In his famous clarification Kant claimed that philosophy of Fichte is „nothing more or less than mere logic". In contrast with this interpretation Fichte from the beginning agreed with Kant and Reinhold on the fact that philosophy and logic are different from each other moreover the classical principles of logic can not be the principles of philosophy as well. However according to Fichte Reinhold did not succeed in explaining the relationship between philosophy and logic sufficiently. Hence Fichte proceeding from the (...) detailed critique of Reinhold laid in Review of Aenesidemus gives a new concept for the principles of both logic and philosophy. Accordingly in Foundations of the Entire Science of Knowledge he building upon this idea chooses such principle of the logic that possesses material validity and special content to be the absolutely primordial axiom of the science of knowledge. As we have seen the differences from the logic conception of Kant and Reinhold we can conceive better the meaning of the sentence from Fichte: “Everything to which the proposition ‘A = A’ is applicable, has reality, insofar as that proposition is applicable to it.” – This is one of the sentences dragged away from the context could provoked Kant’s ire reasonably.In seiner berühmten Erklärung äußerte Kant, die Wissenschaftslehre sei „nichts mehr oder weniger als bloße Logik“. Dieser Meinung widerspricht Fichtes Selbstinterpretation, weil er von Anfang an mit Kant und Reinhold darin einig war, dass sich Philosophie und Logik voneinander unterscheiden, und die klassischen Prinzipien der Logik nicht als Grundsätze der Philosophie gelten können. Nach seiner Auffassung gelingt es allerdings Reinhold nicht, das Verhältnis von Logik und Philosophie befriedigend zu klären. Ausgehend von einer gründlichen Kritik an Reinhold in der Rezension des Aenesidemus führt Fichte eine neue Konzeption vom Verhältnis der Grundsätze der Logik und der Philosophie ein. In der Grundlage der gesamten Wissenschaftslehre wählt er einen mit realer Gültigkeit und besonderem Inhalt ausgestatteten Grundsatz der Logik zum absolut ersten Grundsatz der Wissenschaftslehre. Betrachtet man die Veränderungen der Kantschen und Reinholdschen Logikauffassung, wird es verständlicher, wenn Fichte schreibt: „Alles, worauf der Satz A = A anwendbar ist, hat, inwiefern derselbe darauf anwendbar ist, Realität“–einer von vielen Sätzen, die aus dem Kontext herausgenommen mit Fug und Recht Kants Missfallen ausgelöst haben könnten. (shrink)

According to Fichte’s early science of knowledge, man is a free and independent being who becomes somebody not through the power of nature, by developing his innate skills and abilities, or through external influence, but by his own power. Since the essence of human beings is I-hood, the individual, having defeated the not-I or nature living in him, has to strive towards the absolute I, which is nothing else but the being created by himself. This process is Bildung, the details (...) of which are elaborated in Fichte’s philosophy of education, whereby he opposes his point of view to Rousseau. Although Fichte emphasizes the activity of the student, he sees the assistance of an educator as indispensable. The role of the educator can be apprehended from the foundations of the science of knowledge. Thus, in order to be able to posit ourselves as free beings we require another being who summons us. ‘The summons to engage in free self-activity is what we call upbringing.’. (shrink)