Abstract: Moreno is the founder of psychodrama and sociometry. The purpose of this paper is to introduce Moreno's works in the realm of philosophy while comparing his basic ideas with those of some philosophers' with regard to interaction of science and philosophy. This paper concludes that Moreno's works on psychodrama has been degraded to only practical applications and it attemps to find a new understanding Moreno's philosophy, as well.

Keywords: psychodrama, Moreno's philosophy, relationship of philosophy and science

Introduction

Moreno; The Founder of Psychodrama and sociometry, was entranced by his spectators with his creative talent and wide knowledge that resulted in discoveries in many fields. In my point of view, the main contrubition of Moreno to our knowledge about man is made by his being the inventor of an original psychological theory and therapy technique which include the theories of development, psychopathology and psychotherapy. However, when we consider his works, his statement about what he has discovered on his own is not limited by all these and modest at all. Moreno is proud of making contribution to many fields from teology to cosmology, art to philosophy, political systems to sociology and also of being the theoretician and applier of a new philosophical system, called the philosophy of moment, of the Science of Man, and of a concept of creative revolution that results in liberation, by solving the problems faced by man in every field.

If we consider the conditions of the world in which Moreno made such claims as well as his success and creative personality, the strength and intensity of these claims can be excused. Meanwhile if we don't take into account the relative influence of sociometry in the field of sociology, we see that the tecnique of Moreno is deemed more important than his theory. In most of the psychodrama books (Blatner 1973; Goldman and Morrison 1984; Starr 1979) written recently, the theory of psychodrama that Moreno tries to improve is almost never discussed, that is, y suppose, a result of conscious negligence. In fact, psychodrama brought up by Moreno has such a comprehensive scope that it can not be explained by being reduced to a technique. If the theory behind the psychodrama tecniques is neglected due to pragmatic reasons only, first of all this attitude is unjust.

We suppose that, the most important reason why nowadays the psychodrama techniques of Moreno are given more importance than his psychodrama theory, is based on his way of behaving. The admiration of followers for Moreno prevented them from criticizing his mistaken comprehension regarding the relations between theory, practice, and tecnique. This caused the psychodrama to be reduced just to a technique and this is not fair. The followers of Moreno preferred to ignore this misunderstanding rather than clarifying it. In my opinion, instead of ignoring his ideas in the fields of development, psychopathology and psychotherapy, we should take the benefits from these and this should be the way to be selected both for giving the importance he is worthy of and for the future psychodrama. However, in order to follow up such a way we should behave artical against him and reconsider psychodrama not only in respect of technique but also as a whole, taking the present level of knowledge into account. While doing this we should meet the necessities of a scientific work appropriate to the philosophy of science and leave the unscientific aspects by making them clear.

In this article we will concentrate on Moreno's ideas -the book of Psychodrama (Moreno 1977)- about his own philosophy and his criticisms about life and existential philosophy (these are almost all of Moreno's aspects philosophy). Finally, we will try to explain his incorrect attitudes regarding relations between science and philosophy and make a suggestion to correct this manner.

Creative Revolution and The Philosophy of Moment

Moreno thinks Freud has Failed in two respect, first he rejected religion and he's lost the chance to learn in an existential way of the contribution which saints and prophets have made towards psychotherapy as the most ingenious agents of psychotherapy before the advent of natural science. Second, he ignored social movementes as socialism and communism losing chance to study group structure and refusing to transcend the boundaries of the individual organism. (p.8)* However, psychodrama and sociometry by the philosophy of creative act that they are based on complete the deficiencies of psychoanalysis and also provide an opportunity for man to come over all problems of the civilization in which they live. In Moreno's opinion this adventure of man who lives in the age of social revolutions can be divided into three phases. First, the period between French Revolution (1789) and Russian Revolution (1917), economic revolution. The second, the psychological revolution which began with the romantic movement of the nineteenth century and climaxed in the popularization of psychoanalysis. Finally, creative revolution started with psychodrama that is an answer to axiological crisis of our time and a new assesment of our system of avlues emphasizing that man is a creative agent not an animal. It is the revolutionary phase which will direct the future of the human group. (p.10)

