Proceedings of 2nd International Symposium for Color Science and Art 2020-2021

A Surveillance of contemporary Reactions
to Goethe’s Theory of Color
Masato Ogawa
Tokyo Polytechnic Univ., 1583 Iiyama, Atsugi, Kanagawa 243-0297, Japanwir uns fürchten] [5]. Although Heisenberg stresses theimportanceof
modernscientificmethodology
accompanied with experiments and observations andanalytics, which should lead to the mathematic formulationin the end, he shows obviously his sympathy with
Goethe’s view of nature and theory of color.

ABSTRACT
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832) gavesome noteworthy accounts of color in his book on color“Zur Farbenlehre” (1810), which plays undoubtedly aprominent part in the history of color science and art. But
they are, even today, exposed to merciless criticism frominnumerable scientists and physicians. Nevertheless,
Goethe’s thought attracts intellectual interests andbecomes occasionally a big focus of attention, especiallyin the context of study of aesthetics and art. The present
paper will give an outlook for modernist receptions ofGoethe’s idea of color.

2. Weizsäcker’s critical assessmentsCarl Friedrich von Weizsäcker (1912-2007), a German
physicist, gives some important comments on Goethe’s
theory of color. He studied physics working with
Heisenberg and Bohr in pre-World War II period. It issignificant comparison of his commentary on Goethe with
Heisenberg’s accounts in consideration of their academic
relationship of teacher and student. Weizsäcker’s essay“some concepts from Goethe’s natural scientific research”
was written originally 1954 as a contribution to acommemorative volume for a German poet andindustrialist Robert Boehringer (1884-1974) [6]. He checks
out carefully Goethe’s scientific works in the historicaldevelopment of observation of nature from Platon to thepresent day and, especially in connection with Goethe’ssome scientific errors, give a comment as it follows:“he[=Goethe] made a mistake, because he wanted tomake a mistake.” [7] Weizsäcker’s criticism to Goethe’snatural scientific works is much more severe than
Heisenberg’s judgements, but on the other hand there isalso a sympathy to the poet in the above mentioned
comment. As he explains, Goethes theory of color rooted
in his individual, “not replaceable” [unersetzlich]experience of sensibility [8].

1. Goethe and Heisenberg
Werner Karl Heisenberg (1901-1976), a German
theoretical physicist, who won Nobel Prize in Physics for1932 for “the creation of quantum mechanics, theapplication of which has, inter alia, led to the discovery of
the allotropic forms of hydrogen”, had lifelong an interest in
Goethe’s study of nature, particularly the “Farbenlehre”.
On 5. May 1941 in Budapest, Heisenberg gave a lecture
concerning Goethe’s ideas of color and made a few
remarks on the color scientific inconsistency between
Newton and Goethe in respect to modern physics [1].
Heisenberg examined a remarkable episode of Goethe’spersonal history, that he was fully aware of thecontradiction to Newton’s analytical approach to theessence of color when he tested out Newton’s theory ofcolor by experiment using a prism in the spring of 1791.
Goethe wrote then, “a limit [eine Grenze] is indispensablefor production of color” [2]. His conviction, light originate
not only from light but develops from connection of lightand darkness, was confirmed at that time. Heisenberg did
not carelessly criticize Goethe’s opposition to Newton’s
theory of color and his unscientific way of research,instead offered a very suggestive comment as following:“Goethe’s doctrine of color and Newton’s theory of color,they deal with two fundamentally different aspects ofreality” [3].
Heisenberg had an opportunity in later years to grapple
with the Goethe and Newton problem again. In the yearly
general meeting of the Goethe Gesellschaft zu Weimar,
21. May 1967, he gave a lecture under the title of“Goethe’s view of nature and natural science andtechnology” [4]. He made in the lecture mention of
Goethe’s criticism to analytical way of thinking of modernscience, referring to the following words of Goethe: “thepossible abuse of this abstract view” [Abstraktion, vor der

3. Wittgenstein as a reader of Goethe’s “Farbenlehre”
Ludwig Josef Johann Wittgenstein (1889-1951), an
Austrian-British philosopher, made one of the mostimportant contributions of 20th-century philosophy. His
philosophical writings in every period from early days to
final years contain several mentions of color. Among them,his manuscripts “Remarks on Colour”, which are written in
the last two years of his lifetime, take rank as the mostsignificant work on Color [9]. The editor’s preface of“Remarks on Colour” brings us some information of theformation of Wittgenstein’s manuscripts on color. The
most important trigger of Wittegnstein’s “Remarks onColour” was his reading of Goethe’s “Farbenlehre” in theyears of fighting against his illness caused by the cancer ofthe prostate. In early spring of 1950, inspired by Goethe’sidea of color, he wrote several paragraphs on color, which15

