles away from his place; or he sends him a chariot of fire or a hippogryph or Clavileno, the wooden horse, or an enchanting boat. Otherwise it would be impossible for a knight fighting in the Armenian mountains with a dragon to be saved at the last minute by his friend who was just a moment ago in England.19 Don Quixote spends four nights in the cave of Montesinos, although those who wait for him at the entrance of the cave state that he was away a little more than an hour 20 - a problem similar to that which in our day Bergson has analyzed in discussing the time concept of Einstein's theory of relativity.21 All this is due to the work of the enchanters, the friendly and the hostile ones, who fulfill in Don Quixote's sub-universe the role of causality and motivation. Their activity is the basic category of Don Quixote's interpretation of the world. It is their function to translate the order of the realm of phantasy into the realms of common-sense experience, to transform the real giants attacked by Don Quixote, for instance, into phantoms of windmills. Enchanters, so we learn, can transform all things and change their natural shapes. But, strictly speaking, what they change is the scheme of interpretation prevailing in one sub-universe into the scheme of interpretation valid in another. Both refer to the same matter of fact which is, in terms of Don Quixote's private sub-universe, Mambrino's miraculous helmet, and, in terms of Sancho 15 Ibid., p. 252. 16 Ibid., p. 33. 17 Ibid., p. 731. 18 Ibid., p. 270. 19 Ibid., p. 271. 20 Ibid., p. 620. 21 Cf. the dialogue between Pierre in the flying missile and Paul waiting at the gun in Durie et Simultantiti, Paris, 1922. 140 APPLIED THEORY Panza's paramount reality of everyday life, an ordinary barber's basin. Thus, it is the function of the enchanters' activities to guarantee the coexistence and compatibility of several sub-universes of meaning referring to the same matters of fact and to assure the maintenance of the accent of reality bestowed upon any of such sub-universes. Nothing remains unexplained, paradoxical or contradictory, as soon as the enchanter's activities are recognized as a constitutive element of the world. But to Don Quixote the existence of enchanters is much more than a mere hypothesis. It is a historical fact proved by all the sacred source books reporting on matters of chivalry. Of course, this fact is not verifiable by ordinary means of sense perception. For magicians never allow themselves to be seen,22 and it is clear that the axiom of enchantment, which makes the reconciliation between the sub-universe of phantasy and the paramount reality possible, cannot itself be subjected to a test originating within one of these sub-universes. Our enlightened age is certainly not prepared to accept the agency of invisible enchanters as a principle of explanation of the occurrences and facts in the causal structure of the world. To be sure, we acknowledge the existence of invisible viruses, or of neutrinos or of an "Id" in the sense of psychoanalysis as the causal source of observed phenomena. But who would dare to compare these findings of our scientists with the activities of the enchanters of the madman Don Quixote ? Yet, in the latter's theory, the activity of invisible enchanters has a great advantage over the explanatory principles of modern science just mentioned: the enchanters themselves have their motives for acting as they do and these motives are understandable to us human beings. Some of them bear the knight malice because they know through their art and spells that in the fullness of time Don Quixote will conquer one of their favorite knights in combat and that they will not be able to gainsay or avert what Heaven has decreed.23 But friendly enchanters also interfere: the sage who is on Don Quixote's side shows a rare foresight in making Mambrino's helmet, that object of immense value, appear to every one a barber's basin, thus protecting its owner from persecution by all v Don Quixote, p. 126. » Op. cit., p. 65. DON QUIXOTE AND THE PROBLEM OF REALITY 141 those who would understand its true meaning.24 And it also happens, for instance in the miraculous adventure with the enchanted boat, that two powerful enchanters meet in opposition, one frustrating the other's design.25 Here we have all the elements of Greek theology at the time of Homer: the envy of the gods, their intervention in favor of their proteges, their struggle for power, their subjection under inevitable fate. To be sure, if we introduce the enchanters into the causal chain, we cannot solve the Cartesian doubt about whether the world is governed by an evil genius or by God. But we are sure that whatever happens, happens reasonably, that is, within the motivation of the enchanters. We might be tempted to speak of a non-Hegelian dialectic in a similar way in which we speak of a non-Euclidian geometry. These are the main features of Don Quixote's closed sub-universe upon which he has bestowed the accent of reality, his home-base from which he interprets all the other provinces of reality. But this his private world comes into contact with the world of his fellow-men, and both, Don Quixote and the others, have to come to terms with the conflicts arising between the disparate schemes of interpretation prevailing in each of them. In the description of the various adventures Don Quixote meets on his three expeditions Cervantes shows in a highly systematic way the typical solutions for this problem and it would be a rather tempting task to analyze them step by step. This purpose cannot be achieved within the frame of the present paper. We have to restrict ourselves to a general survey and to the analysis of a few adventures. The social world which Don Quixote meets on each of his three expeditions takes a radically different attitude to his private world of phantasy, which is to him a highly meaningful one, but a world of madness to his fellow-men. On the first short expedition Don Quixote is alone. He is merely involved in an inner dialogue with the unknown sage, whoever he may be, who will commit the chronicle of his deeds to future generations. But otherwise Don Quixote remains undisturbed master in his sub-universe; he is not refuted by the behavior of his fellow-men who, as Cervantes 14 Ibid., p. 204. 85 Ibid., p. 661. 142 APPLIED THEORY states, "fall in with his humor." 