Friedrich August von Hayek war ein österreichischer Ökonom und Philosoph. In Wien in eine Familie von Akademikern hineingeboren, studierte Hayek zunächst Rechtswissenschaften an der Universität Wien, zeigte aber auch großes Interesse an Psychologie und Volkswirtschaftslehre. So nahm er regelmäßig an Seminaren von Ludwig von Mises Teil und wurde 1921 in Rechtswissenschaften und 1923 in Staatswissenschaften promoviert.

Zunächst Pfarrer in Berlin-Charlottenburg, dann Professor für Philosophie in Halle, repräsentiert Eberhard die nachwolffianische deutsche Popularphilosophie, der an praktisch und pädagogisch wirksamer Aufklärung im Zusammenspiel mit den fortschrittlichen politischen und religiösen Kräften lag. In diesen Lehrbüchern repräsentiert Eberhard sich als Aufklärer auf dem philosophischen Niveau der ästhetischen, hermeneutischen und historischen Modifikation des Wolffschen Systems und der neuerlichen Rezeption der Philosophie Leibniz’, zumal der Erkenntnistheorie der 1765 erschienenen „Nouveaux essais sur l’entendement humain“. Eberhard wurde aufgrund seiner Theorie des Denkens und Empfindens (...) als Schüler Leibniz’ bezeichnet; und er verfasste denn auch eine Leibniz-Biographie. Er hielt zeitlebens an den wolffianischen Standards von Rationalität fest und widersetzte sich nicht nur dem normativen Rekurs auf „Empfindsamkeit“ in Literatur und Religion, sondern auch der sog. Glaubensphilosophie Friedrich Heinrich Jacobis, erst recht der zeitgenössischen Wiederkehr von Okkultismus und Esoterik. Johann August Eberhard, professor of philosophy in Halle, is one of the foremost exponents of the Popularphilosophie of the German Enlightenment. He was a major contributor to Friedrich Nicolai’s "Allgemeine Deutsche Bibliothek", and advanced unorthodox opinions on religious and political issues. (shrink)

1885 faßte Friedrich Nietzsche den Entschluß, eine Neue Ausgabe seiner Schriften erscheinen zu lassen, die »das Eigene und Unvergleichliche in diesen Werken« herausstellen sollte. Diesem Konzept folgt auch die von Claus-Artur Scheier neu herausgegebene Ausgabe der philosophischen Werke in sechs in Bänden. BAND 1 Jenseits von Gut und Böse (1886) Die Geburt der Tragödie (Neue Ausgabe 1886) Ca. 399 Seiten BAND 2 Menschliches, Allzumenschliches 1 (Neue Ausgabe 1886) Ca. 366 Seiten BAND 3 Menschliches, Allzumenschliches 2 (Neue Ausgabe 1886) Ca. (...) 332 Seiten BAND 4 Morgenröthe (Neue Ausgabe 1887) Ca. 332 Seiten BAND 5 Die Fröhliche Wissenschaft / Wir Furchtlosen (Neue Ausgabe 1887) Ca. 312 Seiten BAND 6 Zur Genealogie der Moral (1887) Götzen-Dämmerung (1889) Ca. 276 Seiten Diese erste Ausgabe der philosophischen Werke Friedrich Nietzsches in der »Philosophischen Bibliothek« folgt dem 1885 von Nietzsche selbst gefaßten und begründeten Konzept einer Neuen Ausgabe seiner im eigentlichen Sinne »philosophischen« Schriften und bietet den Text nach den Originalausgaben von 1886/1887, ergänzt um die 1889 erschienene Götzen-Dämmerung. Eine »vollständige Ausgabe letzter Hand« nach dem Vorbild Goethes hat Friedrich Nietzsche nicht vorlegen können, denn am Ende war er nicht mehr Herr seiner Sinne. Doch gibt das wirklich Grund zur Klage? Oder anders gefragt: Hätte Nietzsche eine solche Ausgabe, die einfach alles versammelt, was