[185] But if this is the case, then this also includes the element of metaphysical passion, which you can observe in all the great physicists^a beginning with Newton^b himself, and all the following physicists. So philosophy, ^cbecause of its dual character of being a matter of passion and a matter of detached observation at the same time, is present, even in scientific research, in both respects, which again is an answer to the question not only "religion and philosophy" but also "religion and science." Now the historian^d (we spoke about him fully and about the different levels of his work) is in the same way, consciously or unconsciously, a philosopher. And those people who want to write a history of salvation and at the same time deny philosophy, simply don’t know what they are doing---and they could be pardoned if they were primitive, but unfortunately they are not. It's quite obvious that every task of the historian, beyond the finding of facts, is dependent on valuations of historical factors. What has EFFECT [a fact?] on man as acting in history? [?] To answer such a question, you must consciously or unconsciously have a doctrine of the nature of man. Many presentday factual historians, in all realms of life---take simply the history of economics:^e there you HAVE presuppositions about the nature of man, and it was the false presupposition of classical economics to believe that man can ECONOMICALLY be defined as that being which follows the laws of the market, buying at the lowest possible price and selling at the highest. Actually, the psychology of man is absolutely different from this law, which is a mere abstraction and can be used for mathematical equations as they appear in economics today.