26 To Don Quixote there is really a fortress with towers in shining silver, a dwarf's trumpet announcing the approaching knight, beauteous maidens taking the air at the castle's gate, and a castellan. Only to the observer there is an inn, a swineherd blowing his horn, two women of easy virtue and an innkeeper. Nothing and nobody, however - to revert to the quotation from William James at the beginning -starts a quarrel by saying something inadmissible which would contradict the experience held by Don Quixote to be true. The innkeeper receives him in a way appropriate for a knight, permits him the watch of arms, performs the ceremony of knighting him; nor do the silk-merchants on horseback, who are reluctant to acknowledge without proof that Dulcinea is the most beauteous maiden, or their muleteer behave in a way incompatible with the pattern of interpretation taken for granted in the world of chivalry. Thus, Don Quixote's actions remain performable within the paramount reality of daily life in spite of his phantastic motives, and no enchanters are needed to reconcile the disparate schemes of interpretation. The activity of the enchanters appears for the first time during the interlude between the first and second expedition when the priest and the barber try to cure Don Quixote by burning his books and walling up his library. This event is explained as the work of Don Quixote's archenemy, the magician Freston, and the knight understands this perfectly well, taking it as a real occurrence. From now on he uses the fact of enchantment in order to maintain the accent of reality on his private sub-universe of chivalry if this world clashes with the paramount reality of those of his fellow-men who come in contact or conflict with him. For on this second expedition Don Quixote is no longer alone. He has to establish a "sub-universe of discourse" with the fellow-men with whom he shares a face-to-face relationship within the world of common sense. This refers first of all to Sancho Panza, his squire, the representative of everyday thinking who has always a treasure of proverbs at his command, in order to explain everything in terms of knowledge just taken for granted. But if the things and occurrences experienced by both of them are interpreted in accordance with different schemes of inter- 26 Op. ext., p. 25. DON QUIXOTE AND THE PROBLEM OF REALITY 143 pretation, are they still common experiences of the same objects? Our relationship with the social world is based upon the assumption that in spite of all individual variations the same objects are experienced by our fellow-men in substantially the same way as by ourselves and vice versa, and also that our and their schemes of interpretation show the same typical structure of relevances. If this belief in the substantial identity of the intersubjective experience of the world breaks down, then the very possibility of establishing communication with our fellow-men is destroyed. In such a crisis situation we become convinced that each of us lives in the impenetrable shell of his solipsistic prison, the Others becoming mere mirages to us, we to the Others, we to ourselves. There are two possibilities: either experiences of the objective world turn out to be mere illusions (and in Don Quixote's terminology this means that the enchanter has transformed the objective world); or I myself have changed my identity (and this means I am enchanted myself). On the other hand, it is precisely the assumed activity of the enchanters, who change and alter all our deeds and transform them according to their pleasure, which leads to the effect that what seems to Don Quixote Mambrino's helmet appears to Sancho as a barber's basin and to another as something else .27 This is not to Sancho's liking. To him, the neo-positivistic empiricist, the pains in his shoulders caused by the blanket-tossing in the inn vouch for the reality of his tormentors, the innkeepers and the muleteer, and he refuses to accept Don Quixote's explanation that they were phantoms in an enchanted castle. Where you start recognizing people who have names, there is no enchantment involved, says he. But slowly Sancho accepts the knight's scheme of interpretation. Enchantment is to Sancho at least plausible, and at the end of the second part, after Don Quixote's defeat by the Knight of the Moon, it becomes a fact. "For all this episode seemed to him to be happening in a dream and the whole business to be a matter of enchantment." 28 With great skill Cervantes shows this transition and the devices by which a common sub-universe of discourse is established between knight and squire. Both have good arguments for explaining away discrepancies. Don Quixote admits that Sancho is not a knight 27 Op. cit., p. 204. 2* Ibid., p. 890. 144 APPLIED THEORY and, therefore, subject to other laws; 29 perhaps his fear prevents him from seeing and hearing right 30 ; if Sancho stealthily followed the two flocks of sheep for a short while he would discover that they were re-transformed into two armies as described by Don Quixote.31 On the other hand, Sancho is inclined to believe that the Knight's misfortunes are due to the fact that he has broken a solemn oath; 32 or perhaps that he has power over real giants, but no power at all over phantoms.33 And having discovered that he has to accept enchantment as a scheme of interpretation in order to establish a universe of discourse with Don Quixote. Sancho learns to express himself like a follower of the Greek skeptic philosophers. He corrects several times his original statement that what Don Quixote declares to be Mambrino's helmet is just a barber's basin, and worth a real if it's worth a farthing. "It's like nothing so much as a barber's basin. Just like it, it is."34 And later on,35 he speaks even of a "basin-helmet." Toward the end of the first part,86 the story of this adventure is used to develop, like in a stretto of a complicated fugue, the main theme of inter-subjective reality in new elaborations. In the inn - to Don Quixote an enchanted castle - all the main actors of the story have assembled. The barber, the former owner of the basin-helmet, which Don Quixote had acquired in due combat, appears and claims his property and also the pack-saddle which Sancho on this occasion has taken away from his mule. The company in the inn decides to carry the joke further and confirms to the despair of the robbed owner that the object in question is, as Don Quixote maintains, a helmet and not a barber's basin. An expert opinion, furnished by master Nicholas, Don Quixote's barber friend, corroborates this finding. The former owner cannot understand how so many honorable gentlemen can possibly say that this is not a basin but a helmet. But if this is right, he argues, then the pack-saddle of his mule must be a horse's harness since Don Quixote maintains that he had met him riding a silver colored 89 Ibid., p. 128. 80 Ibid., p. 137. 81 Ibid., p. 138. 88 Ibid., p. 142. 88 Op. cit., p. 252. 84 Ibid., p. 162. 89 Ibid., p. 395. 84 Ibid., pp. 4