er geschrieben hat, überhaupt gewollt und gutgeheißen? Die Frage muß offen bleiben. Doch es gibt gewiß Gründe, Nietzsche nicht mit jenen gleichzustellen, denen es auf diese Weise nur darum zu tun war, ihren Nachruhm zu sichern und nach eigenen Vorstellungen zu steuern. Denn es gibt sie ja, die von Nietzsche selbst gewollte und kritisch kommentierte Ausgabe ganz eigener Art: nämlich die durch Jenseits von Gut und Böse und die Genealogie der Moral eingerahmte Neue Ausgabe von 1886/87, die die vor dem Zarathustra veröffentlichten, mit neuen Vorreden versehenen philosophischen Schriften enthält, von denen der Autor selber sagte: »Sie werden bemerken, daß Menschliches, Allzumenschliches, die Morgenröte, die fröhliche Wissenschaft einer Vorrede ermangeln: es hatte gute Gründe, daß ich damals, als diese Werke entstanden, mir ein Stillschweigen auferlegte – ich stand noch zu nahe, noch zu sehr ›drin‹ und wußte kaum, was mit mir geschehen war. Jetzt, wo ich selber am besten und genauesten sagen kann, was das Eigene und Unvergleichliche in diesen Werken ist und inwiefern sie eine für Deutschland neue Literatur inaugurieren (das Vorspiel einer moralischen Selbst-Erziehung und Kultur, die bisher den Deutschen gefehlt hat), würde ich mich zu solchen zurückblickenden und nachträglichen Vorreden gerne entschließen. Meine Schriften stellen eine fortlaufende Entwicklung dar, welche nicht nur mein persönliches Erlebnis und Schicksal sein wird: – ich bin nur der Erste, eine heraufkommende Generation wird das, was ich erlebt habe, von sich aus verstehn und eine feine Zunge für meine Bücher haben. Die Vorreden könnten das Notwendige im Gange einer solchen Entwicklung deutlich machen.« (Brief vom 7. August 1886 an seinen Verleger Th. Fritsch) Mit der 1990 unter dem Titel ›Friedrich Nietzsche: Ecce auctor‹ vorgelegten Edition der Vorreden von 1886 hatte Claus-Artur Scheier zum ersten Mal darauf aufmerksam gemacht, daß Nietzsche die für die Neue Ausgabe seiner im eigentlichen Sinne »philosophischen« Schriften verfaßten Vorreden als in sich geschlossenen, genealogisch angelegten Versuch einer selbstkritischen Neubewertung und Einordnung seines Werkes ansah: »Von der Vorrede zur Geburt der Tragödie bis zur Vorrede des letztgenannten Buchs [der ›Genealogie der Moral‹] – das gibt eine Art ›Entwicklungsgeschichte‹« (zu der, des Erprobens der Tonlage wegen, noch die Vorrede zu »Jenseits von Gut und Böse« gerechnet werden kann). Jetzt sah sich Nietzsche im Zenit seiner Schaffenskraft, und die Neue Ausgabe sollte den Mitte 1885 gefaßten Plan vorantreiben, »eine große Schul-Tätigkeit als Philosoph auszuüben [...]. Die Bücher heraus aus diesem Winkel!!! Es sind meine Angelhaken; wenn sie mir keine Menschen fangen, so haben sie keinen Sinn!« (Brief an die Schwester, kurz vor dem 15. August 1885). (shrink)

This is a documentary study that presents: background on the debate between Hegel and Schleiermacher that parallels the writing of Hegel's preface to Hinrichs' work; the entire text of Hinrichs' Religion in Its Internal Relationship to Systematic Knowledge; plus appropriate introductions, annotations, a glossary, and a transcription of the German critical edition of Hegel's Hinrichs-Vorwort on which the new translation is based.

