View
216
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
8/10/2019 Hegel, Relation of the History of Philosophy to the Rest of the Manifestations of the Spirit
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/hegel-relation-of-the-history-of-philosophy-to-the-rest-of-the-manifestations 1/5
Introduction
to
the
Lectures on
the
History of
Philosophy
G W F H EGEL
TRANSLATED Y
T M KNOX
AND
A V MILLER
CLARENDON PR SS · OXFORD
1985
8/10/2019 Hegel, Relation of the History of Philosophy to the Rest of the Manifestations of the Spirit
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/hegel-relation-of-the-history-of-philosophy-to-the-rest-of-the-manifestations 2/5
1 8 b ltrodu tioll to
th
e
Le
ctures
11
the is
to ry
oj Philosophy
order in which they
emerge
is settled by nece ssity Th is w ill be
and in
more de tail
in th
e exposition
of the
hI story of ph
l
osophy. Each
fa
ctor in the whole comprises the
t?taltty of .
th
e [dea in a one-sided form; because
of
its one-
t itse
lf
aJ?d refuting its ow n finality,
unlles with what
t
lacke
d,
I.e. lis opposite
num
ber and so
becomes deep
er and
richer.
Th
is is the dia lectic specific
categorIes. But tlu s
mov
ement
do
cs not end in nothing; the
superseded categories have themselves an affirmati ve cha
ra
cter
It is in this sense that we have to tr
ea
t the his tory of philosophy:
. T
hu
s the. hlst
?ry of
pllllosop
hY
.ls itse
lf
science. Philosophy
III
Its non-historIca l development
IS
the same as
th
e history
of
phIlosophy In a phIlosophy we have to begin with the simplest
and proceed to more concrete ones.
The
same is
the case. wIth philo
sophy s
history. In both we have a necessary
pI
ogress and thIS IS the
same
m both. What IS interesting in
the hIstory of phIlosophy
S
therefore self
-determinin
g
thought
a stnctly
sC
ient
Ifi
c progress.
The
history
of
is a
mirr
or of philosophy, except
that 11 S phIlosophy s c
ompl
ete devel
opment
in time, in the
r
ea
lm of and ex ternality. This develo
pm
ent is
grounded mdee
d m the logI
ca
l. Id
ea
and its devel
opment,
ye
t
we cannot conduct the exposItion
of
our subject in
it
s logical
strIc
tn
ess throughout. But we must at least hint at that
Th e second point in the Introduction is the relation
of
sophy to
th
rest of the manifestations of the spirit and the
hIstory of pllliosophy to the history of other subjects .
[147] D. Relation of the History of Philosophy
to the rest
of
the
Manifestations of
the Spirit
.
We
know that the history
of
philosophy is not on its own
but has a conn
ec
tion with history genera
ll
y,
with the history
of
af
fa
ir
s as we
ll
as
of religion ,
el C., and
it
is natural for us
to
reca
ll
th
e chief features of political history,
th
e character
of th
e
age,
and the whole situation
of
a people wherein a philosophy
ha
s
a
ri
sen . But, this apart , thi s connect ion is inner , essential ,
necessary, not me rel y
extern
al or sim
uhan
eous. (Simultaneity
is no relation .)
Therefore
there are two things to no tice: (i) the stric tly
histori
ca
l aspect
of
this conn ection and (ii) the co
nn
ection
of
the subject,
i.e.
the
co
nnection
of
phil
osop
hy
it
s
elf
with religion
and
th
e o
th
er inte
ll
ectual activit ies
re
lated to
it
.
Thes
e t
wo
things
arc
to be considered
mor
e fully in o
rder
to distinguish more
precisely the
conception,
the spec
ifi
c character,
of
philosophy.
1 .
The
Historical
Position of Philo
so
ph y
The first point which mu
st
be noticed is
lhe
general relation
of
the ph
il
osophy
of
a g iv en period to the rest of the character istics
of that p
er
i
od.
(0 )
t
is usua lly said that politi
ca
l
matters
, religion,
myth-
ology, etc., are to be noticed in the history of philosophy
b
eca
use they ha
ve had
a great influence
[1481
on the philosophy
of
the time and vice versa. But if you are sa
ti
sfied with cate
go
r-
ies like great influen
ce ,
effect on one
another ,
et
c.,
all you
h
ave to do is to point
to
an external connection , i.e. you start
by
regarding
both as
on their own,
indepe
nd
ent
of one another.
But here we must cons id er this relation from a differe nt aspect
altogether:
th
e essential category is unity,
th
e inner connection
of a ll these different manifestatio ns. H ere we mu st keep hold of
th
e
fa
ct that
it
is
only one
spirit ,
one
principl
e,
which is stamped
o n the political si tuation and manifested in re
li
gi
on,
art, moral
and social life, trad e , and
indu
stry, so that a ll these different
forms are
but
branches of one
main trunk
. This is the chief
8/10/2019 Hegel, Relation of the History of Philosophy to the Rest of the Manifestations of the Spirit
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/hegel-relation-of-the-history-of-philosophy-to-the-rest-of-the-manifestations 3/5
110
Introduction /0 tilt: Lec/ufeJ on II {: rf Phi/OJo/J/ y
point or
view. The spirit is
o le
and
OIlC only;
there is
ol l
spirit
as
the substance or an era, a people, an
<lgc,
hut
il
is shaped
and
manifested
in variolls ways; and these different manif('sta
lions arc the which
have been
adduced. Thus we must
not
have the idea
that politics,
constitutions, religions, cle.,
are
the
root
or of philosophy, or that, conversely, philosophv
is
the basis
of them.
