[483] national existence. In the twenties–I started my academic career as professor in 1919–we tried to overcome this situation. It was the idea of a new humanism^a–I spoke about this already briefly–it developed in this connection, namely a theory which is continuously related to the actual problems of the social and political life of the day in which these theories are developed. It meant that if you had to lecture at the University of Berlin, as I had to do, and opposite this building was the Museum of Modern Art established by the German Republic, over against the whole

powers of petty bourgeois reaction, then it was felt by myself and some of my colleagues as their DUTY TO RELATE lectures in Greek philosophy and in history of Christian thought and in philosophy of religion TO WHAT WAS DONE AND FOUGHT OUT in the rooms opposite the Avenue Unter den Linden, namely the modern art and the expression it meant for the situation in which we were living. Now this new humanism^b, this socially related humanism, was an attempt to build up a new university as, 100 years ago, the great men of German classical philosophy and culture generally, built up the University of Berlin as a means of rebirth, from a humanistic point of view-it was the first great humanistic university in Germany. Now we tried to build it up again in terms of a new

humanism, after the old humanism had run under the social conditions of the 19th century into self-defeat, because of its ivory-tower situation, and its complete lack of relationship to the social and political situation.. If, however, you WANT to do this, you cannot avoid what in Germany is called Weltanschauung, world-view, interpretation of human existence, IN JUDGING our own social situation, IN JUDGING