Between Man and Man

1. Introduction

Between Man and Man is a mid‑twentieth‑century collection of essays in which Martin Buber develops his philosophy of dialogue beyond the more concentrated, lyrical argument of I and Thou. While I and Thou formulates the distinction between I–Thou and I–It, Between Man and Man explores how this distinction shapes everyday relations, institutions, and forms of community.

The volume brings together texts written between the end of the First World War and the early 1940s and published in German in 1947 as Zwischen Mensch und Mensch. The English selection, translated by Ronald Gregor Smith as Between Man and Man the same year, helped introduce Buber’s dialogical thought to a wider philosophical, theological, and educational audience.

Across the essays, Buber investigates how genuine dialogue is possible between persons and how such encounters ground responsibility, education, and political life. The work is frequently read as a bridge between existentialist concerns with individual authenticity and social theories of community and politics, and as a key text in twentieth‑century Jewish and Christian thought about interhuman relations.

Because the book is a collection rather than a systematic treatise, readers and commentators differ on whether it should be approached primarily as a philosophical, religious, political, or pedagogical work; most agree, however, that it is central for understanding Buber’s mature conception of what it means to be “between man and man.”

2. Historical Context

2.1 Interwar Europe and the Crisis of Community

The essays in Between Man and Man were composed from 1919 to 1942, a period marked by the aftermath of the First World War, economic crises, and the rise of totalitarian movements. Many scholars interpret the work as a response to widespread experiences of disintegration of community, mass society, and bureaucratic depersonalization.

2.2 Jewish Life, Zionism, and Exile

Buber’s position within Central European Jewry and cultural Zionism shapes the essays’ concerns. Proponents of this contextual reading emphasize how his dialogical philosophy responds to:

• Debates about Jewish cultural renewal in German‑speaking lands
• The search for non‑nationalistic forms of community in Palestine/Israel
• Experiences of antisemitism and exclusion under Nazism (Buber emigrated to Jerusalem in 1938)

Alternative interpretations stress broader European intellectual currents—existentialism, neo‑Kantianism, and phenomenology—and see Buber’s Jewish commitments as one strand among many.

2.3 Intellectual Milieu

Buber’s essays engage, implicitly or explicitly, with contemporaries such as Franz Rosenzweig, Max Scheler, and Ferdinand Tönnies, as well as Christian theologians and personalist philosophers. Commentators often situate Between Man and Man:

There is disagreement over whether Buber should primarily be classified as an existentialist, a religious thinker, or a social philosopher; Between Man and Man is frequently used as evidence for each of these classifications.

3. Author and Composition

3.1 Martin Buber’s Position in His Career

When Buber wrote the essays later gathered in Between Man and Man, he was already known for his work on Hasidism, religious socialism, and for I and Thou (1923). Scholars commonly describe this period as that of his mature dialogical philosophy, in which earlier mystical and nationalist interests are reinterpreted through the lens of interpersonal relation.

Between Man and Man is typically placed in the “middle” phase.

3.2 Circumstances of Composition

The individual essays originated as lectures, journal articles, and occasional writings in differing settings:

• “Dialogue” emerged from Buber’s reflections on communication and teaching in the Weimar years.
• “The Question to the Single One” was shaped by debates on individual and community amidst growing mass movements.
• The essays on education relate to Buber’s practical work as an educator and his involvement in adult education and Jewish schooling.
• “The Political Principle” developed against the background of his critique of totalitarian and statist politics in the 1930s.

Researchers note that the move from Germany to Jerusalem in 1938 influenced later revisions and the framing of some essays, though the core ideas predate his emigration.

3.3 Collection and Translation

In 1947 the German volume Zwischen Mensch und Mensch brought these dispersed texts together. Editorial decisions about which essays to include and how to order them were shaped by Buber and his publishers, with the aim—according to most commentators—of presenting a coherent exposition of his dialogical anthropology.

The English volume Between Man and Man (1947), translated by Ronald Gregor Smith, contains a slightly different selection and ordering. Some scholars argue that the English arrangement emphasizes theological and educational dimensions, while the German collection presents a broader spectrum of Buber’s social thought.

4. Structure and Organization of the Essays

4.1 Main Components

The standard English edition of Between Man and Man is organized as a sequence of substantial essays, each with a distinct focus yet unified by the theme of interhuman relation:

Some German editions include additional or slightly differently titled pieces, but commentators generally treat these as variations around the same core.