All
these have
one
single characte'r
which
lies at their root and rUlls through them all. However
manifold all these different things are, there is no contradiction
between them. Not one of them contains anything different in
kind from their basis,
no
matter how much they seem to
tradict
onC' another.
They
arC'
only shoots
from
the
sallle
roo{,
and
philosophy is one of {hern.
It
is r?resupposed here that all
this
stands in one necessary
connection
so that' only thix
philosophy,
this religion, can exist
along' with this political
constitution
this
state of the
sciences.
There is
only
one
spirit; its
development is
a
single
progress-
one
principle,
one
Idea, one character expressed in
the mosl
varied formations.
This
is
what we
call
the spirit
of
an age.
This too is nothing superficial f 49J or detennined from
side; knowledge
of
it must be drawn,
not from
petty externals,
but
from its
great formations in the world. Philosophy is one of
these and it is contemporary with a specific religion, political
constitution,
art, morals science,
etc
. . . .
[152]
Thus
the
historical shape
of a philosophy stands in a
necessary connection
with political
history.
Before
there can
be
a J).hilosophy at all, a people must have reached a
certain
stage
of mtellectual development. The necessities of life
must have
been
supplied [cf.
Aristotle: Me . 982 22 [K.]],
the
agony
of
deSire must have vanished; the purely
finite
intcrests of mcn
must
have
been worked off,
and
their
minds
must
have
advanced
so far as to
take
an interest in
universal
matters.
Philosophy
is
free activity
(hence
the
need for philosophy).
So it
can
be
regarded as a luxury because luxury is the satisfaction derived
from things that are
not
directly necessary,
and
from this
point
of view
philosophy
is of
course dispensable. But
all depends on
what
you call
necessary.
f1531
From
the
point of
view
of
the
thinking spirit, however, philosophy must be
regarded as
the
most necessary thing of all .
154] T'hus philosophy as such only enters at a specific epoch
J-listorical PO itiOll
ill a whole civilization. UL
it
occurs there
not as
philosophy
simply but as a specific philosophy; and
this
specific character
of conscious
thought
also cOllstitutes the basis of everything else
that
exists,
of' every
aspect
of the
history of
the time.
The Jaws
of peoples
their
mora' s,
their
social life, etc., arc most
Illately
associated \vith this specific character. It is essential here
to
keep hold
of
the
fact
that
when
the spirit has reached
a
specific
stage, it
builds
this
principle into
the
entire
wealth of'its
world,
works
it
out into
the of
its existence,
so
that
all the other specific characters of that world are dependent
on this fundamental one. 'T'hc philosophy of our
time,
or any
philosophy necessary within Christendom,
coul.d no. exist in
heathen Rome because all aspects,
branches,
SltuatlOns, and
relations of a whole civilization arc expressions of one and the
same specific character which philosophy enunciates in terms
of
pure thought. Therefore it cannot
be
said
that
political
history
is
tht' cause of philosophy,
since
a branch
is
nO{ the
cause of a whole tree; the branch
and
the tfunk have a common
root,
and
the root
common
to
philosophy
and
politics,
etc.,
is
the spirit of the
age,
i.c. the specific
stage
in the devclopmc.nt
[15:)] of the
spirit at
a time which has its
proximate
(liS
ground) in the
preceding
stage
but,
in general terms, on.e
form of the Idea.
To
dernonstrate this unity, to expound thiS
whole
growth
,
to comprehend it as proceeding from one
root,
the task of the philosophy of world-history, which must be left
aside here. We
are
only concerned with
one
branch, with
the
pure
thought
of these aspects
,
situations, etc., with the
sophical consciousness of each era. But we had at least to pOint
out the
connection between the principle of philosophy
and the
principle of
the
rest of history.
[149] {3) Thus philosophy is one a'im of the entire j()J"J11<Hion
or
manifestation
of' the spirit it is the consciousness of the
spirit and spirit 's supreme flowering, since its
endeavour
is to
know what
spirit
is. In general
terms, the
dignity of
man is
to
know what he is and to know
this
in the purest way, i.e. to
rise
to the thought of what he is. From this the position of philosophy
among the other f()rms
of
the spirit
can
be
inferred.
