SECTION XLIV.

TRANSITION TO HEGEL.

The great want of Schelling’s philosophizing, was its inability to

furnish a suitable form for the philosophic content. Schelling went

through the list of all methods, and at last abandoned all. But this

absence of method into which he ultimately sank, contradicted the very

principle of his philosophizing. If thought and being are identical, yet

form and content cannot be indifferent in respect to each other. On the

standpoint of absolute knowledge, there must be found for the absolute

content an absolute form, which shall be identical with the content.

This is the position assumed by _Hegel_. Hegel has fused the content of

Schelling’s philosophy by means of the _absolute method_. Hegel sprang

as truly from Fichte as from Schelling; the origin of his system is

found in both. His method is essentially that of Fichte, but his general

philosophical standpoint is Schelling’s. He has combined both Fichte and

Schelling.

Hegel has himself, in his “_Phenomenology_,” the first work in which he

appeared as a philosopher on his own hook, having previously been

considered as an adherent of Schelling—clearly expressed his difference

from Schelling, which he comprehensively affirms in the following three

hits (_Schlagworte_):—In Schelling’s philosophy, the absolute is, as it

were, shot out of a pistol; it is only the night in which every cow

looks black; when it is widened to a system, it is like the course of a

painter, who has on his palette but two colors, red and green, and who

would cover a surface with the former when a historical piece was

demanded, and with the latter when a landscape was required. The first

of these charges refers to the mode of attaining the idea of the

absolute, viz., immediately, through intellectual intuition; this leap

Hegel changes, in his _Phenomenology_, to a regular transit, proceeding

step by step. The second charge relates to the way in which the absolute

thus gained is conceived and expressed, viz., simply as the absence of

all finite distinctions, and not as the immanent positing of a system of

distinctions within itself. Hegel declares that every thing depends upon

apprehending and expressing the true not as substance (_i. e._ as

negation of determinateness), but as subject (as a positing and

producing of finite distinction). The third charge has to do with

Schelling’s manner of carrying out his principle through the concrete

content of the facts given in the natural and intellectual worlds, viz.,

by the application of a ready-made schema (the opposition of the ideal

and the real) to the objects, instead of suffering them to unfold and

separate themselves from themselves. The school of Schelling was

especially given to this schematizing formalism, and that which Hegel

remarks, in the introduction to his _Phenomenology_, may very well be

applied to it: “If the formalism of a philosophy of nature should happen

to teach that the understanding is electricity, or that the animate is

nitrogen, the inexperienced might look upon such instructions with deep

amazement, and perhaps revere them as displaying the marks of profound

genius. But the trick of such a wisdom is as readily learned as it is

easily practised; its repetition is as insufferable as the repetition of

a discovered feat of legerdemain. This method of affixing to every thing

heavenly and earthly, to all natural and intellectual forms, the two

determinations of the universal scheme, makes the universe like a

grocer’s shop, in which a row of closed jars stand with their labels

pasted on them.”

The point, therefore, of greatest difference between Schelling and Hegel

is their philosophical method, and this at the same time forms the bond

of close connection which unites Hegel with Fichte. Thesis, antithesis,

synthesis—this was the method by which Fichte had sought to deduce all

being from the Ego, and in precisely the same way Hegel deduces all

being—the intellectual and natural universe—from the thought, only with

this difference, that with him that which was idealistically deduced had

at the same time an objective reality. While the practical idealism of

Fichte stood related to the objective world as a producer, and the

ordinary empiricism as a beholder, yet with Hegel the speculative

(conceiving) reason is at the same time productive and beholding. I

produce (for myself) that which is (in itself) without my producing. The

result of philosophy, says Hegel, is the thought which is by itself, and

which comprehends in itself the universe, and changes it into an

intelligent world. To raise all being to being in the consciousness, to

knowledge, is the problem and the goal of philozophizing, and this goal

is reached when the mind has become able to beget the whole objective

world from itself.

In his first great work, the “_Phenomenology of the Mind_,” Hegel sought

to establish the standpoint of absolute knowledge or absolute idealism.

He furnishes in this work a history of the phenomenal consciousness

(whence its title), a development of the formative epochs of the

consciousness in its progress to philosophical knowledge. The inner

development of consciousness consists in this, viz., that the peculiar

condition in which it finds itself becomes objectified (or conscious),

and through this knowledge of its own being the consciousness rises ever

a new step to a higher condition. The “_Phenomenology_” seeks to show

how, and out of what necessity the consciousness advances from step to

step, from reality to being _per se_ (_vom Ansich zum Fürsich_), from

being to knowledge. The author begins with the immediate consciousness

as the lowest step. He entitled this section: “_The Sensuous Certainty,

or the This and the Mine_.” At this stage the question is asked the Ego:

what is _this_, or what is _here_? and it answers, _e. g._ the tree; and

to the question, what is _now_? it answers now is the night. But if we

turn ourselves around, _here_ is not a tree but a house; and if we write

down the second answer, and look at it again after a little time, we

find that _now_ is no longer night but mid-day. The _this_ becomes,

therefore, a not-this, _i. e._ a universal. And very naturally; for if I

say: this piece of paper, yet each and every paper is a this piece of

paper, and I have only said the universal. By such inner dialectics the

whole field of the immediate certainty of the sense in perception is

gone over. In this way—since every formative step (every form) of the

consciousness of the philosophizing subject is involved in

contradictions, and is carried by this immanent dialectics to a higher

form of consciousness—this process of development goes on till the

contradiction is destroyed, _i. e._ till all strangeness between subject

and object disappears, and the mind rises to a perfect self-knowledge

and self-certainty. To characterize briefly the different steps of this

process, we might say that the consciousness is first found as a

certainty of the sense, or as the _this_ and the _mine_; next as

perception, which apprehends the objective as a thing with its

properties; and then as understanding, _i. e._ apprehending the objects

as being reflected in itself, or distinguishing between power and

expression, being and manifestation, outer and inner. From this point

the consciousness, which has only recognized itself, its own pure being

in its objects and their determinations, and for which therefore every

other thing than itself has, as such, no significance, becomes the

self-like Ego, and rises to the truth and certainty of itself to

self-consciousness. The self-consciousness become universal, or as

reason, now traverses also a series of development-steps, until it

manifests itself as spirit, as the reason which, in accord with all

rationality, and satisfied with the rational world without, extends

itself over the natural and intellectual universe as _its_ kingdom, in

which it finds itself at home. Mind now passes through its stages of

unconstrained morality, culture and refinement, ethics and the ethical

view of the world to religion; and religion itself in its perfection, as

revealed religion becomes absolute knowledge. At this last stage being

and thought are no more separate, being is no longer an object for the

thought, but the thought itself is the object of the thought. Science is

nothing other than the true knowledge of the mind concerning itself. In

the conclusion of the “_Phenomenology_,” Hegel casts the following

retrospect on the course which he has laid down: “The goal which is to

be reached, viz., absolute knowledge, or the mind knowing itself as

mind, requires us to take notice of minds as they are in themselves, and

the organization of their kingdom. These elements are preserved, and

furnished to us either by history, where we look at the side of the

mind’s free existence as it accidentally appears, or by the science of

phenomenal knowledge, where we look at the side of the mind’s ideal

organization. These two sources taken together, as the ideal history,

give us the real history and the true being of the absolute spirit, the

actuality, truth, and certainty of his throne, without which he were

lifeless and alone; only ‘from the cup of this kingdom of minds does

there stream forth for him his infinity.’”

A History of Philosophy in Epitome · 第 44 / 45 章