history of philosophy-第111章

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！


finite；　empirical；　or　reflected；　and　the　Neo…Platonists　tell　of　the　ecstasy　of　thought　in　which
knowledge　is　the　immediate　knowledge　of　the　Absolute；　this　definite　distinction　must　be　noticed；
viz。；　that　with　Plato's　knowledge　of　the　universal；　or　with　his　intellectuality；　wherein　all　opposition
as　a　reality　is　abrogated；　dialectic　is　associated；　or　the　recognized　necessity　for　the　abrogation　of
these　opposites；　Plato　does　not　begin　with　this；　for　with　him　the　movement　in　which　they　abrogate
themselves　is　present。　The　Absolute　is　itself　to　be　looked　at　as　this　movement　of　self…abrogation；
this　is　the　only　actual　knowledge　and　knowledge　of　the　Absolute。　With　Schelling　this　idea　has；
however；　no　dialectic　present　in　it　whereby　those　opposites　may　determine　themselves　to　pass
over　into　their　unity；　and　in　so　doing　to　be　comprehended。

2。　Schelling　begins　with　the　idea　of　the　Absolute　as　identity　of　the　subjective　and　objective；　and
accordingly　there　evinced　itself　in　the　presentations　of　his　system　which　followed；　the　further
necessity　of　proving　this　idea；　this　he　attempted　to　do　in　the　two　Journals　of　Speculative　Physics。
But　if　that　method　be　once　adopted；　the　procedure　is　not　immanent　development　from　the
speculative　Idea；　but　it　follows　the　mode　of　external　reflection。　Schelling's　proofs　are　adduced　in
such　an　exceedingly　formal　manner　that　they　really　invariably　presuppose　the　very　thing　that　was　to
be　proved。　The　axiom　assumes　the　main　point　in　question；　and　all　the　rest　follows　as　a　matter　of
course。　Here　is　an　instance：　“The　innermost　essence　of　the　Absolute　can　only　be　thought　of　as
identity　absolute；　altogether　pure　and　undisturbed。　For　the　Absolute　is　only　absolute；　and　what　is
thought　in　it　is　necessarily　and　invariably　the　same；　or　in　other　words；　is　necessarily　and　invariably
absolute。　If　the　idea　of　the　Absolute　were　a　general　Notion”　（or　conception）；　“this　would　not
prevent　a　difference　being　met　with　in　it；　notwithstanding　this　unity　of　the　absolute。　For　things　the
most　different　are　yet　in　the　Notion　always　one　and　identical；　just　as　a　rectangle；　a　polygon　and　a
circle　are　all　figures。　The　possibility　of　the　difference　of　all　things　in　association　with　perfect　unity　in
the　Notion　lies　in　the　manner　in　which　the　particular　in　them　is　combined　with　the　universal。　In　the
Absolute　this　altogether　disappears；　because　it　pertains　to　the　very　idea　of　the　Absolute　that　the
particular　in　it　is　also　the　universal；　and　the　universal　the　particular；　and　further　that　by　means　of　this
unity　form　and　existence　are　also　one　in　it。　Consequently；　in　regard　to　the　Absolute；　from　the　fact
of　its　being　the　Absolute；　there　likewise　follows　the　absolute　exclusion　from　its　existence　of　all
difference；　and　that　at　once。”　（14）

In　the　former　of　the　two　above…named　works；　the　“Journal　of　Speculative　Physics；”　Schelling
began　by　again　bringing　forward　the　Substance　of　Spinoza；　simple；　absolute　Existence；　inasmuch
as　he　makes　his　starting…point　the　absolute　identity　of　the　subjective　and　objective。　Here；　like
Spinoza；　he　employed　the　method　of　geometry；　laying　down　axioms　and　proving　by　means　of
propositions；　then　going　on　to　deduce　other　propositions　from　there；　and　so　on。　But　this　method
has　no　real　application　to　philosophy。　Schelling　at　this　point　laid　down　certain　forms　of　difference；
to　which　he　gave　the　name　of　potencies；　adopting　the　term　from　Eschenmayer；　who　made　use　of　it
（p。　514）；（15）　they　are　ready…made　differences；　which　Schelling　avails　himself　of。　But　philosophy
must　not　take　any　forms　from　other　sciences；　as　here　from　mathematics。　With　Schelling；　the
leading　form　is　that　which　was　brought　into　remembrance　again　by　Kant；　the　form　of　triplicity　as
first；　second；　and　third　potency。

