Friedrich Schiller (1759-1805) is now regarded by many readers and scholars not simply as a poet, historian, or playwright, but as a genuine philosopher in his own right. -/- The following research articles in French and English are devoted to understanding the relationship between Schiller’s philosophy and German idealism, especially some of the chief figures associated with the inception and extended development of this movement: Kant, Reinhold, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and Lotze. -/- In the last twenty years in particular, ground-breaking (...) edited collections have appeared on the content and legacy of Schiller’s thought. The present volume of articles, however, is one of the first to attempt a broader investigation of Schiller’s connection to German idealism, in which the contributions have above all been written by scholars of German idealism itself. -/- The aim of this volume is to furnish foundational material for better answering the question: To what extent should Friedrich Schiller be considered a German idealist? Naturally, the response to this question depends on one’s conception of German idealism, a point discussed below. This introduction provides a brief overview of earlier scholarship on this topic and summarizes the findings of our contributors. (shrink)

Les Cahiers philosophiques de Strasbourg 52 contains an Introduction and 9 new research articles in French & English on Friedrich Schiller's philosophy in relation to German Idealism. All fully available online on Open-Edition and as free e-book. -/- Edited and introduced by Henny Blomme, Laure Cahen-Maurel, & David W. Wood. With contributions by Frederick C. Beiser, María del Rosario Acosta López, Cody Staton, Jeremy D. Hovda, Laure Cahen-Maurel, Quentin Landenne, Katia Hay, Louis Carré, and Charlotte Morel. -/- SOMMAIRE / CONTENTS (...) -/- Introduction: Friedrich Schiller, a German Idealist? (Henny Blomme, Laure Cahen-Maurel & David W. Wood) -/- 1. Frederick C. Beiser. Schiller’s Humanism -/- 2. María del Rosario Acosta López. Une dimension esthétique de la critique : la temporalité du beau dans les lettres de Schiller Sur l’éducation esthétique -/- 3. Cody Staton. In Search of Play: Schiller’s Drive Theory as a Turn Away from Kant -/- 4. Jeremy D. Hovda. Bildung between Kant and Schiller -/- 5. Laure Cahen-Maurel. Fichte avec Schiller : La querelle des Heures à la lumière de Grâce et Dignité -/- 6. Quentin Landenne. La Bildung chez Schiller et Fichte, entre esthétique et politique -/- 7. Katia Hay. On the Tragic-Sublime and Tragic Freedom: Thinking with Schiller and Schelling -/- 8. Louis Carré. Vicissitudes de l’État organique : Kant, Hegel, Schiller -/- 9. Charlotte Morel. Conjoindre idéalisme et réalisme après Hegel : Les lectures de Schiller par Lotze et Lange -/- Résumés / Abstracts. (shrink)

Der Untersuchung geht es um einen Systemvergleich zwischen Kant und Fichte anhand zentraler Lehrstucke ihrer theoretischen Philosophie. Die Philosophien Kants und Fichtes werden daruber hinaus gegenuber Rousseau, Jacobi, Schiller, Schelling und Hegel systematisch abgegrenzt.

Friedrich Schillers Abhandlung Über die ästhetische Erziehung des Menschen in einer Reihe von Briefen aus dem Jahre 1795 gehört zu den wirkmächtigsten theoretischen Texten zur Schönheit und zur Kunst um 1800. Wie aus den Forschungen zu Hölderlin, Jean Paul, Herder, den Brüdern Schlegel, Schelling u.v.m. bekannt ist, wurden Schillers Briefe umgehend nach ihrem Erscheinen gelesen und kritisch für die je eigene Entwicklung verarbeitet. Noch Hegel und Vischer bezogen sich in ihren umfassenden Ästhetiken um die Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts kritisch und (...) affirmativ auf Schillers großen Wurf. Darüber hinaus vermag Schiller der rousseauschen Aufklärungs- und Kulturkritik eine Form zu geben, die bis ins späte 20. Jahrhundert– so bei Habermas– ihre Wirksamkeit behält. In diesen „gelehrten Briefen“ gelingt Schiller mithin nicht nur eine Legitimation der Kunst in Zeiten revolutionären Umbruchs in Europa, sondern auch eine integrative Vermittlung zeitgenössischer Philosophie von Kant über Reinhold bis Fichte im Zeichen der Ästhetik. (shrink)