Proceedings of 2nd International Symposium for Color Science and Art 2020-2021
der Goetheschen und der Newtonschen Farbenlehre
bezeichnen, wenn man sagt, dass sie von zwei ganzverschiedenen Schichten der Wirklichkeit handelten.”(In: Werner Heisenberg “Wandlungen in den Grundlagen
der Naturwissenschaft” Hirzel, Stuttgart 1959)][4] Werner Heisenberg “Das Naturbild Goethes und die
technisch-naturwissenschaftliche Welt” [in:Jahresgabe
der Goethe-Gesellschaft Kassel auf das Jahr 1968,
pp.7-26.][5] Goethe Werke Hamburger Ausgabe in 14 Bänden hrsg.
v. Erich Trunz. Bd.13, p.317.
[6] Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker “Einige Begriffe aus
Goethes Naturwissenschaft”. (In: Goethe Werke
Hamburger Ausgabe in 14 Bänden hrsg. v. Erich Trunz.
Bd.13, Naturwissenschaftliche Schriften I. Mit einem
Essay von Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker. “Nachwort”,
pp.539-.555 )[7] “Wie konnte ein so großer, so umfassender Geist soirren? Ich weiß nur eine Antwort: er irrte, weil er irren
wollte. Er wollte irren, weil er eine entscheidende
Wahrheit nur durch Zorn zu verteidigen vermochte,
dessen Ausdruck dieser Irrtum war.” (In: Goethe Werke
Hamburger Ausgabe in 14 Bänden hrsg. v. Erich Trunz.
Bd.13, p.539)[8] “Die Sinneserfahrung, in der Goethes Wissenschaft
wurzelt, ist seine eigene, ist unersetzlich.” (In: Goethe
Werke Hamburger Ausgabe in 14 Bänden hrsg. v. ErichTrunz. Bd.13, p.541)[9] Ludwig Wittgenstein “Bemerkungen über die Farben”
herausgegeben von G. E. M. Anscombe, Blackwell
Publishing 1977 (Ludwig Wittgenstein “Remarks onColour” edited by G. E. M. Anscombe, translated inEnglish by Linda Schättle, Blackwell Publishing 1977)[10] Ludwig Wittgenstein “Remarks on Colour” p.9e[11] ibd. p.26e[12] ibd. p.29e[13] ibd. p.16e[14] Werner Heisenberg “Die Goethe’sche und die
Newton’sche Farbenlehre im Lichte der modernen
Physik” [in: Werner Heisenberg “Die Wandlungen in den
Grundlagen der Naturwissenschaft. Zehn Voträge.” 12.
Aufl. Hirzel Verlag 2005] p.77

constituted probably “Part II” of the manuscripts on color.
“Part III” was then written in Oxford in the spring of 1950,and “Part I” in Cambridge in March 1951 was noted downin the weeks just before his death on 29. April 1951.
It is one of the most interesting arguments in
Wittgenstein’s “Remarks on Colour”, that the concept ofidenticalness of color is philosophically questioned, as hewrites in connection with Goethe’s theory of color as it
follows. “The difficulties we encounter when wecontemplate the essence of colors (these which Goethe
wanted to get sorted out in his theory of colors) areembedded in the indeterminateness of the concept ofidenticalness of color”(I. §56) [10]. The “indeterminateness[die Unbestimmtheit]” in the concept of color and ofidenticalness of color is a basic topic which run throughout
in “Remarks on Colour”. Further he writes, “it is not at allclear a priori, which are the basic color concepts” (III. §69)
or “there is no such thing as the pure concept of color” (III.
§73) [11]. These statements contain undoubtedly hisself-criticism, because he criticizes his own former opinion
that there should be the simple and basic color. After all hewrites admittedly as it follows, “the logic of the concept ofcolor is just much more complicated than it might seem”(III. §106) [12]. Wittgenstein’s philosophical denial ofgeneral idea of color is also correlated with the ambiguity
and multiplicity of the concept of color. It is tightly bound up
with the theme of certainty in philosphy, on which heworked in the last days of his lifetime.
4. Concluding remarks
Wittgenstein left in his “Reamrks on Colour” somewords concerning the opposition of Goethe and Newton,“phenomenological analysis (as e. g. Goethe would haveit) is analysis of concepts and can neither agree with norcontradict physics”. (II. §16) [13] This comment iscomparable with Heisenberg’s following remarks as well,“ultimately both Goethe’s doctrine and Newton’s theory ofcolor handle their proper, fundamentally different
phenomenon. There remains yet a question, why can be
combined so different objects in one single concept ofcolor.” [14] Their comments suggest us the possible
plurality of concept of color and the further development ofinvestigation of color in various fields of science and art.
5. REFERENCES[1] Werner Heisenberg “Die Goethesche und die
Newtonsche Farbenlehre im Lichte der modernen
Physik” [In: Geist der Zeit, 19 (1941), ab S. 261. (In:Werner Heisenberg “Wandlungen in den Grundlagen derNaturwissenschaft” Hirzel, Stuttgart 1959)][2] “Es durfte keiner langen Zeit Überlegung, so erkannte
ich, daß eine Grenze notwendig sei, um Farben
hervorzubringen, und ich sprach wie durch einen Instinkt
sogleich vor mich laut aus, daß die Newtoniche Lehre
falsch sei.” Goethe Werke Hamburger Ausgabe in 14
Bänden hrsg. v. Erich Trunz. Bd.14, p.259.
[3] “Am richtigsten kann man vielleicht den Unterschied16