(aO:')
Philosophy
is
identical with the
spirit
of the age in
which
it
appears;
it
does not
rise
above its time but is only a
consciollsness of the substance of its time or the
thoughtful
8/10/2019 Hegel, Relation of the History of Philosophy to the Rest of the Manifestations of the Spirit
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/hegel-relation-of-the-history-of-philosophy-to-the-rest-of-the-manifestations 4/5
8/10/2019 Hegel, Relation of the History of Philosophy to the Rest of the Manifestations of the Spirit
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/hegel-relation-of-the-history-of-philosophy-to-the-rest-of-the-manifestations 5/5
114·
Inlmdudl'on
to
tilt
I_ertures OJ the
HistOl)
( l
Phi/osop/ y
and
they began
to think when
everything
in the
world
outside
was s,t(}rrny and vvretched, i.e. at the
time of
tile Peloponnesian
war, 1 \vas when the philosophers [152] withdre\v into their
:,>'orld of thought. They became, what the masses
called
them
l(.ijers, 1 An,d sc> in all-nost all peoples, philosophy
only
when
publIc Ide
no longer
gives satisfaction
and
ceases to
engross
the
interest, when
the citizen
can
no
longer
take any part n
government.
'.rhis
is
an,essc ltial. point
which
will be proved in
the history
of
phil,osoph,Y ItscH, With the duwnbll
of
the states in Ionia, the
IOllian phIlosophy arose, Thespirit v\'as no longer satisfied by fhe
Simil.arly in Rome, philosophy only began
with
the
fall of
the
Rcp.ublJc when
demagogues
took
over
the govcrn-
?1Cl1t and c,vcrythlllg
was caught up
in
dissolut
ion and a
struggle
fnr new, And only with the
of
the
Empire great, n:agnific,cllt, but inwardly already
dead-chd the
older (J"reek
philosopllles
experience their lofty
and supreme
development through
the
Neo-Platonists
or Alex-
andrians
, , .
P?3]
: .the rnisi'ortuncs of
the
Ernpire political, moral, and
had w,eakened, ,and [154] this
we
encounter again
1I1
.the 1,Hh and 16th centUries when
the
Germanic life of the
Middle
WOl:
form,
when
the spirit
of
the peoples
longe,r Its where it had been found prev-
lOusly. I:..arher
on
.
pohtlcs was
still in unity
with religion,
and
the Church
domll1ated
even
when the
state
fought
it. Now,
the breach between the
state--civil, rnoral,
political
lde-,and Church and at this
date
people began
to even
If
at
hrst
only in
the
form of learning and
revlvdY1l1?,
philosophies. Not
till
later
did philosophy
have the form of ll1depcndent
thinking.
,
[155J 2. More
detailed Consideration
of
the
Relation
between Philosophy
and the other Formations
or Manii 5tatiolls of the Spirit
The.
second point
the
closer and
more
specific cnn-
nectlOn between phIlosophy and
the
other
fonnations
of
the
spirit. We are
met
by
sciences,
art, mythology,
politics,
etc., and
II Possihly Hegel s l l amial ion
of
iCl1wTtYj, [K.J
and olher Formatiolls ( the Spitit
5
their gelleral connection vvith philusophy has been (- xpourlckd
already. I now intcnd to co'nsidcr
the
difference
betweell
philo-
sophy and these formations, because I want to ddlne
the
con
cepi
or philosophy, to crnpha.sizc
those
of its features which
arc
important
I or us, and
to apply thern to our
subject,
the history
of
philosophy, so
that
we can cut
off
and exclude
what
is irrel-
evant to it. It
is easy
to
say
that in
the history
of philosophy
we
have only to consider philosophy s
own progress and
leave
aside
everything
else, religion, etc" included,
This
is right enough in
general. But I ask: What is philosophy? [156] Lots
of
things
are put to its account
which
we must exclude.
If
I kept to
the
name alone, 1 would have 10
introduce
lots or things
which
have nothing to do with the real
nature or concept of
philo
sophy, By the sarne tokcn, it could bc said in general terms that
we have to leave
religion on
one
side;
but, in history,
religion
and philos,ophy have
often been
partners or foes, in
both
Greek
and
Roman times,
and
their opposition is a
very important
feature in the history of philosophy,
It
is
just
a pretence for
philosophy
to
disregard
religion.
In
history they
have never
left.
one another untouched, and
we
must not leave
them
like
that
either.
n this connection
the
first thing
we
want
to consider is the sci-
ences or scientific culture generally,
the
second is
religion
and
especially the closer
relation
between
philosophy and
religion.
Consideration
of
this
relation
must be
open, direct, and
honest;
I
must
not give the impression of wanting
to
leave religion un -
touched, that I wish to conceal the fact that philosophy has
been opposed to
religion.
Religion-i.e. the theologians-
pretends to ignore philosophy,
but
only so that they
can
avoid
being embarrassed
in their capricious ratiocinations.
I he
other
thing to be considered here is
the
separation frmn
philosophy of some features related to
the history
of
philo-
sophy, i.e. we must
establish
the differences between philo-
sophy and those branches [of study] which arc related to
it and
which therefore may be mistaken for it. It is this relationship
above all which may readily lead to perplexity in the handling
of the
history
of philosophy, because this relationship
is
very
close.
Thus
the greatest care
must
be taken to settle [157] what
philosophy is.
We
could concern ourselves with possessors
of
culture, and more particularly with scientifIc culture generally,
Recommended