"Kant, Kantianism and Idealism" presents an overview of German Idealism, the major movement in philosophy from the late 18th to the middle of the 19th Century. The period was dominated by Kant, Fichte, Schelling and Hegel, whose work influenced not just philosophy, but also art, theology and politics. The volume covers not only these major figures but also their main followers and interpreters. These include Kant's younger contemporary Herder, his early critics such as Jacobi, Reinhold, and Maimon, and his readers (...) Schiller and Schlegel - who shaped much of the subsequent reception of Kant in art, literature and aesthetics - as well as Schopenhauer, whose unique appropriation and criticism of theories of cognition later had a decisive influence on Nietzsche. The "Young Hegelians" - such as Bruno Bauer, Ludwig Feuerbach, and David Friedrich Strauss, whose writings would influence Engels and Marx - are also discussed. The influence of Kant and German Idealism also extended into France, shaping the thought of such figures as Saint-Simon, Fourier, and Proudhon, whose work would prove decisive for subsequent philosophical, political, and economic thinking in Europe in the second half of the 19th century. (shrink)

In this essay, Hegel attempted to show how Fichte’s Science of Knowledge was an advance from the position of Kant in the Critique of Pure Reason, and how Schelling (and incidentally Hegel himself) had made a further advance from the position of Fichte.

Avec l'ecrit sur le Droit naturel, Foi et Savoir constitue la voie d'entree, strategiquement fondamentale, dans le systeme hegelien, comme Theorie et Doctrine du Logos. En sa conclusion Hegel ayant expose la coeur de la philosophie de la reflexion dont les hautes figures sont Kant, Jacobi et Fichte, celebre le Vendredi Saint de l'esprit qui abolit le Dieu perdu de Pascal (Br. 441). Ainsi est annoncee la derniere page de La Phenomenologie de l'esprit ou dans le Golgotha de l'Esprit absolu, (...) comme Savoir absolu, depassant le savoir en devenir (Werdend Wissen) se dit la fin de l'histoire dont emerge le sens depuis le Calice auquel reve Schiller (La Phenomenologie de l'esprit, page derniere). (shrink)

On the History of Modern Philosophy is a key transitional text in the history of European philosophy. In it, F. W. J. Schelling surveys philosophy from Descartes to German Idealism and shows why the Idealist project is ultimately doomed to failure. The lectures trace the path of philosophy from Descartes through Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Fichte, Jacobi, to Hegel and Schelling's own work. The extensive critiques of Hegel prefigure many of the arguments to be found in Feuerbach, Kierkegaard, Marx, Nietzsche, Heidegger, (...) and Derrida. This is the first English translation of On the History of Modern Philosophy. In his introduction Andrew Bowie sets the work in the context of Schelling's career and clarifies its philosophical issues. The translation will be of special interest to philosophers, intellectual historians, literary theorists, and theologians. (shrink)

