Andrey Sudakov. Reflective design and positive spirituality. The early Fichte and the philosophy of spirit. Vol. 1. No. 1. 2016.

Publication Details

Abstract

The article analyzes the very first reviews published by Fichte. The Hegel-style construal of Fichte’s system sees it as a subjective idealist philosophy of self-consciousness oriented at the principle of absolute identity (idealist monism). Contrary to this interpretation, the present paper states that Fichte’s thought at its early stage was already directed at the idea of “the I” as the integral spirit in unity with its pre-reflective reality.

The review of Creuzer (Leonhard Creuzer. Skeptische Betrachtungen über die Freyheit des Willens mit Hinsicht auf die neuesten Theorien über dieselbe. Gießen: Heyer, 1793) thematizes the concept of will as a faculty of practical self-determination within the context of Kantian ethics of autonomy. Distinction of two acts of practical self-determination serves as a focus here, notably the act of moral legislation in virtue of which reason is practical and act of self-determining to follow the law. The first act does not appear in the empirical consciousness; it is by its means that the activity of “the I” confers the form of law to the faculty of desire. The second act of self-determination is subject to the law of foundation; it is given in the empirical consciousness. The integral picture of the spirit is achieved by correlating the two acts of self-determination of the I. In Fichte’s review of Schulze-Aenesidemus (Aenesidemus, oder Über die Fundamente der von dem Herrn Prof. Reinhold in Jena gelieferten Elementar-Philosophie. Nebst einer Verteidigung des Scepticismus gegen die Anmaßungen der Vernunftkritik. O. D., 1792) Fichte’s thought proceeds from discussing “the condition of consciousness” in Reinhold. Analysis of Aenesidemus’ polemics with Reinhold helps Fichte to crystallize the idea of the absolute I, not given in empirical perception but posed in intellectual contemplation, as well as that of the absolute non-I, also not perceived but posed. Exposing the premises of the real experience of consciousness demands establishing the spirit’s universal actions; in these texts one can already trace the first two principles of the “Science of Knowledge” (Wissenschaftslehre): the thetic and antithetic ones. The focus is put on the concept of “fact and/or act” (Thathandlung) and original position. However principles posed by intellectual contemplation do not make real sense without the facticity of the experience of empirical consciousness. The image of human spirit is outlined in this light in the shape of monodualist metaphysics. Thematization addresses the pure I in intellectual contemplation as a faculty of independent self-position and I as an empirically determined effectivity of the intelligence. Both aspects should make unity, however in real experience they always contradict each other. Reason is practical since it aims at uniting these aspects of reality of the I; however it is real only as an aspiration, for abolishing their opposition would mean abolishing practical reason itself. The two cycles of reflection by which Fichte builds the system of theoretical and practical science of knowledge are also incipient at the earliest stage of its making. 

Keywords

Fichte, Kant, Reinhold, spirit, philosophy of spirit, reflection, position, self-determination, practical reason, monodualism.

References 

Creuzer L. (1793) Skeptische Betrachtungen über die Freiheit des Willens mit Hinsicht auf die neuesten Theorien über dieselbe. Gießen: Heyer.

Fichte J. G. (1965a) “[Rezension: Leonhard Creuzer. Skeptische Betrachtungen über die Freyheit des Willens mit Hinsicht auf die neuesten Theorien über dieselbe. Gießen: Heyer, 1793]”. Fichte J. G. Gesamtausgabe der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Reihe I: Werke. Bd. 2. Werke 1793–1795 (hg. v. R. Lauth, H. Jacob, M. Zahn). Stuttgart, Bad Cannstatt: Friedrich Frommann Verlag (Günter Holzboog): 7–14.

