按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
within it。 Thus the Idea is the central point； which is also the periphery； the source of light； which in
all its expansion does not come without itself； but remains present and immanent within itself。 Thus
it is both the system of necessity and its own necessity； which also constitutes its freedom。
3。 RESULTS OBTAINED WITH RESPECT TO THE NOTION OF THE
HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY。
Thus we see that Philosophy is system in development； the history of Philosophy is the same； and
this is the main point to be noted and the first principle to be dealt with in this treatise on that
history。 In order to make this evident； the difference in respect to the possible modes of
manifestation must first be pointed out。 That is to say； the progression of the various stages in the
advance of Thought may occur with the consciousness of necessity； in which case each in
succession deduces itself； and this form and this determination can alone emerge。 Or else it may
come about without this consciousness as does a natural and apparently accidental process； so
that while inwardly； indeed； the Notion brings about its result consistently； this consistency is not
made manifest。 This is so in nature； in the various stages of the development of twigs； leaves；
blossom and fruit； each proceeds for itself； but the inward Idea is the directing and determining
force which governs the progression。 This is also so with the child whose bodily powers； and
above all whose intellectual activities； make their appearance one after the other； simply and
naturally； so that those parents who form such an experience for the first time； marvel whence all
that is now showing itself from within； comes from； for the whole of these manifestations merely
have the form of a succession in time。
The one kind of progression which represents the deduction of the forms； the necessity thought out
and recognized； of the determinations； is the business of Philosophy； and because it is the pure
Idea which is in question and not yet its mere particularized form as Nature and as Mind； that
representation is； in the main； the business of logical Philosophy。 But the other method； which
represents the part played by the history of Philosophy； shows the different Stages and moments in
development in time； in manner of occurrence； in particular places； in particular people or political
circumstances； the complications arising thus； and； in short； it shows us the empirical form。 This
point of view is the only one worthy of this science。 From the very nature of the subject it is
inherently the true one； and through the study of this history it will be made manifest that it actually
shows and proves itself so。
Now in reference to this Idea； I maintain that the sequence in the systems of Philosophy in History
is similar to the sequence in the logical deduction of the Notion … determinations in the Idea。 I
maintain that if the fundamental conceptions of the systems appearing in the history of Philosophy
be entirely divested of what regards their outward form； their relation to the particular and the like；
the various stages in the determination of the Idea are found in their logical Notion。 Conversely in
the logical progression taken for itself； there is； so far as its principal elements are concerned； the
progression of historical manifestations； but it is necessary to have these pure Notions in order to
know what the historical form contains。 It may be thought that Philosophy must have another order
as to the stages in the Idea than that in which these Notions have gone forth in time； but in the main
the order is the same。 This succession undoubtedly separates itself； on the one hand； into the
sequence in time of History； and on the other into succession in the order of ideas。 But to treat
more fully of this last would divert us too far from our aim。
I would only remark this； that what has been said reveals that the study of the history of
Philosophy is the study of Philosophy itself； for； indeed； it can be nothing else。 Whoever studies
the history of sciences such as Physics and Mathematics makes himself acquainted with Physics
and Mathematics themselves。 But in order to obtain a knowledge of its progress as the
development of the Idea in the empirical； external form in which Philosophy appears in History； a
corresponding knowledge of the Idea is absolutely essential； just as in judging of human affairs one
must have a conception of that which is right and fitting。 Else； indeed； as in so many histories of
Philosophy； there is presented to the vision devoid of idea； only a disarranged collection of
opinions。 To make you acquainted with this Idea； and consequently to explain the manifestations；
is the business of the history of Philosophy； and to do this is my object in undertaking to lecture on
the subject。 Since the observer must bring with him the Notion of the subject in order to see it in
its phenomenal aspect and in order to expose the object faithfully to view； we need not wonder at
there being so many dull histories of Philosophy in which the succession of its systems are
represented simply as a number of opinions； errors and freaks of thought。 They are freaks of
thought which； indeed； have been devised with a great pretension of acuteness and of mental
exertion； and with everything else which can be said in admiration of what； is merely formal。 But；
considering the absence of philosophic mind in such historians as these； how should they be able
to comprehend and represent the content； which is reasoned thought？
It is shown from what has been said regarding the formal nature of the Idea； that only a history of
Philosophy thus regarded as a system of development in Idea； is entitled to the name of Science： a
collection of facts constitutes no science。 Only thus as a succession of phenomena established
through reason； and having as content just what is reason and revealing it； does this history show
that it is rational： it shows that the events recorded are in reason。 How should the whole of what
has taken place in reason not itself be rational？ That faith must surely be the more reasonable in
which chance is not made ruler over human affairs； and it is the business of Philosophy to
recognize that however much its own manifestations may be history likewise； it is yet determined
through the Idea alone。
Through these general preliminary conceptions the categories are now determined； the more
immediate application of which to the history of Philosophy we have now to consider。 This
application will bring before us the most significant aspects in this history。
a。 The development in Time of the various Philosophies。
The first question which may be asked in reference to this history； concerns that distinction in
regard to the manifestation of the Idea； which has just been noticed。 It is the question as to how it
happens that Philosophy appears to be a development in time and has a history。 The answer to
this question encroaches on the metaphysics of Time； and it would be a digression from our object
to give here more than the elements on which the answer rests。
It has been shown above in reference to the existence of Mind； that its Being is its activity。 Nature；
on the contrary； is； as it is； its changes are thus only repetitions； and its movements take the form
of a circle merely。 To express this better； the activity of Mind is to know itself。 I am； immediately；
but this I am only as a living organism； as Mind I am only in so far as I know myself。 Know thyself；
the inscription over the temple of the oracle at Delphi； is the absolute command which is expressed
by Mind in its essential character。 But consciousness really implies that for myself； I am object to
myself。 In forming this absolute division between what is mine and myself； Mind constitutes its
existence and establishes itself as external to itself。 It postulates itself in the externality which is just
the universal and the distinctive form of existence in Nature。 But one of the forms of externality is
Time； and this form requires to be farther examined both in the Philosophy of Nature and the finite
Mind。
This Being in existence and therefore Being in time is a moment not only of the individual
consciousness； which as such is essentially finite； but also of the development of the philosophical
Idea in the element of Thought。 For the Idea； thought of as being at rest； is； indeed； not in Time。
To think of it as at rest； and to preserve it in the form of immediacy is equivalent to its inward
perception。 But the Idea as concrete； is； as has been shown； the unity of differences； it is not really
rest； and its existence is not really sense…perception； but as differentiation within itself and therefore
as development； it comes into existent Being and into externality in the element of Thought； and
thus pure Philosophy appears in thought as a progressive existence in time。 But this element of
Thought is itself abstract and is the activity of a single consciousness。 Mind is； however not only to
be considered as individual； finite consciousness； but as that Mind which is universal and concrete
within itself； this concrete universality； ho