The period from Kant to Hegel is one of the most intense and rigorous in modern philosophy. The central problem at the heart of it was the development of a new standard of theoretical reflection and of the principle of rationality itself. The essays in this volume, published in 2000, consider both the development of Kant's system of transcendental idealism in the three Critiques, the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, and the Opus Postumum, as well as the reception and transformation (...) of that idealism in the work of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 39.2 (2003) 302-303 [Access article in PDF] Sedgwick, Sally, ed. The Reception of Kant's Critical Philosophy: Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Pp. x + 338. Cloth, $59.95. This collection consists almost entirely of papers from a 1995 conference at Dartmouth on "The Idea of a System of Transcendental Idealism in Kant, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel." Four categories of (...) papers address: (1) the relation between Kant's three Critiques and the Opus Postumum; (2) Fichte's reception of the Critical Philosophy; (3) Schelling's Naturphilosophie as a reaction to Kant and Fichte; and (4) Hegel's indebtedness to and famous departure from Kantianism.In "The Unity of Nature and Freedom: Kant's Conception of the System of Philosophy," Paul Guyer argues that, appearances aside, Kant's thought from the first Critique to the Opus Postumum forms a continuous and self-consistent project. Indeed, Guyer claims that Kant's conception of transcendental philosophy remained essentially unchanged throughout this period (this despite frequent—and often flattering—remarks in the Opus Postumum concerning Spinoza). In contrast, Jeffrey Edwards' "Spinozism, Freedom, and Transcendental Dynamics in Kant's Final System of Transcendental Idealism" points to a conceptual tension present in Kant's late attempt to find common ground between Spinoza and transcendental idealism. Edwards argues that Kant's notion in the Opus Postumum of a dynamical form of matter leads him to embrace a realist (quasi-Spinozistic) conception of space. Finally, in "Is the Critique of Judgment Post-Critical?" Henry Allison challenges the view (common from Hegel to Guyer) that a profound change in Kant's project occurs in the Critique of Judgment, viz., that something profoundly un-transcendental emerges with Kant's notions of the intuitive intellect and purposiveness of nature.Günter Zöller, in "From Critique to Metacritique: Fichte's Transformation of Kant's Transcendental Idealism," offers an interpretation of the development of notions of "system" and "transcendental idealism" from Kant to Fichte. This is an indispensable paper for anyone concerned with the fine points of this development and, [End Page 302] indeed, Zöller's treatment is throughout a model of clarity. In "The Spirit of the Wissenschaftslehre," Daniel Breazeale offers an outstanding survey of the defining features of Fichte's early Jena Wissenschaftslehre. The breadth and depth of Breazeale's paper is a signal achievement, one that puts before the reader's eyes the lay of the often convoluted and confusing land that is the Wissenschaftslehre. Furthermore, Breazeale's discussion of the subdivisions of the Wissenschaftslehre (i.e., the particular sciences grounded by the "science of science") is of particular benefit for understanding the totality of Fichte's conception of philosophy."The 'I' as Principle of Philosophy" by Allen Wood, and "The Practical Foundation of Philosophy in Kant, Fichte, and After" by Karl Ameriks offer differing evaluations of the kind of "primacy of the practical" that each author locates in Fichte. Ameriks rejects Wood's sympathetic reading of the fundamentally practical character of the Fichtean "I." What is at stake for the authors is the success or failure of Fichte's attempt to account for the unity of theoretical and practical reason. It is important to note however that, unlike Kant, Fichte does not subscribe to the "primacy of the practical" thesis; indeed, Fichte holds the two aspects of reason to be "equiprimordial." As such, some of Wood's and Ameriks' claims are either misleading or simply wrong. This point aside, a common criticism of Fichte is that he reduces the world to the bare posit of the "I," a view of which Robert Pippin's "Fichte's Alleged Subjective, Psychological, One-Sided Idealism" quickly disposes. Instead, Pippin presents a "normative non-psychologistic" interpretation of Fichtean idealism.Regarding Schelling's Kant-reception, Manfred Baum's "The Beginnings of Schelling's Philosophy of Nature" locates the origins of Schelling's Naturphilosophie in his youthful interpretation of Plato's Timaeus. Baum's analyses, which abound with rich historical and philological information, are complemented by Dieter Sturma's... (shrink)

The Italian translation of writings by W. von Humboldt recently edited by G. Moretto and F. Tessitore makes it possible to obtain a picture of Humboldt’s philosophy more complete than those which have been for a long time dominating. The results of Tessitore’s researches, which are summarized in his Introduction, underline the most fundamental aspects of Humboldt’s thought, i.e. the pivotal role played in it, as in Schiller’s, by an anthropology based on the ideas of force, energy and individuality; and (...) a vision of history, hostile to the apriorism and the teleological bent of the philosophy of history originating in Kant and carried on by Schelling, Fichte, Hegel, and centering on the notion of an individuality irreducible to any abstract and deterministic scheme, which inaugurates that historicistic conception of philosophy and life which has to be regarded as the other great current of thought born in the Goethezeit, alternative to the idealist one. (shrink)

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel was not only a great philosopher but a great historian of philosophy. He invented the idea of the philosophical tradition as a discussion among philosophers extending over centuries centering on a few main philosophical problems. The conceptual scheme, widely accepted in histories of philosophy, emerged in Hegel's lectures at the same time as German idealism itself. This new abridgment of a well-known edition makes the main insights of Hegel's famous Lectures on the History of Philosophy widely (...) available in an inexpensive edition. In this student-oriented text, Professor Tom Rockmore selects the most significant material in a one-volume abridgment. A short introduction explains the purpose and principles of the selections and assesses the continued importance of the work. This is followed by selections that include parts of the introduction to the discussion of Greek philosophy, as well as the sections on Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle; the introduction to modern philosophy; and then the sections on Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Kant, Fichte, Schelling, and the "Final Result.". (shrink)

On the History of Modern Philosophy is a key transitional text in the history of European philosophy. In it, F. W. J. Schelling surveys philosophy from Descartes to German Idealism and shows why the Idealist project is ultimately doomed to failure. The lectures trace the path of philosophy from Descartes through Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Fichte, Jacobi, to Hegel and Schelling's own work. The extensive critiques of Hegel prefigure many of the arguments to be found in Feuerbach, Kierkegaard, Marx, Nietzsche, Heidegger, (...) and Derrida. This is the first English translation of On the History of Modern Philosophy. In his introduction Andrew Bowie sets the work in the context of Schelling's career and clarifies its philosophical issues. The translation will be of special interest to philosophers, intellectual historians, literary theorists, and theologians. (shrink)

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)