ZusammenfassungDer heutige Arbeitsalltag im medizinischen Betrieb ist durch verschiedene Belastungsfaktoren gekennzeichnet: 1) die Tempobeschleunigung und die Komplexitätssteigerung der medizinischen Entwicklung allgemein sowie 2) eine zunehmende moralische Verunsicherung des Personals in Bezug auf das Verhältnis von Möglichkeiten und Notwendigkeiten bestimmter therapeutischer Verfahren. Die in diesem Aufsatz vorgelegten Beobachtungen, die aus einem Projekt am Lehrstuhl für Ethik der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen resultieren, machen noch einen weiteren Punkt geltend, so dass 3) bereits die unterschiedliche Einschätzung rein sachlicher Fragen zu einem Dissens führen kann, (...) der als moralischer empfunden wird. Aus diesen drei Momenten erwächst ein allgemeiner Bedarf an ethischer Handlungsorientierung. Allerdings ist die Entlastung, die durch ethische Kommunikation, beispielsweise in klinischen Ethik-Komitees, erreicht wird, anderer Art als zunächst in der Regel erwartet. Denn die Leistung liegt nicht so sehr in der Lösung von Problemen als vielmehr in deren Beschreibung. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungDer heutige Arbeitsalltag im medizinischen Betrieb ist durch verschiedene Belastungsfaktoren gekennzeichnet: 1) die Tempobeschleunigung und die Komplexitätssteigerung der medizinischen Entwicklung allgemein sowie 2) eine zunehmende moralische Verunsicherung des Personals in Bezug auf das Verhältnis von Möglichkeiten und Notwendigkeiten bestimmter therapeutischer Verfahren. Die in diesem Aufsatz vorgelegten Beobachtungen, die aus einem Projekt am Lehrstuhl für Ethik der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen resultieren, machen noch einen weiteren Punkt geltend, so dass 3) bereits die unterschiedliche Einschätzung rein sachlicher Fragen zu einem Dissens führen kann, (...) der als moralischer empfunden wird. Aus diesen drei Momenten erwächst ein allgemeiner Bedarf an ethischer Handlungsorientierung. Allerdings ist die Entlastung, die durch ethische Kommunikation, beispielsweise in klinischen Ethik-Komitees, erreicht wird, anderer Art als zunächst in der Regel erwartet. Denn die Leistung liegt nicht so sehr in der Lösung von Problemen als vielmehr in deren Beschreibung. (shrink)

English summary: Johann Friedrich Flatt (1759-1821) was the first professor of philosophy to hold lectures on Kants critical philosophy in Tubingen. It has been proven that these lectures were attended by Hegel, Holderlin and Schelling. In them, Flatt endeavored to adopt a benevolently neutral attitude towards the Kritik der reinen Vernunft (Critique of Pure Reason). Thus the transcripts published in this work will be able to alter the widespread opinion, prevalent for a long time, that Flatt was nothing more (...) than an opponent of Kant and an apologist of Tubingen orthodoxy. The transcripts of the lectures on metaphysics and psychology were written by Hegels and Holderlins classmate August Friedrich Klupfel and have been provided with introductions and commentaries. German description: Johann Friedrich Flatt (1759-1821) war der erste Philosophieprofessor, der in Tubingen Vorlesungen uber Kants Kritische Philosophie gehalten hat. Sie wurden nachweislich von Hegel, Holderlin und Schelling besucht. Flatt bemuht sich darin, eine wohlwollend neutrale Haltung gegenuber der >Kritik der reinen VernunftMetaphysischenPsychologischen Vorlesungen. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungDer heutige Arbeitsalltag im medizinischen Betrieb ist durch verschiedene Belastungsfaktoren gekennzeichnet: 1) die Tempobeschleunigung und die Komplexitätssteigerung der medizinischen Entwicklung allgemein sowie 2) eine zunehmende moralische Verunsicherung des Personals in Bezug auf das Verhältnis von Möglichkeiten und Notwendigkeiten bestimmter therapeutischer Verfahren. Die in diesem Aufsatz vorgelegten Beobachtungen, die aus einem Projekt am Lehrstuhl für Ethik der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen resultieren, machen noch einen weiteren Punkt geltend, so dass 3) bereits die unterschiedliche Einschätzung rein sachlicher Fragen zu einem Dissens führen kann, (...) der als moralischer empfunden wird. Aus diesen drei Momenten erwächst ein allgemeiner Bedarf an ethischer Handlungsorientierung. Allerdings ist die Entlastung, die durch ethische Kommunikation, beispielsweise in klinischen Ethik-Komitees, erreicht wird, anderer Art als zunächst in der Regel erwartet. Denn die Leistung liegt nicht so sehr in der Lösung von Problemen als vielmehr in deren Beschreibung. (shrink)