To Moreno, the most radical right wing deists and the most radical left wing agnostics and atheists have attributed various positive and negative qualities to God and Supreme Universal Intelligence as well as to various philosophies and religions. Among these various positive and negative qualities attributed to God His being as a creator has almost never been mentioned. It means it is the God of the second status after creation (Sabbath) that has been dwelt upon but the other status of God in the process of creating even as a symbol has been neglected. Moreno thinks that science and new psychology have been preceded by the great religions and have directed our civilization through the ideal of man who is competent to reach to a perfection as an intellectual agent. The same strategy of preference for the second state of God, after creation, is experienced in man's attitude toward himself his arts, his morals, his forms of culture, society and goverment and man accepts himself and everything as a finished product that has completed the process of creating. The last stage of a work, the books in the libraries, the painting and sculptures in the galleries and museums, the technological advents, the rigid standarts, the ethical, psychological and physical fomulae became idols around which everyone was to revolve. The same principle is applicable to all types of creation to a culture and a civilization as well. Eveything has been tried to be immortalised by being reached to its last perfect form. Moreno claims that, the main category of philosophy of the creator is the moment and development of a technique which steer finished products spontaneously without idolizing and repeating them (p.31-33)

As far as the Creative Revolution is concerned, Moreno claims that the greatest, longest, most difficult of all wars man has ever waged in the history of the universe is not the war against nature, other animals or one human race, nation or state against any other.It is not the war of on social class against another one. It is a war of man against the ghosts that have been called the greatest makers of compart and civilization. They are the machine, the cultural conserve and the robot. To Moreno, the weakest point in our present-day universe is the incapacity of man to compete with machine-like devices. Because man due to the illusion of the finished-perfected product neglected and abandoned the creative process in his soul. In Moreno's opinion there is a simple and clear way to win this difficult war; neither being destructive nor being a part of social machinery but being creative individual man has to find a strategy of creation which escapes the treachery of conservation. The method is the spontaneity that is as old as mankind. If man practise a creative act that changes his products by spontaneity he would escape without giving up anything that machine civilization has produced, into a Garden of Eden. This war against ghosts not only on the part of single individuals an d small groups, but on the part of the broad masses of men is the Creative Revolution (p.44-46).

What kind of ideal that Moreno has triedto achieve and reason why he has not been satisfied with only a psychological theory and directed towards a great description have been understood by his claims made upto now. Moreno believes that by the concepts of moment and spontaneity that are his own theoretical discoveries he has found a solution so that the civilization can get rid of its dilemmas. What is left is to analyze and prove this concepts on the levels of science and philosophy. From the beginning science and philosophy have been in a position of only mediation for the savior ideas. Moreno has proved that his ideas are saviors by following a characteristic and dispersed way using always the scientific and philosophical are within another evidently.

Moreno defines spontaneity as an inherent tendency to be experienced by a subject as his own state autonomous and free, that is, free from any external influence and from any internal influence which he can not control or an ability of a subject to meet each new situation with adequacy. The other interesting property of spontaneityis that it is not only the process within the person, but also the flow of feeling in the direction of the spontaneity state of another person. Moreno's theory of rol and interpersonal relations is based on this form of spontaneity called tele (p.81). In Moreno's opinion the sense for spontaneity, as a cerebral function, shows a more rudimentary development than any other important, fundamental function of the central nervous system. When compared with many other mental functions such as intelligence and memory, the sense for spontaneity is less developed since in the civilization of conserves it is for less used and trained. Moreno thinks that the theoretical structure of every empirical science needs from to time to time a revision, and also the theory of child development that is essential for the theory of personality requires such a revision. The theories of child development, as evolved by behaviorism, The Gestalt School and psychoanalysis have lost their magnetism and usefulness in experimental study. The concepts of psychodrama such as spontaneity, warming up process, spontaneity training, auxilary ego, role playing and tele have the capacity to meet this requirement.

Moreno thinks that spontaneity and creativity are regarded as primary and positive phenomena and not as as derivatives of libido or any other animal drive. The moment of birth emphasizes this fact the best.It is the sense of spontaneity, that is, the s factor which makes it miracle that on infant who moves into a differnt world survives despite he is biologically inadequately developed. For Moreno an individual's personality is determined by the s factor other than the hereditary, social and enviromental forces. He thinks that both the s factor and the tele (t) factorwhich refers to social forces can be measured scientifically by spontaneity and sociometric tests developed by himself. Moreno claims that to be scientific there must be measurements and the first basic manifestation of spontaneity, warming up process, can also be measured (p.50-52).

