But this we will reserve till later.

And now, why does man philosophize?—­that is to say, why does he investigate the first causes and ultimate ends of things?  Why does he seek the disinterested truth?  For to say that all men have a natural tendency to know is true; but wherefore?

Philosophers seek a theoretic or ideal starting-point for their human work, the work of philosophizing; but they are not usually concerned to seek the practical and real starting-point, the purpose.  What is the object in making philosophy, in thinking it and then expounding it to one’s fellows?  What does the philosopher seek in it and with it?  The truth for the truth’s own sake?  The truth, in order that we may subject our conduct to it and determine our spiritual attitude towards life and the universe comformably with it?

Philosophy is a product of the humanity of each philosopher, and each philosopher is a man of flesh and bone who addresses himself to other men of flesh and bone like himself.  And, let him do what he will, he philosophizes not with the reason only, but with the will, with the feelings, with the flesh and with the bones, with the whole soul and the whole body.  It is the man that philosophizes.

I do not wish here to use the word “I” in connection with philosophizing, lest the impersonal “I” should be understood in place of the man that philosophizes; for this concrete, circumscribed “I,” this “I” of flesh and bone, that suffers from tooth-ache and finds life insupportable if death is the annihilation of the personal consciousness, must not be confounded with that other counterfeit “I,” the theoretical “I” which Fichte smuggled into philosophy, nor yet with the Unique, also theoretical, of Max Stirner.  It is better to say “we,” understanding, however, the “we” who are circumscribed in space.

Knowledge for the sake of knowledge!  Truth for truth’s sake!  This is inhuman.  And if we say that theoretical philosophy addresses itself to practical philosophy, truth to goodness, science to ethics, I will ask:  And to what end is goodness?  Is it, perhaps, an end in itself?  Good is simply that which contributes to the preservation, perpetuation, and enrichment of consciousness.  Goodness addresses itself to man, to the maintenance and perfection of human society which is composed of men.  And to what end is this?  “So act that your action may be a pattern to all men,” Kant tells us.  That is well, but wherefore?  We must needs seek for a wherefore.

In the starting-point of all philosophy, in the real starting-point, the practical not the theoretical, there is a wherefore.  The philosopher philosophizes for something more than for the sake of philosophizing. Primum vivere, deinde philosophari, says the old Latin adage; and as the philosopher is a man before he is a philosopher, he must needs live before he can philosophize, and, in fact, he philosophizes in order to live.  And usually he philosophizes either