This translation of The Science of Logic (also known as 'Greater Logic') includes the revised Book I (1832), Book II (1813) and Book III (1816). Recent research has given us a detailed picture of the process that led Hegel to his final conception of the System and of the place of the Logic within it. We now understand how and why Hegel distanced himself from Schelling, how radical this break with his early mentor was, and to what extent it entailed (...) a return (but with a difference) to Fichte and Kant. In the introduction to the volume, George Di Giovanni presents in synoptic form the results of recent scholarship on the subject, and, while recognizing the fault lines in Hegel's System that allow opposite interpretations, argues that the Logic marks the end of classical metaphysics. The translation is accompanied by a full apparatus of historical and explanatory notes. (shrink)

Se a contemporaneidade filosófica nasceu com a crítica de Kant à Metafísica, o presente volume apresenta um percurso privilegiado pela formação da filosofia contemporânea. Especialistas do Brasil, Portugal e Espanha expõem perspectivas originais sobre temas centrais desse percurso, oferecendo um olhar diferenciado sobre várias estações constitutivas do pensamento contemporâneo. A ideia seminal do transcendentalismo kantiano dá unidade a uma panorâmica através de diversos temas e autores, abordados de pontos de vista inovadores. São objecto de estudo nos diferentes capítulos da obra (...) a definição da Lógica Transcendental de Kant, o seu desenvolvimento e dialectização na filosofia clássica alemã, com Schiller, Hegel, Fichte e Schelling, a recuperação crítica do transcendentalismo em Simmel, bem como a sua influência e superação progressiva no desenvolvimento do pensamento fenomenológico, hermenêutico e existencial, abordado em estudos sobre Fink, Heidegger, Marcel, Merleau-Ponty e Ricouer. (shrink)

La historia del idealismo alemán se articula en torno a una serie de encuentros y desencuentros entre quienes pretenden completar una obra que habría quedado inacabada, y que conduciría a una suerte de constitución definitiva de la filosofía. La correspondencia intercambiada entre I. Kant, J. G. Fic..

This new translation of The Science of Logic (also known as 'Greater Logic') includes the revised Book I (1832), Book II (1813), and Book III (1816). Recent research has given us a detailed picture of the process that led Hegel to his final conception of the System and of the place of the Logic within it. We now understand how and why Hegel distanced himself from Schelling, how radical this break with his early mentor was, and to what extent it (...) entailed a return (but with a difference) to Fichte and Kant. In the introduction to the volume, George di Giovanni presents in synoptic form the results of recent scholarship on the subject, and, while recognizing the fault lines in Hegel's System that allow opposite interpretations, argues that the Logic marks the end of classical metaphysics. The translation is accompanied by a full apparatus of historical and explanatory notes. (shrink)

English summary: Philosophy of history is a comparatively young discipline. Beginning with the Enlightenment the historical is viewed as a philosophic topic. Through German Idealism it is emphatically placed at the centre of attention. The idealistic perspective on history was important for further development. The author presents the integral components of Kant's, Fichte's, Schelling's and Hegel's philosophy of history. He explains Kant's regulative idea on advancement, Fichte's model of the development of reason in five main eras, Schelling's three steps in (...) the absolute, speculative and revelation and Hegel's historical conception of a comprehensive Weltgeist. The most important opposing positions to an idealistic philosophy of history are described in the final chapter - reaching from new Kantianism, hermeneutics and science theory to the recent narratological approaches. German description: Geschichtsphilosophie, d. h. die bewusste Reflexion des Historischen als eines besonderen Gegenstands fur das menschliche Erkennen und Handeln, ist eine vergleichsweise junge Disziplin. Erst mit der Aufklarung wird Geschichte ernsthaft als eigenstandiges Thema wahrgenommen, und erst im deutschen Idealismus ruckt sie nachdrucklich ins Zentrum des philosophischen Interesses. Dabei ist die idealistische Sicht auf das Historische fur die weitere Entwicklung der Geschichtsphilosophie uberaus pragend gewesen - sei es indem ihre spekulativen Fortschrittsszenarien ubernommen und fur ahnlich umfassende Geschichtsbilder zugrunde gelegt wurden, sei es indem abweichende Geschichtsauffassungen in ihr das wesentliche Gegenkonzept fanden. Das Buch stellt die Hauptaspekte der Geschichtsphilosophie bei Kant, Fichte, Schelling und Hegel dar. Dabei wird besonderes Augenmerk darauf gelegt, wie diese Geschichtsentwurfe in die jeweilige philosophische Gesamtarchitektur der vier Autoren eingebettet sind. Zudem werden die wichtigsten Gegenpositionen zur idealistischen Geschichtssicht skizziert - von der Historikerschule und dem Neukantianismus uber die Hermeneutik und die Wissenschaftstheorie bis hin zu den narratologischen Ansatzen der jungeren Zeit. (shrink)