Every student of the twentieth century has heard both of the great Viennese economist Friedrich von Hayek and of the equally great philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein. But what isn't well known is that the two were distant cousins and that, shortly after Wittgenstein's death in 1951, Hayek set out to write a biography of his cousin. The project was derailed by Wittgenstein family members, who felt it was to soon to publish such a work - especially one like Hayek's, so (...) candid about his cousin's difficulties and depressions. But Hayek's draft acquired an underground readership, and Wittgensteins biographers have used it extensively. Here finally, is the text of that work itself - a true goldmine in being one great thinker's view of another, whom he knew personally, even if not well. Hayek's account has the great merit of being close to its subject; the draft, moreover sheds light, not only on Wittgenstein but on Hayek as well. (shrink)

The first meeting of the Schleiermacher Studies and Translations Group was held August 8–11, 1986, at Drew University. The purposes of this “Schleiermacher Summer Camp” were to plan the translations into English of Schleiermacher’s complete corpus, including sermons and letters, as well as some prominent German secondary sources, and to provide an opportunity for the initial participants in this ambitious project to meet each other and learn each other’s methods. presuppositions, interests, and goals. The sessions were extremely valuable toward (...) these ends, and we all felt the satisfaction of a unified spirit of collaboration. (shrink)

Três poemas de Schelling-Bonaventura. Tradução de “Tier und Pflanze”, “Lied” e “Los der Erde”.

Jakob Friedrich Fries (1773-1843): A Philosophy of the Exact Sciences -/- Shortened version of the article of the same name in: Tabula Rasa. Jenenser magazine for critical thinking. 6th of November 1994 edition -/- 1. Biography -/- Jakob Friedrich Fries was born on the 23rd of August, 1773 in Barby on the Elbe. Because Fries' father had little time, on account of his journeying, he gave up both his sons, of whom Jakob Friedrich was the elder, (...) to the Herrnhut Teaching Institution in Niesky in 1778. Fries attended the theological seminar in Niesky in autumn 1792, which lasted for three years. There he (secretly) began to study Kant. The reading of Kant's works led Fries, for the first time, to a deep philosophical satisfaction. His enthusiasm for Kant is to be understood against the background that a considerable measure of Kant's philosophy is based on a firm foundation of what happens in an analogous and similar manner in mathematics. -/- During this period he also read Heinrich Jacobi's novels, as well as works of the awakening classic German literature; in particular Friedrich Schiller's works. In 1795, Fries arrived at Leipzig University to study law. During his time in Leipzig he became acquainted with Fichte's philosophy. In autumn of the same year he moved to Jena to hear Fichte at first hand, but was soon disappointed. -/- During his first sojourn in Jenaer (1796), Fries got to know the chemist A. N. Scherer who was very influenced by the work of the chemist A. L. Lavoisier. Fries discovered, at Scherer's suggestion, the law of stoichiometric composition. Because he felt that his work still need some time before completion, he withdrew as a private tutor to Zofingen (in Switzerland). There Fries worked on his main critical work, and studied Newton's "Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica". He remained a lifelong admirer of Newton, whom he praised as a perfectionist of astronomy. Fries saw the final aim of his mathematical natural philosophy in the union of Newton's Principia with Kant's philosophy. -/- With the aim of qualifying as a lecturer, he returned to Jena in 1800. Now Fries was known from his independent writings, such as "Reinhold, Fichte and Schelling" (1st edition in 1803), and "Systems of Philosophy as an Evident Science" (1804). The relationship between G. W. F. Hegel and Fries did not develop favourably. Hegel speaks of "the leader of the superficial army", and at other places he expresses: "he is an extremely narrow-minded bragger". On the other hand, Fries also has an unfavourable take on Hegel. He writes of the "Redundancy of the Hegelistic dialectic" (1828). In his History of Philosophy (1837/40) he writes of Hegel, amongst other things: "Your way of philosophising seems just to give expression to nonsense in the shortest possible way". In this work, Fries appears to argue with Hegel in an objective manner, and expresses a positive attitude to his work. -/- In 1805, Fries was appointed professor for philosophy in Heidelberg. In his time spent in Heidelberg, he married Caroline Erdmann. He also sealed his friendships with W. M. L. de Wette and F. H. Jacobi. Jacobi was amongst the contemporaries who most impressed Fries during this period. In Heidelberg, Fries wrote, amongst other things, his three-volume main work New Critique of Reason (1807). -/- In 1816 Fries returned to Jena. When in 1817 the Wartburg festival took place, Fries was among the guests, and made a small speech. 