Introduction

Culture appears to be an extraordinarily diverse phenomenon, which does not easily fit within conceptualizations. Thus, there is a widespread belief that it is difficult, or even impossible, to provide its univocal definition. Indeed, the term “culture” itself, just as any other term from the field of the humanities, belongs to the class of so-called “open” terms. Such terms not only tend to be used in an unspecified or vague sense but they also refer to objects which may have no common properties.¹ In this situation, we are often left helpless and, confronted with a great variety of propositions, or cultural facts, we find ourselves disoriented and devoid of clear criteria to discriminate between the valuable and valuable and the worthless. However, most of us are aware of the importance of culture, which pervades all our life as human beings. Moreover, cultural works leave their mark on our experience: some of them influence us in a positive manner, sometimes to the point of elevation, while others appear as disheartening or even harmful. This is all a broad realm of human experience in which various themes and motifs intersect. And in spite of numerous difficulties on the way, it is worth examining this field.

      This book deals with those issues by analysing different cultural works in order to answer the question concerning the essence of culture, its place, and the role it plays in the personal life of the human being as both its subject and purpose. Although this question is not easy to answer, it seems particularly pressing today, when various tendencies to separate culture from its primary objective – human improvement – continue to prevail. As a consequence, the need for high culture is denied, or the differences between high and low culture are utterly removed, which makes them indistinguishable. In fact, these tendencies are an expression of a particular image of the human being created on the basis of philosophical, or even ideological, premises. Turning to the past, we notice that the consequences of such premises often exceed the field theoretical speculation and permeate into social life. This, in turn, affects the way in which culture influences human development.

      The purpose of this book is to show the philosophical and anthropological foundation of the dispute about culture, especially in the perspective of the disputed opposition between high and low culture. In the analysis of key steps of Western philosophical reflection on culture, we shall draw on its original ←9 | 10→understanding, i.e. the ancient times, when Greek thinkers began to find the answers to the vital, philosophical questions: who is the creator and subject of culture, what is culture in its essence, and what is its superior purpose? Later, I will present the circumstances in which that idea was adopted by Roman culture, and finally, the impact of Christianity on the intensification of the reflection on culture, which was possible, on one hand, thanks to the enormous Greek cultural heritage and, on the other hand, due to the new anthropology suggested by Christianity and depicting the human being as an entity which exists in the perspective of a particular purpose – not death but eternal life.

      It is not by accident that the title of this book contains the term “high culture.” For thanks to referring to the history of the philosophical understanding of culture, I shall demonstrate that it is based on three interconnected concepts: paideia, humanitas, and magnanimitas (magnanimity). All of these concepts emphasise an important aspect of the development of the human being oriented toward a certain ideal model of humanity. To be sure, this model went through modifications over time, but it was always based on an examination of human nature and its potential for development. It is the denial of these essential elements that constitutes what we call “low culture,” one which aspires to satisfy only the needs created by the lowest human desires and feelings.

      The very term “high culture” was not formulated until the second half of the nineteenth century, when Matthew Arnold’s essays appeared as a collection titled Culture and Anarchy (1869). It was only after the publication of this book that the term entered the English vocabulary and became increasingly popular. This does not mean, however, that the issues defined by the notion of high culture had not appeared before. In the context of those ambiguities, it appears highly important to differentiate between the very expression (term) “high culture” and the concept it designates.

      At the very beginning, it needs to be said that the notion of “high culture” appeared much earlier than the expression itself, namely – in the times of Ancient Greece. When analysing the issue of education, the Greeks have discovered its ideal model, which was the shaping of a perfect man. In their opinion, education and culture had a similar goal. As pointed out by Werner Jaeger, that ideal appeared already in the works of Homer, and even though it referred to the world of knights, the court, and aristocracy, it was characteristic not only of aristocratic nature but also of all human beings. Therefore, Greek culture quickly acquired universal character thanks to the fact that it laid its foundations on human nature. It gained popularity along with the proliferation of democracy. The Greeks described this cultural ideal in terms of kalokagathía (moral beauty).

      ←10 | 11→

      Christianity adopted this ideal model of Greek culture but it completed the Greek understanding of culture