Der Begriff »Klassische Deutsche Philosophie« setzt sich zusehends gegenüber der alten Bestimmung »Deutscher Idealismus« durch. Dies geschieht vollkommen zu Recht, denn letztere führt in die Irre. Tatsächlich verfolgen Fichte, Schelling und Hegel zusammen mit Kant das Anliegen, Idealismus und Realismus als einseitige Positionen zu überwinden. Ausgehend von diesem gemeinsamen Vorhaben entspinnt sich zwischen ihnen eine Kontroverse, die in unterschiedlichen Lösungskonzepten mündet. Die vorliegende Arbeit stellt die unterschiedlichen Ansätze zur Vermittlung von Idealismus und Realismus, die in der Forschung bisher eher vage (...) präsent sind, erstmals systematisch anhand ihrer historischen Entwicklung dar. Ein Anhang zur Analytischen Philosophie belegt die Relevanz der Fragestellung auch für die Philosophie der Gegenwart. (shrink)

Lectures from the late period of Fichte’s career, never before available in English. Translated here for the first time into English, this text furnishes a new window into the final phase of Fichte’s career. Delivered in the summer of 1812 at the newly founded University of Berlin, Fichte’s lectures on ethics explore some of the key concepts and issues in his evolving system of radical idealism. Addressing moral theory, the theory of education, the philosophy of history, and the philosophy of (...) religion, Fichte engages both directly and indirectly with some of his most important contemporaries and philosophical rivals, including Kant, Schelling, and Hegel. Benjamin D. Crowe’s translation includes extensive annotations and a German-English glossary. His introduction situates the text systematically, historically, and institutionally within an era of cultural ferment and intellectual experimentation, and includes a bibliography of recent scholarship on Fichte’s moral theory and on the final period of his career. (shrink)

The problem of knowledge in German Idealism has drawn increasing attention. This is the first attempt at a systematic critique that covers all four major figures, Kant, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. The book offers a fresh and challenging analysis.

A groundbreaking text for the account of the problem of evil in German idealism. Here is a brief review for the German audience.

The dissertation contrasts Kant's epistemological assertiveness with his ontological skepticism as a central issue in the development of the discourse in German Idealism. Fichte's phenomenological demarche essentially amplifies this problem but, at the same time, allows him to advance a path breaking critique of formal logic and to stress the importance of contradiction. Schelling, by restoring metaphysics, attempts to overcome Fichte's contrast between ontological dualism and epistemological monism. Finally, it is Hegel who directly addresses the need for a non-formal cognitive (...) logic. The author analyzes Hegel's deduction in the Phenomenology, invokes current genetic epistemology, and reads the Science of Logic as a genetic theory of systematic knowledge and as circular epistemology. Emphasizing the unity between the logical and the historical, the distinction between intellectual and rational explanation, and the cognitive importance of contradiction, the dissertation argues for the possibility a coming-to-be totality of reflective scientific reason. (shrink)

My presentation begins with Kant's philosophical project, which played a key role in understanding German Idealism, and then considers in detail the philosophical approaches developed by Schelling and Hegel.

