LETTER III.

Man is not better treated by nature in his first start than her other

works are; so long as he is unable to act for himself as an independent

intelligence she acts for him. But the very fact that constitutes him a

man is that he does not remain stationary, where nature has placed him,

that he can pass with his reason, retracing the steps nature had made him

anticipate, that he can convert the work of necessity into one of free

solution, and elevate physical necessity into a moral law.

When man is raised from his slumber in the senses he feels that he is a

man; he surveys his surroundings and finds that he is in a state. He was

introduced into this state by the power of circumstances, before he could

freely select his own position. But as a moral being he cannot possibly

rest satisfied with a political condition forced upon him by necessity,

and only calculated for that condition; and it would be unfortunate if

this did satisfy him. In many cases man shakes off this blind law of

necessity, by his free spontaneous action, of which among many others we

have an instance, in his ennobling by beauty and suppressing by moral

influence the powerful impulse implanted in him by nature in the passion

of love. Thus, when arrived at maturity, he recovers his childhood by an

artificial process, he founds a state of nature in his ideas, not given

him by any experience, but established by the necessary laws and

conditions of his reason, and he attributes to this ideal condition an

object, an aim, of which he was not cognizant in the actual reality of

nature. He gives himself a choice of which he was not capable before,

and sets to work just as if he were beginning anew, and were exchanging

his original state of bondage for one of complete independence, doing

this with complete insight and of his free decision. He is justified in

regarding this work of political thraldom as non-existing, though a wild

and arbitrary caprice may have founded its work very artfully; though it

may strive to maintain it with great arrogance and encompass it with a

halo of veneration. For the work of blind powers possesses no authority

before which freedom need bow, and all must be made to adapt itself to

the highest end which reason has set up in his personality. It is in

this wise that a people in a state of manhood is justified in exchanging

a condition of thraldom for one of moral freedom.

Now the term natural condition can be applied to every political body

which owes its establishment originally to forces and not to laws, and

such a state contradicts the moral nature of man, because lawfulness can

alone have authority over this. At the same time this natural condition

is quite sufficient for the physical man, who only gives himself laws in

order to get rid of brute force. Moreover, the physical man is a

reality, and the moral man problematical. Therefore when the reason

suppresses the natural condition, as she must if she wishes to substitute

her own, she weighs the real physical man against the problematical moral

man, she weighs the existence of society against a possible, though

morally necessary, ideal of society. She takes from man something which

he really possesses, and without which he possesses nothing, and refers

him as a substitute to something that he ought to possess and might

possess; and if reason had relied too exclusively on him she might, in

order to secure him a state of humanity in which he is wanting and can

want without injury to his life, have robbed him even of the means of

animal existence, which is the first necessary condition of his being a

man. Before he had opportunity to hold firm to the law with his will,

reason would have withdrawn from his feet the ladder of nature.

The great point is, therefore, to reconcile these two considerations, to

prevent physical society from ceasing for a moment in time, while the

moral society is being formed in the idea; in other words, to prevent its

existence from being placed in jeopardy for the sake of the moral dignity

of man. When the mechanic has to mend a watch he lets the wheels run

out; but the living watchworks of the state have to be repaired while

they act, and a wheel has to be exchanged for another during its

revolutions. Accordingly props must be sought for to support society and

keep it going while it is made independent of the natural condition from

which it is sought to emancipate it.

This prop is not found in the natural character of man, who, being

selfish and violent, directs his energies rather to the destruction than

to the preservation of society. Nor is it found in his moral character,

which has to be formed, which can never be worked upon or calculated on

by the lawgiver, because it is free and never appears. It would seem,

therefore, that another measure must be adopted. It would seem that the

physical character of the arbitrary must be separated from moral freedom;

that it is incumbent to make the former harmonize with the laws and the

latter dependent on impressions; it would be expedient to remove the

former still farther from matter and to bring the latter somewhat more

near to it; in short, to produce a third character related to both the

others--the physical and the moral--paving the way to a transition from

the sway of mere force to that of law, without preventing the proper

development of the moral character, but serving rather as a pledge in the

sensuous sphere of a morality in the unseen.

Aesthetical Essays of Friedrich Schiller · 第 15 / 57 题