Moreno explains his own philosophy called the philosophy of the moment in order to describe in his theory. In a philosophy of the moment, the locus, the status nascendi, and the matrix are the factors to be emphasized. These represent three views of the same process. There is no "thing" without its locus, no locus without its status nascendi, and no status nascendi without its matrix. The locus of a flower, for instance, in the bed where it is growing. Its status nascendi is that of a growing thing as it springs from the seed. Its matrix is the fertile seed, itself. If these facts are adopted to human organism; the mother's placenta is the locus, the moment of the fertilization is the status nascendi and the embryo developed from fertilized egg is the matrix (p.55).

The warming up process manifests itself in every expression of the living organism as it strives towards an act. It has somatic expression, a psychological expression, and a social expression. Every warming up process has a focus. It tends to be in a zone of the body as its locus nascendi. In these zones there are physical starters for spontaneous act. At the moment of birth and in a life of an infant without words and almost without a cerebral cortex the warming up process and spontaneous act have a crucial importance. The physical starters (to which mental starters will be added then) activate the warming up process, and spontaneity act. This causes the organisms to strive towards objects or persons and to shape a role (p.56-57). In an infant's early life, in the course of warming up process, and in the shaping of his/hers roles, auxillary egos, especially the mother have a basic function. This co-being, co-action, and co-experience, which, in the primary phase, exemplify the infants relationship to the persons and things around him form the matrix of identity. The matrix of identity the infant's social placenta and the infant develops due to s and t factors present in this matrix.The matrix of identity breaks up gradully as the infants becomes independent of the auxillary egos and the differentiation between real and imagined things begins to take form (p.61-64).

One of the distinguishing property of Moreno's theory of child development, unlike psychoanalytical theory, is that, it evaluates the growth of the infant in positive terms and in terms of progression, rathet than in negative terms and in terms of retardation and regression.Moreno claims that in the period of infancy called the first universe, the emphasis on the memory and intelligence have taken the places of the positive characteristics that we possess from the point of view of spontaneity and these positive characteristics are retarded due to faulty tendencies of the our civilization. Yn his opinion there is total amnesia in the first three years of life that he called the first universe. Because a certain part of the ego must observe and register the events so that these can be remembered and forgetten. However, it is impossible for an infant only experiencing the immediate situation without past and future dimensions, to learn by remembering. Moreno claims that, as a natural consequence of his theory, the first universe of an infant possess a dreamless state. The beginning of dreaming must be related to a decreasing intensity of the spontaneous act-hunger of the infant that is the characteristic of the first universe, the dream-hunger will be enhanced when the breach between fantasy and reality is experienced by the child (p.64-69).

In Moreno's opinion, in the first universe the roles thst tke form due to physical starters, warming up process are the psychosomatic roles. The new sets of the roles emerge out of the psychosomatic world in the identity matrix since the beginning of the second universe formed by differentiation of the real world and the fictitious world. The new roles are social and psychodramatic roles (p.73) A new situation is experienced when it is passed from the first universe to the second one; s factor lost its importance and it has served the intelligence, memory and social forces, social and cultural repetitions (stereotypes) have become dominant. The reason for this negative experience of spontaneity in human life is that the "moment" as a category and as a focus in itself could not maintain itself as a pragmatic tool for the shaping of human progress. Fearful of staking his existence on spontaneity and unreliabilities of the moment, the man threw his creativity into forms of technical and cultural conserves. By clinging to these technological and cultural devices they tried to get rid of the feeling of imperfection due to unprepared momentary performances. Moreno can understand the fear of man for the spontaneity to a certain degree and his tendency towards conserves but he claims that while man has tried to get rid of the fear for the spontaneity and the moment he has brought about a new crisis in the form of over-extensive development techno-cultural environment. Robots and cultural machinery which have result in this environment, are able not only assist but to replace man at the moment of performance (p.78-80). The spontaneity training and motivatedhuman creativity can be solution to the weakness of our civilization.