Mock interviews with Kant, Hegel, Fichte, Schelling, Reinhold, Jacobi, Schlegel, and a letter from Schopenhauer.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS 485 consent to suffer or die? Consent, contractual obligations, and free acts of commitment certainly have a place in a complete ethical theory. But do they have the only place? If Wolff has consigned certain of Kant's central theses to the deep, he also has managed to salvage and restore others. In The Right and the Good, for instance, Ross argues that it is logically absurd to (...) suppose that we ought to act from a sense of duty. But Wolff argues convincinglythat "what Kant actually says is that our acts have moral worth only insofar as they are done from a certain motive (namely, respect for the law). Their rightness is quite independent of their motive. We have, according to Kant, an obligation to do what is right. We do not have an obligation to perform morally meritorious acts" (p. 81). Wolff also manages to shed light on Kant's analysis of rational agency and the nature of will. He enables us to see more clearly than Kant himself does that "will" does not name a faculty but rather has a home in such phrases as "to have a will" which, in turn, "simply means to be capable of being moved by reason rather than by natural causes.... To be free is simply to be moved by reason" (p. 216). Despite its flaws as a commentary, The Autonomy of Reason contributes significantly to our understanding of Kant and the problems he addresses. Wolff's critique is especially valuable because it attempts to relate Kant's ethics to his metaphysics and epistemology in more than a superficial manner. If it does not always succeed, it never ceases to be provocative, imaginative, and well-argued. The Autonomy of Reason offers us a flesh opportunity not only to grapple with the central problems of Kantian ethics but to face the central issues of contemporary ethics as well. HANS OBERDIEK Swarthmore College Philosophic als System bei Fichte Schelling und Hegel. By Adolf Schurr. (Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Friedrich Frommann, 1974, Pp. 192. DM 58) Fichte and Schelling often seem to have existed merely to serve as a bridge between the genius of Kant and Hegel. Whether or not they deserve better can here be left unanswered, but in any case Schurr's study has supported this common conception. It begins with a "Kantian" Fichte, passes through a confused Schelling, and ends with a young and confident Hegel. The particular topic developed by Schurr is the attempts made by Fichte and Schelling to forge a unitary system from the brilliant yet fundamentally unresolved conceptions of the Kantian legacy. The study was initiallyprepared as Schurr's Habilitationschrift at Regensburg University, and it evidences all of the virtues and vices of these advanced forms of doctoral dissertations: it is orderly and firmly documented, virtues that when pressed pass into the vices of a deadening style and an uninspired recital of textual references. Perhaps the best single term encompassing these virtues and vices is "conscientiousness." The study should arouse neither speculative enthusiasm nor scholarly disdain, being principally a direct and uncomplicated exposition of some central principles found in the philosophy of Fichte, the thought of young Schelling, and a single text of Hegel. It covers the brief historical period from Fichte's review of Schulze's Aenesidemus in 1794 to the appearance of Hegel's 1801 study Differenz des Fichteschen und Sehellingsehen Systems der Philosophic. The work, then, is naturally divided into three chapters of uneven length. Were the reader to rely upon pagination alone to determine importance, Fichte leads by far, and Hegel is the least, being granted only nineteen pages. Insofar as each philosopher is confined to his chapter, the length allowed seems more than usually significant. In this regard, as the final chapter on Hegel can hardly be said to touch directly upon Hegel's own conception of a system, the title of Schurr's work could be misleading to anyone more closely interested in Hegel. 486 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY The work lacks both a general introduction and a conclusion, not only as separate sections but in any form whatsoever. Certainly the reader is prepared, for whatever unspoken necessity, to surrender such amenities... (shrink)

A literary and philosophical examination of art's relation to the absolute as it is explicitly addressed in the works of Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche.

In dem vorliegenden Buch wird auf den Anfang einer Ethik des Selbstbewußtseins im zentralen Gedankengang der idealistischen Philosophie aufmerksam zu machen gesucht: für die Kantische Philosophie mit Hilfe systematischer Überlegungen und bei Fichte, Schelling und Hegel anhand ausgewählter Texte. In dieser Ethik ist das Desiderat einer Wahrung der Eigenheit des Anderen erfüllt, indem sie als integraler Bestandteil einer Strukturexplikation des Selbstbewußtseins in der Aufklärung der Verständlichkeit der Welt für uns mit ethischen Konzepten entwickelt wird.Das Bewußtsein von sich selbst enthält eine (...) Unbestimmtheit in sich, die allein durch die ethische Beziehung zum Anderen so strukturiert zu denken ist, daß das Selbstbewußtsein weder seine interne Differenz verliert, noch in eine Beziehung extern bestimmter Relata transformiert wird. Das Ethische und das Sollen werden damit nicht als Phänomene in der Welt aufgenommen, sondern aus jener Bestimmungslosigkeit des Selbstbewußtseins entwickelt, aus der verständliche Bestimmtheiten der Welt auszuarbeiten sich die idealistische Philosophie zur genuinen Aufgabe gemacht hatte.Indem die idealistische Subjektphilosophie die Untrennbarkeit ihres tragenden Gedankens eines bewußten Selbstverhältnisses von seiner Explikation in ethischen Konzepten denkt, nimmt die Subjektivität auf der Grundlage des Selbstbewußtseins eo ipso den Status ethischer Verpflichtetheit an. In dieser ethischen Beziehung wird der Andere in einer Bestimmtheit anerkannt, die er sich nur selbst geben kann, so daß sie seine Selbstexplikation bleibt. Das Eigene des Anderen kommt deshalb im Innersten des als Selbstbewußtsein gedachten Subjekts in Gestalt der ethischen Verantwortlichkeit vor der und für die Freiheit des Anderen zur Geltung.Die idealistische Subjektphilosophie denkt das absolut Andere also bereits an ihrem Anfang in der keiner exogenen Bestimmtheit zugänglichen Selbstbestimmtheit des Selbstbewußtseins. Ein Bewußtsein des Anderen läßt sich demnach direkt im Zentrum der Philosophie des Selbstbewußtseins entdecken: als Ethik, die allein die Struktur des Selbstbewußtseins in seiner Identität und Differenz verständlich machen kann. (shrink)

