history of philosophy-第14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！


best　of　what　is　in　the　world　is　that　which　Thought　produces；　it　is　unreasonable　to　believe　that
reason　only　is　in　Nature；　and　not　in　Mind。　That　man　who　believes　that　what；　like　the　philosophies；
belongs　to　the　region　of　mind　must　be　merely　contingent；　is　insincere　in　his　belief　in　divine　rule；　and
what　he　says　of　it　is　but　empty　talk。　

A　long　time　is　undoubtedly　required　by　Mind　in　working　out　Philosophy；　and　when　one　first
reflects　on　it；　the　length　of　the　time　may　seem　astonishing；　like　the　immensity　of　the　space　spoken
of　in　astronomy。　But　it　must　be　considered　in　regard　to　the　slow　progress　of　the　world…spirit；　that
there　is　no　need　for　it　to　hasten：…〃A　thousand　years　are　in　Thy　sight　as　one　day。〃　It　has　time　enough
just　because　it　is　itself　outside　of　time；　because　it　is　eternal。　The　fleeting　events　of　the　day　pass　so
quickly　that　there　is　not　time　enough　for；　all　that　has　to　be　done。　Who　is　there　who　does　not　die
before　he　has　achieved　his　aims？　The　world…spirit　has　time　enough；　but　that　is　not　all。　It　is　not　time
alone　which　has　to　be　made　use　of　in　the　acquisition　of　a　conception；　much　else　is　required。　The
fact　that　so　many　races　and　generations　are　devoted　to　these　operations　of　its　consciousness　by
Mind；　and　that　the　appearance　is　so　perpetually　presented　of　rising　up　and　passing　away；　concern
it　not　at　all；　it　is　rich　enough　for　such　displays；　it　pursues　its　work　on　the　largest　possible　scale；　and
has　nations　and　individuals　enough　and　to　spare。　The　saying　that　Nature　arrives　at　its　end　in　the
shortest　possible　way；　and　that　this　is　right；　is　a　trivial　one。　The　way　shown　by　mind　is　indirect；　and
accommodates　itself　to　circumstances。　Considerations　of　finite　life；　such　as　time；　trouble；　and　cost；
have　no　place　here。　We　ought；　too；　to　feel　no　disappointment　that　particular　kinds　of　knowledge
cannot　yet　be　attained；　or　that　this　or　that　is　still　absent。　In　the　history　of　the　world　progression　is
slow。　

b。　The　application　of　the　foregoing　to　the　treatment　of　Philosophy。

The　first　result　which　follows　from　what　has　been　said；　is　that　the　whole　of　the　history　of
Philosophy　is　a　progression　impelled　by　an　inherent　necessity；　and　one　which　is　implicitly　rational
and　a　priori　determined　through　its　Idea；　and　this　the　history　of　Philosophy　has　to　exemplify。
Contingency　must　vanish　on　the　appearance　of　Philosophy。　Its　history　is　just　as　absolutely
determined　as　the　development　of　Notions；　and　the　impelling　force　is　the　inner　dialectic　of　the
forms。　The　finite　is　not　true；　nor　is　it　what　it　is　to　be…its　determinate　nature　is　bound　up　with　its
existence。　But　the　inward　Idea　abolishes　these　finite　forms：　a　philosophy　which　has　not　the
absolute　form　identical　with　the　content；　must　pass　away　because　its　form　is　not　that　of　truth。　

What　follows　secondly　from　what　we　have　said；　is　that　every　philosophy　has　been　and　still　is
necessary。　Thus　none　have　passed　away；　but　all　are　affirmatively　contained　as　elements　in　a　whole。
But　we　must　distinguish　between　the　particular　principle　of　these　philosophies　as　particular；　and　the
realization　of　this　principle　throughout　the　whole　compass　of　the　world。　The　principles　are　retained；
the　most　recent　philosophy　being　the　result　of　all　preceding；　and　hence　no　philosophy　has　ever
been　refuted。　What　has　been　refuted　is　not　the　principle　of　this　philosophy；　but　merely　the　fact　that
this　principle　should　be　considered　final　and　absolute　in　character。　The　atomic　philosophy；　for
example；　has　arrived　at　the　affirmation　that　the　atom　is　the　absolute　existence；　that　it　is　the
indivisible　unit　which　is　also　the　individual　or　subject；　seeing；　then；　that　the　bare　unit　also　is　the
abstract　being…for…self；　the　Absolute　would　be　grasped　as　infinitely　many　units。　The　atomic　theory
has　been　refuted；　and　we　are　atomists　no　longer。　Mind　is　certainly　explicitly　existent　as　a　unit　or
atom；　but　that　is　to　attribute　to　it　a　barren　character　and　qualities　incapable　of　expressing　anything
of　its　depth。　The　principle　is　indeed　retained；　although　it　is　not　the　absolute　in　its　entirety。　This　same
contradiction　appears　in　all　development。　The　development　of　the　tree　is　the　negation　of　the　germ；
and　the　blossom　that　of　the　leaves；　in　so　far　as　that　they　show　that　these　do　not　form　the　highest
and　truest　existence　of　the　tree。　Last　of　all；　the　blossom　finds　its　negation　in　the　fruit。　Yet　none　of
them　can　come　into　actual　existence　excepting　as　preceded　by　all　the　earlier　stages。　Our　attitude　to
a　philosophy　must　thus　contain　an　affirmative　side　and　a　negative；　when　we　take　both　of　these　into
consideration；　we　do　justice　to　a　philosophy　for　the　first　time。　We　get　to　know　the　affirmative　side
later　on　both　in　life　and　in　science；　thus　we　find　it　easier　to　refute　than　to　justify。　