According to Moreno, The idea of conservation of energy has been the consciuos model of many psychological theories, as, for instance, the psychoanalytical theory of the libido. However, the theory of universal spontaneity has rejected such closed psychodynamic systems and not accepted an individual as a reservoir spontaneity. The spontaneity is (or is not) available in varying degrees of readiness, from zero to maximum operating like a psychological catalyzer. The spontaneity functions only in the moment of its emergence just as light turned on in a room, and all parts of it become distinct. When the light turned off in a room, the basic structure remained the same, but it had disappeared. Moreno claims that the recurrence of curtain events is inversly propositional to the spontaneity; the frequency of s factor changes according to individuals or different periods in the life of the same individual and one can prove the existence of the s factor by two methods: first negative method; by logical or intuitive analysis, second, positive method; by experiments (p.85-88). (Moreno in many places of his books, has accepted the logical or intuitive analysis as a method to prove, as he has reduced the scientific one to the measurable one.)

In summmary, Moreno's ideas about his own philosophy and his way of defending these ideas have a such a style. Apperently, his aim is neither to develop a radical philosophy nor limit himself only with a psychological theory but to prove his ideas about spontaneity and creativity that he accepts as rescuer in the fields of science and philosophy. His aim becomes apperent in his style of critisizing the philosophies in his book.

Moreno and The Philosophies of Life

The philosophers, rather different from each other, Bergson, Peirce and Nietzsche whom the historicians of philosophy have tended to classify under the some title of philosophies of life are included in Moreno's bok.

In Moreno opinion, the thought waves leading up tu psychodrama have simmered in several brains. To Henri Bergson goes the honor of having brought the principle of spontaneity into philosophy, at a time when the leading scientists were adamont that there is no such thing in objective science. But his "donnees immediates", "elan vital" and "durees" were the metaphors which Bergson has used to define spontaneity. There is no "moment" in his system, only duree. In his justifiable refutation of the mathematical intellectual time construct he also threw away the creative moment and did not comprehend the moment as locus nascendi. Moreno thinks that without the moment as locus nascendi, Bergson's theory of spontaneity and creativity threatens to remain entirely metaphysical or to become entirely automatic (p.8-9). In spite of his being the closest one to question in modern philosophy, according to Moreno, Bergson could not comprehend the moment as a revolutionary category and build a bridge between the creative absolute and space and man-made time in which we live. That's why Bergson is in a position that is irrational and useless to scientific progress and methodology.

Moreno also has began to criticize Bergson while he was criticizing Freud because of his psychological determinism. In his opinion the idea of absolute psychic determinism as an idea fixe is largely responsible for the many forced and the artificial interpretations which Freud has given the psychological problems: Bergson, by making the elan vital a fetish, developed the other extreme. The total denial of determinism has just the same consequence as its full acceptence: Whereas Freud's psychic determinism did not leave any room for the s factor, Bergson left, since he could not develop a meaningful category of moment, so much room to the creative that everything outside of it became a demonic distortion. However, to Moreno, his own theory of spontaneity has a place for a "functional, operational determinism" to avoid from the mistakes made by freud and Bergson. According to this theory there can be, in the development of a person, original moments, truly creative and decisive beginnings, it is not necessary to give every moment in the development of a person the credit of the spontaneity. From time to time moments spring up which become locii nascendi which push that person into a new experience or into new "role" (p.102-103).

Moreno's claims regarding Bergson have proved that he has not considered the relation between science and philosophy adequately, to put it right, he did not need such an elaborately attitude due to the basic aim of his work. Moreno has criticized Bergson for not behaving appropriate to positivist methodology to which he has already been against and he has not hesitated to put Bergson's philosophical and Freud's scientific ideas into the same category.

In Moreno's opinion, Charles Saunders Peirce, founder of pragmatism, made astonishing references to spontaneity which is considered a greater contribution than his pragmatic theory, even they are in an unsystematized form. However; Moreno accused Peirce as well as Bergson of the same thing. In spite of Peirce's brilliant determinations, there was no place left for the category of moment. Like Bergson, Peirce was a spectator-philosopher, not an actor philosopher; he did not try to change universe, merely to understnd it. The weakest point in the references of Bergson and peirce to spontaneity is that they are generalized situations: Even if the true meaning of spontaneity could be found by pure reflection, it would be a truth unrealized and unlived. It is spontaneity which produces spontaneity, no reflection of it. It is spontaneity which produces order, not the laws which are themselves as artefact of a spontaneous order.It is spontaneity which enhanced creativity (p.9).