1819 was the so-called "Great Year" for Fries: His wife Caroline died, and Karl Sand, a member of a student fraternity, and one of Fries' former students stabbed the author August von Kotzebue to death. Fries was punished with a philosophy teaching ban but still received a professorship for physics and mathematics. Only after a period of years, and under restrictions, he was again allowed to read philosophy. From now on, Fries was excluded from political influence. The rest of his life he devoted himself once again to philosophical and natural studies. During this period, he wrote "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" (1822) and the "History of Philosophy" (1837/40). -/- Fries suffered from a stroke on New Year's Day 1843, and a second stroke, on the 10th of August 1843 ended his life. -/- 2. Fries' Work Fries left an extensive body of work. A look at the subject areas he worked on makes us aware of the universality of his thinking. Amongst these subjects are: Psychic anthropology, psychology, pure philosophy, logic, metaphysics, ethics, politics, religious philosophy, aesthetics, natural philosophy, mathematics, physics and medical subjects, to which, e.g., the text "Regarding the optical centre in the eye together with general remarks about the theory of seeing" (1839) bear witness. With popular philosophical writings like the novel "Julius and Evagoras" (1822), or the arabesque "Longing, and a Trip to the Middle of Nowhere" (1820), he tried to make his philosophy accessible to a broader public. Anthropological considerations are shown in the methodical basis of his philosophy, and to this end, he provides the following didactic instruction for the study of his work: "If somebody wishes to study philosophy on the basis of this guide, I would recommend that after studying natural philosophy, a strict study of logic should follow in order to peruse metaphysics and its applied teachings more rapidly, followed by a strict study of criticism, followed once again by a return to an even closer study of metaphysics and its applied teachings." -/- 3. Continuation of Fries' work through the Friesian School -/- Fries' ideas found general acceptance amongst scientists and mathematicians. A large part of the followers of the "Fries School of Thought" had a scientific or mathematical background. Amongst them were biologist Matthias Jakob Schleiden, mathematics and science specialist philosopher Ernst Friedrich Apelt, the zoologist Oscar Schmidt, and the mathematician Oscar Xavier Schlömilch. Between the years 1847 and 1849, the treatises of the "Fries School of Thought", with which the publishers aimed to pursue philosophy according to the model of the natural sciences appeared. In the Kant-Fries philosophy, they saw the realisation of this ideal. The history of the "New Fries School of Thought" began in 1903. It was in this year that the philosopher Leonard Nelson gathered together a small discussion circle in Goettingen. Amongst the founding members of this circle were: A. Rüstow, C. Brinkmann and H. Goesch. In 1904 L. Nelson, A. Rüstow, H. Goesch and the student W. Mecklenburg travelled to Thuringia to find the missing Fries writings. In the same year, G. Hessenberg, K. Kaiser and Nelson published the first pamphlet from their first volume of the "Treatises of the Fries School of Thought, New Edition". -/- The school set out with the aim of searching for the missing Fries' texts, and re-publishing them with a view to re-opening discussion of Fries' brand of philosophy. The members of the circle met regularly for discussions. Additionally, larger conferences took place, mostly during the holidays. Featuring as speakers were: Otto Apelt, Otto Berg, Paul Bernays, G. Fraenkel, K. Grelling, G. Hessenberg, A. Kronfeld, O. Meyerhof, L. Nelson and R. Otto. On the 1st of March 1913, the Jakob-Friedrich-Fries society was founded. Whilst the Fries' school of thought dealt in continuum with the advancement of the Kant-Fries philosophy, the members of the Jakob-Friedrich-Fries society's main task was the dissemination of the Fries' school publications. In May/June, 1914, the organisations took part in their last common conference before the gulf created by the outbreak of the First World War. Several members died during the war. Others returned disabled. The next conference took place in 1919. A