In　the　third　place；　we　shall　limit　ourselves　to　the　particular　consideration　of　the　principle　itself。　Each
principle　has　reigned　for　a　certain　time；　and　when　the　whole　system　of　the　world　has　been
explained　from　this　special　form；　it　is　called　a　philosophical　system。　Its　whole　theory　has　certainly
to　be　learned；　but　as　long　as　the　principle　is　abstract　it　is　not　sufficient　to　embrace　the　forms
belonging　to　our　conception　of　the　world。　The　Cartesian　principles；　for　instance；　are　very　suitable
for　application　to　mechanism；　but　for　nothing　further；　their　representation　of　other　manifestations　in
the　world；　such　as　those　of　vegetable　and　animal　nature；　are　insufficient；　and　hence　uninteresting。
Therefore　we　take　into　consideration　the　principles　of　these　philosophies　only；　but　in　dealing　with
concrete　philosophies　we　must　also　regard　the　chief　forms　of　their　development　and　their
applications。　The　subordinate　philosophies　are　inconsistent；　they　have　had　bright　glimpses　of　the
truth；　which　are；　however；　independent　of　their　principles。　This　is　exemplified　in　the　Tim？us　of
Plato；　a　philosophy　of　nature；　the　working　out　of　which　is　empirically　very　barren　because　its
principle　does　not　as　yet　extend　far　enough；　and　it　is　not　to　its　principle　that　we　owe　the　deep
gleams　of　thought　there　contained。　

In　the　fourth　place　it　follows　that　we　must　not　regard　the　history　of　Philosophy　as　dealing　with　the
past；　even　though　it　is　history。　The　scientific　products　of　reason　form　the　content　of　this　history；
and　these　are　not　past。　What　is　obtained　in　this　field　of　labour　is　the　True；　and；　as　such；　the
Eternal；　it　is　not　what　exists　now；　and　not　then；　it　is　true　not　only　today　or　tomorrow；　but　beyond
all　time；　and　in　as　far　as　it　is　in　time；　it　is　true　always　and　for　every　time。　The　bodily　forms　of　those
great　minds　who　are　the　heroes　of　this　history；　the　temporal　existence　and　outward　lives　of　the
philosophers；　are；　indeed；　no　more；　but　their　works　and　thoughts　have　not　followed　suit；　for　they
neither　conceived　nor　dreamt　of　the　rational　import　of　their　works。　Philosophy　is　not
somnambulism；　but　is　developed　consciousness；　and　what　these　heroes　have　done　is　to　bring　that
which　is　implicitly　rational　out　of　the　depths　of　Mind；　where　it　is　found　at　first　as　substance　only；　or
as　inwardly　existent；　into　the　light　of　day；　and　to　advance　it　into　consciousness　and　knowledge。
This　forms　a　continuous　awakening。　Such　work　is　not　only　deposited　in　the　temple　of　Memory　as
forms　of　times　gone　by；　but　is　just　as　present　and　as　living　now　as　at　the　time　of　its　production。　The
effects　produced　and　work　performed　are　not　again　destroyed　or　interrupted　by　what　succeeds；
for　they　are　such　that　we　must　ourselves　be　present　in　them。　They　have　as　medium　neither　canvas；
paper；　marble；　nor　representation　or　memorial　to　preserve　them。　These　mediums　are　themselves
transient；　or　else　form　a　basis　for　what　is　such。　But　they　do　have　Thought；　Notion；　and　the　eternal
Being　of　Mind；　which　moths　cannot　corrupt；　nor　thieves　break　through　and　steal。　The　conquests
made　by　Thought　when　constituted　into　Thought　form　the　very　Being　of　Mind。　Such　knowledge　is
thus　not　learning　merely；　or　a　knowledge　of　what　is　dead；　buried　and　corrupt：　the　history　of
Philosophy　has　not　to　do　with　what　is　gone；　but　with　the　living　present。　

c。　Further　comparison　between　the　History　of　Philosophy　and
Philosophy　itself。

We　may　appropria