The point attracted our attention is that Moreno has used exactly Karl Marx's 11 th thesis, regarding philosophers, stating that they did not try to change the universe (Marx and Engels 1987). Naturally there are evident differences in the content of this usage but the important thing is the similarity. Moreno has accused Marx of neglecting the specific inter-individual action process in his social analysis (p.8) but just like him, he has tried to change the universe and thought that his ideas served this purpose. The philosophy of the moment, psychodrama and sociometry aim to change the universe, to put it right, also Moreno as marx has wanted the science and philosophy to cahnge the universe as if this is their main function.

Moreno has mentioned the critisism for Nietzsche in the part of category of the moment. According to Moreno, despite the fact that, one of the most important concepts in all human thought, the category of the moment has been the step of all universally known philosophical systems since it is difficult to define the concept of the moment remained as an unsatisfactory basis for a system of theoretical and practical philosophy. Moreno thinks that, up to his day, the moment had been formulated as a particle of time and space, or as a mathematical abstraction; hence it had been pragmatically useless and theoretically sterile. In his opinion if a modern theory of the moment could be constructed against the cultural conserve the way would be open for a theory of spontaneity and creativity, as well (p.104-105).

Moreno claims that the highest value of the spontaneity and the creativity the top value on any axiological scale, is a totaly spontaneous-creative being, the Godhead. The question of existence or non-existence of God does not matter here, only a comparison is present for the notions of "infinite" and zero in mathematics. The scale has two opposite poles: the maximum of spontaneity at one pole and zero spontaneity at the other with many degrees of spontaneity between the two. This is an axiological scale: the ideal exponent of one pole is a totaly spontaneous creator, and the ideal exponent the other, the total cultural conserve, spontaneity and cultural conserves do not exist in pure form, one is a function of the other. In Moreno's opinion it is shown in the works of Friedrich Nietzsche that the lack of an adequate concept of the moment has spoiled any attempt at forming a theory of creativity and spontaneity. Nietzsche's value-theory was based on Beethoven, Bach and Wagner who lived in the service of the cultural conserve, Their works i.e, high-grade cultural conserves became the frame of reference for Nietzsche's valuations of creativity and creation. From the point of the creative matrix, however, all conserves, whether high-grade or low-grade, were on the same plane. Moreno claims that there was a mistake in his evaluation of the Superman, Napeleon, Cesare, Christ, St. Francis, and he did not perceive that, whereas, on one occasion, harshness and selfishness may be the strongest response to a situation, on another occasion, love and charity may be the requisite answers. The rigid patterns of conduct were related to the cultural conserve. The exchange of new conserves for old does not change the position of man in his struggle with the realities of the world around him and can not aid in the development of a human society of which man is to be the true master. Man could be in the service of new society as long as he struggles for a revolutionary change of the world in which he lives and contributes to such a change (p.105-106).

Moreno due to his critisism of Nietzsche, regardless of its being right or wrong, has brought up the aims of his scientific and philosophical works, and spontaneity and creativity, this time, have been based on ethical metaphysics by Moreno. When the aim was great naturally the narration also became great and directed towards the targets which the science was never interested in.

Moreno and The Philosophies of Existence

Moreno has concentrated on the philosophy of existence besides the philosophy of life. In according to Moreno, The modern existentialism may be divided into three periods. Onei Kierkegaard's protest against religion in the middle of 19 th century; two the herroic existentialiasm of the first quarter of the 20 th century; three, the intellectual existentialism between and after the two wars (p.207).