Schelling；　like　Fichte；　begins　with　I　=　I；　or　with　the　absolute　intuition；　expressed　as　proposition　or
definition　of　the　Absolute；　that　Reason　is　the　absolute　indifference　of　subject　and　object：　so　that　it
is　neither　the　one　nor　the　other；　for　both　have　in　it　their　true　determination；　and　their　opposition；
like　all　others；　is　utterly　done　away　with。　The　true　reality　of　subject　and　object　is　placed　in　this
alone；　that　the　subject　is　not　posited　in　the　determination　of　subject　against　object；　as　in　the
philosophy　of　Fichte；　it　is　not　determined　as　in　itself　existent；　but　as　subject…object；　as　the　identity
of　the　two；　in　the　same　way　the　object　is　not　posited　according　to　its　ideal　determination　as　object；
but　in　as　far　as　it　is　itself　absolute；　or　the　identity　of　the　subjective　and　objective。　But　the
expression　“indifference”　is　ambiguous；　for　it　means　indifference　in　regard　to　both　the　one　and
the　other；　and　thus　it　appears　as　if　the　content　of　indifference；　the　only　thing　which　makes　it
concrete；　were　indifferent。　Schelling's　next　requirement　is　that　the　subject　must　not　be　hampered
with　reflection；　that　would　be　bringing　it　under　the　determination　of　the　understanding；　which；
equally　with　sensuous　perception；　implies　the　separateness　of　sensuous　things。　As　to　the　form　of　its
existence；　absolute　indifference　is　with　Schelling　posited　as　A　=　A；　and　this　form　is　for　him　the
knowledge　of　absolute　identity；　which；　however；　is　inseparable　from　the　Being　or　existence　of　the
same。（16）

Thus；　therefore；　opposition；　as　form　and　reality　or　existence；　no　doubt　appears　in　this　Absolute；
but　it　is　determined　as　a　merely　relative　or　unessential　opposition：　“Between　subject　and　object　no
other　than　quantitative　difference　is　possible。　For　no　qualitative　difference　as　regards　the　two　is
thinkable；”　because　absolute　identity　“is　posited　as　subject　and　object　only　as　regards　the　form
of　its　Being；　not　as　regards　its　existence。　There　is　consequently　only　a　quantitative　difference　left；”
i。e。　only　that　of　magnitude：　and　yet　difference　must　really　be　understood　as　qualitative；　and　must
thus　be　shown　to　be　a　difference　which　abrogates　itself。　This　quantitative　difference；　says
Schelling；　is　the　form　actu：　“The　quantitative　difference　of　subjective　and　objective　is　the　basis　of
all　finitude。　Each　determined　potency　marks　a　determined　quantitative　difference　of　the　subjective
and　objective。　Each　individual　Being　is　the　result　of　a　quantitative　difference　of　subjectivity　and
objectivity。　The　individual　expresses　absolute　identity　under　a　determined　form　of　Being：　“so　that
each　side　is　itself　a　relative　totality；　A　=　B；　and　at　the　same　time　the　one　factor　preponderates　in
the　one；　and　the　other　factor　in　the　other；　but　both　remain　absolute　identity。（17）　This　is　insufficient；
for　there　are　other　determinations；　difference　is　undoubtedly　qualitative；　although　this　is　not　the
absolute　determination。　Quantitative　difference　is　no　true　difference；　but　an　entirely　external
relation；　and　likewise　the　preponderance　of　subjective　and　objective　is　not　a　determination　of
thought；　but　a　merely　sensuous　determination。

The　Absolute　itself；　in　so　far　as　the　positing　of　difference　is　taken　into　account；　is　defined　by
Schelling　as　the　quantitative　indifference　of　subjective　and　objective：　in　respect　to　absolute　identity
no　quantitative　difference　is　thinkable。　“Quantitative　difference　is　only　possible　outside　of　absolute
identity；　and　outside　of　absolute　totality。　There　is　nothing　in　itself　outside　of　totality；　excepting　by
virtue　of　an　arbitrary　separation　of　the　individual　from　the　whole。　Absolute　identity　exists　only
under　the　form　of　the　quantitative　indifference　of　subjective　and　objective。”　Quantitative
difference；　which　appears　outside　of　absolute　identity　and　totality；　is　therefore；　according　to
Schelling；　in　itself　absolute　identity；　and　consequently　thinkable　only　under　the　form　of　the
quantitative　indifference　of　the　subjective　and　objective。　“This　opposition　does　not　therefore　occur
in　itself；　or　from　the　standpoint　of　speculation。　From　this　standpoint　A　exists　just　as　much　as　B
does；　for　A　like　B　is　the　whole　absolute　identity；　which　only　exists　under　the　two　forms；　but　under
both　of　them　alike。　Absolute　identity　is　the　universe　itself。　The　form　of　its　Being　can　be　thought　of
under　the　image　of　a　line；”　as　shown　by　the　following　scheme：

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　＋