4.2 Thematic Progression

Interpreters often discern a movement in the book:

1. From the basic structure of dialogue (“Dialogue”)
2. To the stance of the individual person (“the single one”)
3. To specific institutional contexts (education)
4. To broader questions of character and worldview
5. To macro‑social and political organization

Others caution that the volume is not a systematic treatise and can be read non‑linearly, with each essay standing on its own.

4.3 Relation to Other Works

The structure of the collection is widely viewed as complementing I and Thou:

Editors and commentators frequently recommend reading the two works together, with Between Man and Man providing elaboration and concrete application of the earlier text’s central distinctions.

5. Central Arguments and Themes

5.1 Dialogical Existence

Across the essays, Buber maintains that human existence is fundamentally dialogical. He distinguishes between:

In “Dialogue,” he argues that genuine dialogue is not merely the exchange of information but a meeting in which each addresses and is answerable to the other.

5.2 Responsibility and the “Single One”

In “The Question to the Single One,” Buber develops the idea that the individual is called to responsibility through concrete encounters, not through abstract moral rules alone. Proponents of existentialist readings relate this to contemporary emphases on decision and authenticity; others stress its social‑philosophical dimension, tying it to critiques of mass movements and conformism.

5.3 Education as Relationship

The essays on education claim that pedagogy is essentially relational. The teacher appears as an authentic person before the pupil, and education aims at the student’s emergence as a responsible self. Critics note that Buber places weight on personal encounter, while saying less about systemic factors in schooling.

5.4 Community, Power, and Politics

“The Political Principle” extends the dialogical approach to politics. Buber contrasts:

He proposes federalistic and communitarian forms of organization grounded in small‑scale dialogical groups. Commentators debate the practicality of this vision in modern societies.

5.5 Religious Dimension

Throughout, Buber links interhuman dialogue with a relation to the eternal Thou (God). He suggests that authentic human encounters are, in some sense, places where the divine address is at work. Theologians, philosophers of religion, and secular interpreters offer differing accounts of how strictly this link should be understood.

6. Key Concepts and Dialogical Method

6.1 Core Concepts

Several key terms structure the arguments in Between Man and Man:

6.2 Features of the Dialogical Method

Commentators identify a distinctive method in the essays:

• Descriptive‑phenomenological: Buber starts from lived experiences of meeting, teaching, or political cooperation rather than from abstract principles.
• Relational analysis: He treats the between (das Zwischen)—the space of relation—as a primary category.
• Concrete exemplification: The essays often work through vignettes and everyday examples instead of formal arguments.

"

“All real living is meeting.”

— Martin Buber, as echoed and elaborated throughout Between Man and Man

Some philosophers regard this method as insufficiently rigorous or systematic for analytic ethics or political theory. Others argue that its strength lies in clarifying structures of experience that more formal approaches can overlook.

6.3 Comparison with Other Approaches

These comparisons are often used in secondary literature to situate, rather than to rank, Buber’s contribution.

7. Legacy and Historical Significance

7.1 Influence Across Disciplines

Between Man and Man has been regarded as a foundational text for several fields:

Commentators such as Maurice Friedman and Paul Mendes‑Flohr have played a major role in disseminating and interpreting these influences.

7.2 Reception and Critique

Historically, the work was welcomed in the late 1940s as a resource for ethical and spiritual reconstruction after fascism and war. Over time, critical perspectives have emerged:

• Analytic philosophers question the precision and argumentative structure of Buber’s concepts.
• Political theorists sometimes view his political principle as utopian or insufficiently attentive to large‑scale governance.
• Critical pedagogues argue that a focus on interpersonal dialogue may obscure systemic inequalities.

Despite such critiques, Between Man and Man continues to be cited as a classic statement of dialogical thinking.

7.3 Continuing Relevance

Contemporary scholarship often revisits the book in light of issues such as pluralism, intercultural dialogue, and the ethics of communication technologies. Some interpreters highlight its resources for reconciliation processes and peacebuilding; others use it to question the adequacy of purely procedural or deliberative models of democracy.

While assessments vary, there is broad agreement in the literature that Between Man and Man helped establish “dialogue” as a central category in twentieth‑century thought and remains a key reference for discussions of relationship, community, and responsibility.