second conference followed in 1921. Nevertheless, such intensive work as had been undertaken between 1903 and 1914 was no longer possible. -/- Leonard Nelson died in October 1927. In the 1930's, the 6th and final volume of "Treatises of the Fries School of Thought, New Edition" was published. Franz Oppenheimer, Otto Meyerhof, Minna Specht and Grete Hermann were involved in their publication. -/- 4. About Mathematical Natural Philosophy -/- In 1822, Fries' "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" appeared. Fries rejects the speculative natural philosophy of his time - above all Schelling's natural philosophy. A natural study, founded on speculative philosophy, ceases with its collection, arrangement and order of well-known facts. Only a mathematical natural philosophy can deliver the necessary explanatory reasoning. The basic dictum of his mathematical natural philosophy is: "All natural theories must be definable using purely mathematically determinable reasons of explanation." Fries is of the opinion that science can attain completeness only by the subordination of the empirical facts to the metaphysical categories and mathematical laws. -/- The crux of Fries' natural philosophy is the thought that mathematics must be made fertile for use by the natural sciences. However, pure mathematics displays solely empty abstraction. To be able to apply them to the sensory world, an intermediatory connection is required. Mathematics must be connected to metaphysics. The pure mechanics, consisting of three parts are these: a) A study of geometrical movement, which considers solely the direction of the movement, b) A study of kinematics, which considers velocity in Addition, c) A study of dynamic movement, which also incorporates mass and power, as well as direction and velocity. -/- Of great interest is Fries' natural philosophy in view of its methodology, particularly with regard to the doctrine "leading maxims". Fries calls these "leading maxims" "heuristic", "because they are principal rules for scientific invention". -/- Fries' philosophy found great recognition with Carl Friedrich Gauss, amongst others. Fries asked for Gauss's opinion on his work "An Attempt at a Criticism based on the Principles of the Probability Calculus" (1842). Gauss also provided his opinions on "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" (1822) and on Fries' "History of Philosophy". Gauss acknowledged Fries' philosophy and wrote in a letter to Fries: "I have always had a great predilection for philosophical speculation, and now I am all the more happy to have a reliable teacher in you in the study of the destinies of science, from the most ancient up to the latest times, as I have not always found the desired satisfaction in my own reading of the writings of some of the philosophers. In particular, the writings of several famous (maybe better, so-called famous) philosophers who have appeared since Kant have reminded me of the sieve of a goat-milker, or to use a modern image instead of an old-fashioned one, of Münchhausen's plait, with which he pulled himself from out of the water. These amateurs would not dare make such a confession before their Masters; it would not happen were they were to consider the case upon its merits. I have often regretted not living in your locality, so as to be able to glean much pleasurable entertainment from philosophical verbal discourse." -/- The starting point of the new adoption of Fries was Nelson's article "The critical method and the relation of psychology to philosophy" (1904). Nelson dedicates special attention to Fries' re-interpretation of Kant's deduction concept. Fries awards Kant's criticism the rationale of anthropological idiom, in that he is guided by the idea that one can examine in a psychological way which knowledge we have "a priori", and how this is created, so that we can therefore recognise our own knowledge "a priori" in an empirical way. Fries understands deduction to mean an "awareness residing darkly in us is, and only open to basic metaphysical principles through conscious reflection.". -/- Nelson has pointed to an analogy between Fries' deduction and modern metamathematics. In the same manner, as with the anthropological deduction of the content of the critical investigation into the metaphysical object show, the content of mathematics become, in David Hilbert's view, the object of metamathematics. -/-. (shrink)