Fichte J. G. (1965b) “[Rezension: Aenesidemus, oder Über die Fundamente der von dem Herrn Prof. Reinhold in Jena gelieferten Elementar-Philosophie. Nebst einer Verteidigung des Scepticismus gegen die Anmaßungen der Vernunftkritik. O. D., 1792]”. Fichte J. G. Gesamtausgabe der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Reihe I: Werke. Bd. 2. Werke 1793–1795 (hg. v. R. Lauth, H. Jacob, M. Zahn). Stuttgart, Bad Cannstatt: Friedrich Frommann Verlag (Günter Holzboog): 41–67.

Frank S. L. (1990) “Nepostizhimoe. Ontologicheskoe vvedenie v filosofiyu religii” [The Unfathomable. An ontological introduction the philosophy of religion]. Frank S. L. Sochineniya [Works]. Moscow: Pravda (Iz istorii otechestvennoi filosofskoi mysli [From the history of Russian philosophical thought]): 181–559. (in Russian).

Hegel G. W. F. (1988) “Differenz des Fichteschen und Schellingschen Systems der Philosophie in Beziehung auf Reinholds Beiträge zur leichtern Übersicht des Zustands der Philosophie zu Anfang des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts”. Kantovskii sbornik. Mezhvuzovskii tematicheskii sbornik nauchnykh trudov. Vypusk 13 [Collection of works on Kant. An Inter-university thematic collection of scholarly works. Issue 13]. Kaliningrad: 150–174. (in Russian).

Hegel G. W. F. (1989) “Differenz des Fichteschen und Schellingschen Systems der Philosophie in Beziehung auf Reinholds Beiträge zur leichtern Übersicht des Zustands der Philosophie zu Anfang des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts”. Kantovskii sbornik. Mezhvuzovskii tematicheskii sbornik nauchnykh trudov. Vypusk 14 [Collection of works on Kant. An Inter-university thematic collection of scholarly works. Issue 14]. Kaliningrad: 126–156. (in Russian).

Hegel G. W. F. (1990) “Differenz des Fichteschen und Schellingschen Systems der Philosophie in Beziehung auf Reinholds Beiträge zur leichtern Übersicht des Zustands der Philosophie zu Anfang des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts”. Kantovskii sbornik. Mezhvuzovskii tematicheskii sbornik nauchnykh trudov. Vypusk 15 [Collection of works on Kant. An Inter-university thematic collection of scholarly works. Issue 15]. Kaliningrad: 127–157. (in Russian).

Hösle V. (1992) Genii filosofii Novogo vremeni: Lektsii v institute filosofii RAN [Genii of the philosophy of Modernity: Lectures at the RAS Institute of Philosophy]. Moscow: Nauka (Filosofy sovremennogo mira [Philosophers of the present day world]). (in Russian).

Kant I. (1997) “Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten”. Kant I. Soch. na nem. i rus. yaz.: v 4 t. T. 3 [Works in German and Russian in 4 vol. Vol. 3]. Moscow: Kami: 38–275. (in Russian).

Kireevsky I. V. (2002) “O kharaktere prosveshcheniya Evropy i o ego otnoshenii k prosveshcheniyu Rossii (pis’mo k grafu E. E. Komarovskomu)” [On the character of Enlightenment in Europe and its Relation to Enlightenment in Russia (a letter to Count A. A. Komarovsky)]. Kireevsky I. V. Razum na puti k istine [Reason on the Way to Truth]. Moscow: Pravilo Very: 151–213. (in Russian).

Reinhold K. L. (1790) Beyträge zur Berichtigung bisheriger Mißverständnisse der Philosophen. Erster Band, das Fundament der Elementarphilosophie betreffend. Jena: Johann Michael Mauke.

[Schulze G. E.] (1792) Aenesidemus, oder Über die Fundamente der von dem Herrn Prof. Reinhold in Jena gelieferten Elementar-Philosophie. Nebst einer Verteidigung des Scepticismus gegen die Anmaßungen der Vernunftkritik. O. D.

Sudakov A. K. (1998) Absolyutnaya nravstvennost’: etika avtonomii i absolyutnyi zakon [Absolute Morality: the Ethics of Autonomy and the Absolute Law]. Moscow: Editorial URSS. (in Russian).