III.

He rose to take his leave, and having been informed that I meditated

a trip to London, he asked me if I would make it with him. Fearing

to intrude, I declined, and received an invitation to visit him in

England. I had at that time just read Mill's masterly work on the

philosophy of William Hamilton, was very full of it, and my mind

was burdened with a thousand philosophic questions aroused by it. I

was, therefore, greatly rejoiced that so rare an opportunity offered

itself to discuss my doubts with the author himself, and a week

later I rang the bell at the garden gate in front of Mill's country

seat in Blackheath Park, near London, that little wicket gate before

which I have never stood without a feeling of joyous expectation, and

which I have never closed behind me without a sense of having been

intellectually enriched.

My university education in Copenhagen had been an abstract metaphysical

one; the professors of philosophy of the institution were men who,

although mutually opposed to one another and supposed to be advocates

of diametrically opposite standpoints, in all essentials bore the

impress of the same school. They had begun their career as theologians,

and had later become Hegelians, some influenced by the left flank of

the Hegel school, others by the right. They had finally, together

with all the rest of the world at that time, become "emancipated

from Hegel," which, however, must be so interpreted as to admit of

Hegel's still remaining first and last in their mental sphere. The

methods of Hegel, employed now more naïvely, now in a more sophistic

way, were preached from a _cathedra_, devoted to the worship of the

absolute, the subjective-objective; his works were cited, his few

witticisms repeated, and a wearisome, never-ending controversy against

his supposed errors was carried on, from which we students gathered

that they were almost all founded on his undervaluation of the real,

especially in his faulty discernment of the natural sciences. We were

taught, however, to consider his errors more precious than the truths

of other thinkers, since truth could only be attained, as was shown by

the example of our worthy professors, by creeping through the loop-hole

of some error of Hegel. The University of Copenhagen, notwithstanding

its otherwise by no means too friendly sentiments towards Germany,

held it as an incontestable fact that modern philosophy was a German,

as ancient philosophy had been a Grecian science. The existence of

English empiricism and of French positivism was not recognized at the

university; of English philosophy, in especial, we only heard as of

a system that had long since been overthrown, and whose death-blow

had been dealt to it by Kant. It had only been possible for me, by a

vigorous effort of the will, to tear myself free, as best I could, from

the bonds of the school prevailing in Denmark, and at the period when

I met Stuart Mill I was still wavering between the speculative and the

positive tendency. I made no secret to Mill of my state of uncertainty.

"So, then, you are very familiar with Hegel," said he. "Do you

understand German?"

"To be sure I do; I read it almost as readily as I do my

mother-tongue."

"I do not understand the German language," he said, in reply, "and

have never read a line of German literature in the original. In fact,

I know so little German that when I have been in Germany, I have had

difficulty in finding my way at railroad stations and elsewhere."

"Have you made the acquaintance of the German philosophers through

translations?"

"Kant I have read in a translation, of Hegel not a syllable either in

a translation or in the original. I know him only through reviews and

refutations, best of all through a concise presentation of his views by

the only Hegelian in England,--Stirling."

"And what impressions have you received of Hegel?"

"That the writings in which Hegel has attempted to apply his principles

may perhaps contain some good things, but that everything purely

metaphysical in what he has written is sheer nonsense!"

I was startled, and suggested that I supposed this remark was to be

taken _cum grano salis_.

"No; every word is meant to be understood literally," replied he. Then

he dwelt on the outlines of the system, on the first preliminaries, the

theory of _being_ that is identified with _nothing_, and exclaimed,

"What would you expect from a whole that begins with such sophistry?

Have you really read Hegel?"

"Certainly; I have read most of his writings."

Eminent Authors of the Nineteenth Century: Literary Portraits · 第 33 / 91 题