Meaning: This quote by George Santayana, the Spanish-American philosopher, poet, and novelist, reflects his critical perspective on the tendency to gather and breed philosophers in universities. Santayana argues that this inclination is not characteristic of ages marked by free and humane reflection, but rather is scholastic in nature and more aligned with the traditions of the Middle Ages and Germany.

Santayana's quote encapsulates his skepticism towards the institutionalization of philosophy within the confines of academia. By associating the gathering and breeding of philosophers with the scholasticism of the Middle Ages and Germany, Santayana suggests that the environment of universities may not always foster the kind of free and humane reflection that he believes is essential to the pursuit of philosophy.

To fully appreciate the meaning and implications of Santayana's quote, it is important to consider the historical and philosophical context within which he was writing. Santayana was a prominent figure in the early 20th century, a time when academic philosophy was undergoing significant transformations. The quote can be understood as a critique of the institutionalization and professionalization of philosophy, which had become increasingly prevalent in university settings during this period.

Santayana's reference to the Middle Ages and Germany is significant in understanding his perspective. The Middle Ages are often associated with the dominance of Scholasticism, a philosophical and theological system that thrived in the medieval university environment. Scholasticism was characterized by its rigorous and systematic approach to philosophical inquiry, often emphasizing the synthesis of Christian theology with classical philosophy, particularly that of Aristotle. Santayana's invocation of the Middle Ages suggests his concern that the academic study of philosophy may become overly rigid and dogmatic, resembling the scholastic tradition that he critiques.

Furthermore, Santayana's mention of Germany may allude to the strong tradition of academic philosophy in German universities, particularly during the 19th and early 20th centuries. Germany was home to influential philosophical movements such as idealism and phenomenology, which were deeply rooted in the academic institutions of the time. Santayana's reference to Germany may thus reflect his apprehension about the potential for philosophy to become overly specialized and confined within the confines of academia, rather than being a pursuit of broader, more open-minded reflection.

In critiquing the gathering and breeding of philosophers in universities, Santayana raises important questions about the nature of philosophical inquiry and the role of academic institutions in shaping the practice of philosophy. His concern seems to be that the institutionalization of philosophy may lead to a narrowing of perspectives, a focus on specialized expertise, and a lack of the free and humane reflection that he values.

It is worth noting that Santayana's perspective is not universally shared among philosophers. Many scholars argue that academic institutions provide valuable resources and opportunities for the cultivation of philosophical thinking, research, and discourse. Universities can serve as centers of intellectual exchange and critical engagement, nurturing the development of philosophical ideas and the training of future generations of thinkers.

In conclusion, George Santayana's quote offers a thought-provoking critique of the institutionalization of philosophy within universities. His reference to the scholastic traditions of the Middle Ages and Germany underscores his concern that the academic environment may not always be conducive to the kind of free and humane reflection that he believes is essential to the practice of philosophy. While Santayana's perspective may be seen as a challenge to the prevailing norms of academic philosophy, it also invites important reflections on the nature and purpose of philosophical inquiry within institutional settings.