On représente traditionnellement l'idéalisme allemand comme le déploiement en ligne droite d'une pensée. L'apriorisme de la Critique, repensé par Fichte, élargi sur les univers de la nature et de l'art par le jeune Schelling, trouve son accomplissement dans l'Encyclopédie de Hegel. Selon une autre vision, minoritaire, la conclusion de l'idéalisme allemand est à chercher dans la remise en question de l'ontologique hégélienne par le second Schelling. Cette opposition peut et doit être dépassée. L'œuvre de Kant qui est à l'origine de (...) cette spéculation contient les ressorts et légitime les développements des deux voies. De la première qui, à travers l'instauration fichtéenne d'une métaphysique de la subjectivité aboutit à la souveraineté de la raison hégélienne, savoir du particulier, du concret, philosophie de l'histoire. De la seconde qui, pensant l'existence, la finitude, le mal redécouvre la transcendance et comprend la nécessaire fondation de la Raison par son autre. Le premier tome de cette réinterprétation intégrale de l'idéalisme allemand traitait surtout de Kant et de l'essentiel de la Doctrine de la Science fichtéenne. Le second tome est consacré à Hegel et, après un excursus sur Boehme et l'étude du second Fichte, à Schelling. Le système hégélien est déployé comme une logique des contenus, aboutissant d'abord à la philosophie de l'histoire, ensuite au Savoir Absolu. Quant aux philosophies intermédiaires et tardives de Schelling, elles naissent avec la doctrine du Fondement pour s'accomplir dans le Savoir Positif. Celui-ci pense la Mythologie et la Révélation, déduit l'Essence de l'Existence, retrouve Dieu à partir de la Factualité Primordiale. Complétant son parcours dans l'Encyclopédie hégélienne et les philosophies négative et positive de Schelling, l'idéalisme allemand apparaît comme l'une des plus hautes expressions de la métaphysique occidentale. (shrink)

Die Untersuchung des unbedingten Grundsatzes der Erkenntnis ist - in Verbindung mit den Begriffen des Bewusstseins, der Anschauung und des Unendlichen - der Kern des Deutschen Idealismus von Fichte, Schelling und Hegel. Nach Fichte muss man das absolut erste und unbedingte Prinzip des gesamten menschlichen Wissens aufsuchen, damit die Philosophie tatsachlich Wissenschaft der Wissenschaft oder Wissenschaftslehre sein kann. Daher rekonstruiert der Autor zunachst Fichtes kritisch gegen Kant gerichtete Radikalisierung des Konzepts der Subjektivitat und die Uberschreitung der Grenze zur intellektuellen Anschauung. (...) Im zweiten Teil werden dann neue Perspektiven in der Analyse von Schellings Idealismus vorgeschlagen: Vor dem Hintergrund einer Analyse der intellektuellen, der asthetischen und der produktiven Anschauung bei Schelling wird das Verhaltnis zwischen Naturphilosophie und Transzendentalphilosophie behandelt. Im dritten Teil des Buches werden Hegels Kritik an Fichte und Schelling sowie an Kant (in der Enzyklopadie) und schliesslich die Bedeutung der Begriffe des Selbstbewusstseins und des Unendlichen vom transzendentalen Idealismus bis hin zu Hegels absolutem Idealismus untersucht. Der Kulminationspunkt ist dabei die alle Bereiche der theoretischen Philosophie durchziehende Wechselbeziehung zwischen dem Endlichen und dem Unendlichen. (shrink)

Hegel’s treatment of ‘Moralität’ in both the Phenomenology of Spirit and the Philosophy of Right provides important clues as to how he conceives the recognitive dynamics of modern moral life. As ‘spirit that is certain of itself’, morality as comprehended in the Phenomenology is the final form of spirit [Geist], which, in Hegel’s exposition, follows ‘reason’ which itself had followed ‘consciousness’ and ‘self-consciousness’. Spirit had first been considered in its objective form as an ‘in itself’. This was the ‘true spirit’ (...) of the ethical world of antiquity. As something ‘for itself’, spirit had then been considered in its self-alienated form as ‘culture’ which had culminated in an analysis of modern politics—specifically the political project of ‘absolute freedom’, the French Revolution, and the terroristic consequences that had been so acutely linked to the modern rationalist political project by Schiller. But, as many have pointed out, if Rousseau was the theorist of the modern political struggle for autonomy, Kant had an equally revolutionary conception of moral autonomy, which, like Rousseau, put the idea of a self-legislating will at the centre of thought. Such an internalization of the self-legislating will, however, now reveals the proper object for judgment in terms of the evaluative polarity of good and bad—the will itself. This evaluation becomes the task of conscience. In this paper I examine Hegel’s treatment of the role of conscience in moral judgment in the light of his relationship to Fichte, and interpret it in terms of a broadly conceived pragmatics of reason-giving in moral life implicit in his concept of intersubjective recognition [Anerkennung]. (shrink)