Ludwig von Mühlenfels as Advocatus Schleiermacheri. An addendum. The editorial copy of the “Allgemeine Zeitung” has survived in the Cotta-Archive with the names of the contributors. This has made it possible to identify belatedly the author of the apologia “Another word about Schleiermacher” in the “Außerordentliche Beilage der Allgemeinen Zeitung” (Augsburg) of April 2, 1834. It was Ludwig Friedrich von Mühlenfels (1793–1861). Mühlenfels, who led a rather varied life, was related to Schleiermacher’s wife Henriette, and thus belonged to Schleiermacher’s (...) extended family. (1) Member of Lützow’s Freicorps. On Schleiermacher’s suggestion, Mühlenfels participated in the war of liberation against Napoleon as a volunteer with the “Black Hunters”, in the end in the so-called Battle of the Nations at Leipzig. He finished the study of law in 1816 and, on probation, joined the prosecutor’s office in Cologne where the French legal code was still in force. (2) Incarcerated as a demagogue under the investigating judge E. T. A. Hoffmann. Mühlenfels became one of the formative figures in the early history of German fraternities and participated in the Wartburg Festival in October 1817. He was arrested in July 1819 by the authorities in Berlin, charged with activities as a demagogue and incarcerated in Berlin on September 17. Mühlenfels contested the jurisdiction of the authorities in Berlin and refused to testify. The investigative judge was the writer and composer E. T. A. Hoffmann who wanted to have Mühlenfels released, and who later used him as a literary figure in a satirical novel. (3) Flight from Berlin – Exile in Sweden. On May 5, 1821, Mühlenfels succeeded in fleeing to Sweden where he made a meagerly living as a private tutor. (4) Professor for German and Scandinavian Literature in London – Return to Prussia. In October 1827, Mühlenfels reached London. Supported by some German scholars, he obtained the Chair for German and Scandinavian at the newly founded University College. He taught there until 1831 and publishedseveral textbooks. When he was acquitted by a court ruling in 1830, he returned to the Prussian public service in August 1831 and gradually built a solid career. (5) The defender of Schleiermacher. His apologia of Schleiermacher written in opposition to the obituary by Gutzkow is a masterpiece of literary and legal writing. – First publication: Six letters between Mühlenfels, Henriette and Friedrich Schleiermacher, and Georg Andreas Reimer. (shrink)

Ludwig von Mühlenfels as Advocatus Schleiermacheri. An addendum. The editorial copy of the “Allgemeine Zeitung” has survived in the Cotta-Archive with the names of the contributors. This has made it possible to identify belatedly the author of the apologia “Another word about Schleiermacher” in the “Außerordentliche Beilage der Allgemeinen Zeitung” (Augsburg) of April 2, 1834. It was Ludwig Friedrich von Mühlenfels (1793–1861). Mühlenfels, who led a rather varied life, was related to Schleiermacher’s wife Henriette, and thus belonged to Schleiermacher’s (...) extended family. (1) Member of Lützow’s Freicorps. On Schleiermacher’s suggestion, Mühlenfels participated in the war of liberation against Napoleon as a volunteer with the “Black Hunters”, in the end in the so-called Battle of the Nations at Leipzig. He finished the study of law in 1816 and, on probation, joined the prosecutor’s office in Cologne where the French legal code was still in force. (2) Incarcerated as a demagogue under the investigating judge E. T. A. Hoffmann. Mühlenfels became one of the formative figures in the early history of German fraternities and participated in the Wartburg Festival in October 1817. He was arrested in July 1819 by the authorities in Berlin, charged with activities as a demagogue and incarcerated in Berlin on September 17. Mühlenfels contested the jurisdiction of the authorities in Berlin and refused to testify. The investigative judge was the writer and composer E. T. A. Hoffmann who wanted to have Mühlenfels released, and who later used him as a literary figure in a satirical novel. (3) Flight from Berlin – Exile in Sweden. On May 5, 1821, Mühlenfels succeeded in fleeing to Sweden where he made a meagerly living as a private tutor. (4) Professor for German and Scandinavian Literature in London – Return to Prussia. In October 1827, Mühlenfels reached London. Supported by some German scholars, he obtained the Chair for German and Scandinavian at the newly founded University College. He taught there until 1831 and publishedseveral textbooks. When he was acquitted by a court ruling in 1830, he returned to the Prussian public service in August 1831 and gradually built a solid career. (5) The defender of Schleiermacher. His apologia of Schleiermacher written in opposition to the obituary by Gutzkow is a masterpiece of literary and legal writing. – First publication: Six letters between Mühlenfels, Henriette and Friedrich Schleiermacher, and Georg Andreas Reimer. (shrink)