Hegel, Relation of the History of Philosophy to the Rest of the Manifestations of the Spirit

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



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superseded categories have themselves an affirmati ve cha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



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





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,

Documents

Hegel, Relation of the History of Philosophy to the Rest of the Manifestations of the Spirit