_In this essay, Hegel attempted to show how Fichte’s Science of Knowledge was an advance from the position of Kant in the Critique of Pure Reason, and how Schelling had made a further advance from the position of Fichte._.

_In this essay, Hegel attempted to show how Fichte’s Science of Knowledge was an advance from the position of Kant in the Critique of Pure Reason, and how Schelling had made a further advance from the position of Fichte._.

The young Hegel was entranced by the notion of intellectual intuition, and this notion continues to entrance many of Hegel’ commentators. I argue that Kant provided three distinct conceptions of an intuitive intellect, that none of these involve aconceptual intuitionism, and that they differ markedly from Fichte’s and Schelling’s conceptions of intellectual intuition. I further argue that by 1804 Hegel recognized that appealing to an aconceptual model, or to Schelling’s model, or to his own early model of intellectual intuition generates (...) inevitable and insoluble problems of question-begging. By incorporating several important points from Kant’s Transcendental Ideal into his reinterpretation of Kant’s Transcendental Deduction and Refutation of Idealism, Hegel’s mature discursive and conceptual account of ‘absolute knowing’ performs some of the functions Kant assigned to the intuitive intellect, though without invoking any such intuitive intellect. I discuss several of these functions. (shrink)

This book offers an important reappraisal of Schelling's philosophy and his relationship to German Idealism. Focusing on Schelling's self-critique in early identity philosophy the author rejects those criticisms of Schelling made by both Hegel and Heidegger. This work significantly redraws the boundaries of metaphysical thinking, arguing for a dialogue between rational philosophy, mythology and cosmology.

The present investigation brings into view the philosophy of nature of German Idealism, a philosophical movement which emerged around the beginning of the nineteenth century. German Idealism appro- priated certain motivations of the Kantian philosophy and developed them further in a "speculative" manner (Engelhardt 1972, 1976, 2002). This powerful philosophical movement, associated above all with the names of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel - and moreover having nothing whatsoever to do with the "subjective idealism" of George Berkeley - was replaced by (...) philosophical positions designated roughly as metaphysics of the will, Marxism, life-philosophy, phenomenology and existentialism, as well as positivism, empiricism, philosophy of science, the linguistic turn, and analytic philosophy. These philosophical positions more or less still shape us today. German Idealism amounts to a virtual intellectual-historical antithesis to these movements and thus presents itself in retrospect as a striking alternative. The basis of Idealism - in its various respective forms - is the ideal <Ideelle>, and thus the opposite of that which is real. It continually takes as its task explaining the real in terms of the ideal, and this is especially true of the Idealists' philosophy of nature.' Is this a hopeless undertaking? Does Idealism not lack an empirical basis? Can one secure any solid ground whatsoever in the ether of the ideal? In what follows, I explain how, more than anyone else, Schelling and Hegel sought to handle this problem and to cope with it. By way of anticipation, a clear preference for the Hegelian philosophy of nature will emerge in what follows, a preference which may come as some surprise considering how much controversy has surrounded the significance of that view. The project of renewing a thoroughgoing philosophy of nature can meaningfully begin here. (shrink)

1. Self-Love, Sociability, and Autonomy: Some Presuppositions of Kant’s Account of Practical Law -- Jeffrey Edwards // 2. The Virtuous Republic: Rousseau and Kant on the Relation between Civil and Moral Religion -- Günter Zöller // 3. Kant, Pistorius, and Accessing Reality -- Halla Kim // 4. Kant, Fichte, and Transcendental Idealism -- Tom Rockmore // 5. Fichte’s Project: The Jena Wissenschaftslehre -- Daniel Breazeale // 6. The Unity of Reason in Kant and Fichte -- Steven Hoeltzel // 7. Idealism (...) and Nihilism -- Benjamin D. Crowe // 8. Fichte and Semantic Holism -- Yukio Irie // 9. “In and Of Itself Nothing is Finite”: Schelling’s Nature (or So-called Identity) Philosophy -- Michael Vater // 10. Conceptual Schemes, Realism, and Idealism: A Hegelian Approach to Concepts and Reality -- Christian Tewes . (shrink)