In Moreno's opinion Kierkegaard's protest was directed against two targets, first, the Church of Christianity, second, the philosophy of Hegel. Because the autohorities of the Church put esthetic Christ in place of real historic Christ while Hegel was intellectualizing the spirit making the same error in philosophy as the Bishops made in the religion. Moreno thinks that Kierkegaard has tried to be an existential prophet and become a "Daseinsanalytiker" to "analyze" Dasein and he wanted to produce a dasein, a high form of existence but he failed and had difficulty in doing this. Moreno accepted Kierkegaard as, in essence, a frustrated psychodramatist who was unable to bring the essential situations of his life to a victorious ending and Moreno claims that if the religious clothing and the emphasis upon the Scriptures are removed, Kierkegaard should be called a psychodramatist rather than an existentialist. Since Kierkegaard existential involvement of the subjective actor was axiomatic; it validated itself, it did not require further proof. Religious behaviour in order to be valid and meaningful has to involve the entire subjectivity of the religious actor. It has to fill and vitalize the religious ritual with it. In Moreno's opinion thi is a special case of spontaneity familiar to psychodramatists, a new response to an old sitiuation, the requirement to re-experience a repeated sitiuation with the same intensity as if it had happened for the first time, the revitalizing of religious conserves as ritual or a prayer. If one goes through the act without feeling, the act becomes a travesty and religiously ineffective. This is in accord with the psychodramatic principle of the "warm-up". Moreno thinks that the gap between the existentialvalidity of religious behaviour and its outward manifestations began to take serious forms in the middle of the 19 th century preparing the way for the agnosticism and atheism of our time (p.207-209).

In his writings regarding Kierkegaard Moreno claimed that a general phenomenon had three forms of validation as scientific, esthetic and existential established something that is appreciative, philosophical, and enlightening the discussing for our time. In his opinion Kierkegaard's fight was to assert existential validation against the esthetic. However, he was not aware of the difference between existential and scientific validation; it is a problem which matured in our time (p.209-210). As Moreno has distinguished three categories of validation and come close to the philosophy instead of examining this validation in detail he first, directed himself to an indefinite target as bringing the existentialism in a contemporary form back to its Kiekegaardian aim then, to his savior mega narration.

In Moreno's opinion being unable to realize that knowledge and existence are never separable prevented a talented existentialist writer from having true and genuine living existence and resulted in a prophetic existence which is not illuminated by reflective thought. Unlike Kierkegaard's frustrated personality, in the first half of the 20 th century, the heroes who experienced existentialist living bravely and looked down on writing books so remained unknown and appeared.

In according to Moreno, among these heroic existentialists Russian mystic Leo Tolstoy, French poet Charles Peguy, Swiss writer Albert Schwaitzer, and in John Kellmer in Vienna have formed a group whose firs principle was the constant effort to maintain from moment to moment the natural, spontaneous flow of existence uninterruptedly. Moreno claims that the anonymous works of this group were a step for psychodrama, sociometry and group psychotherapy in USA. (p.211-2112).

Moreno put puts a low premium on modern intellectual existentialist as their chief concerns are the philosophical problems of existence, not existing and existence itself. In his opinion men like Jaspers, Heidegger and Sartre are philosophers and psychologists; the heroic-socratic existentialism of Kierkegaard has gradually turned into a kind of intellectual existentialism of the middle class. Jaspers is nearer to Dilthey and Freud than to Kierkegaard. Heidegger is nearer to Hegel and Kant than to Socrates and Christ. Moreno has mentioned phenomenology and claimed that the radical realism of phenomenologists like Husserl and Scheler gave rise to a new development in existentialism. The emphasis has shifted to the relation between existential and scientific validation. The original existentialism of Kierkegaard has vanished and his desire to reconcile existentialist philosophies with scientific methods became appearent. Moreno thinks that this dilemma of existentialism can be treated in sociometry and through its psychodramatic method (p.213-215).

Moreno claims that as sociometrists themselves have emphasized their early days that the human being in his total subjectivism has to be made part of scientific analysis. If subjectivism is taken seriously it assumes a "quasi-objectivistic" character by means of "measurement". He believes that the need for establishing a better understanding between the phenomenologists, the existentialists and empirical scientists has been bridged by sociometric theory. The subjectivistic and existentialistic situation of the object and the objective requirements of the scientific method in the process of therapeutic investigation are reconciled and scientific and existential validation do not exclude one another. In Moreno's opinion the development of Daseins "analyse" from a philosophical position to Daseins "therapy" (Binswanger, Boss and others) is an indication yhat philosophy by itself cannot advance the Science of Man. To advance such a Science of Man the subjective participation of individuals other than the philosopher must be reconciled and this can be done by psychodrama Kierkegaard's belated rehabilitation is attained not by the modern existentialists but by the psychodramatic stagedoor (p.216-217).