Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

13049History of Hegelianism

Expand Messages
  • greuterb
    Aug 18, 2012
      Stephen Cowley writes:

      > In his Political Philosophy of Hegel (1964), which is mostly a
      > commentary on the
      > Philosophy of Right (1821), the French commentator Eugene Fleischmann
      > concludes
      > with an “Overall View of the Hegelian System” in which he writes:
      >
      > "Must it be recalled that Hegel's thought was never accepted by a Western
      > Civilisation to which, more than any other perhaps, it gave its entire
      > meaning.
      > Denounced as atheist (by his friend Schelling, enemy Schleiermacher and
      > disciple Kierkegaard), as a subversive (by Stahl, the official
      > philosopher
      > of the Prussian monarchy and may others since), as anti-national (by Haym
      > and his successors), as idealist (by Marx), as dogmatic (by the
      > neo-Kantians), it came towards the end of the century discretely to
      > join the
      > ranks of the great forgotten: scientism no longer understands it.
      > Doubtlessly it has forgotten that this system is also a method. More
      > free in its
      > processes, less obsessed by the wish to stick to the real, contemporary
      > scientific thought rediscovers it piece by piece." (375)
      >
      > This general outline seems to agree with other accounts of the history of
      > Hegelianism. Franz Rosenzweig in Hegel and the State (1920) adds Karl
      > Rosenkranz
      > at the beginning and Wilhelm Dilthey (who probably counts as
      > neo-Kantian) and
      > the historian Friedrich Meinecke at the end. Everyone notes that
      > Rudolf Haym is
      > a major interpreter, though also a critic.
      >
      > The only new things here to me is Stahl. Does anyone know who he was? I
      > remember asking on this list some months ago if anyone knew anything
      > about the
      > censors who supposedly edited the Philosophy of Right (1821), but to
      > no effect.
      > Perhaps Stahl is part of this story?


      I do not think so. Friedrich Julius Stahl was born 1802 (died 1861). His
      first scientific and political activities were in Munich. Only 1840 he
      became a professor for the philosophy of right, constitutional law and
      canon law at the university of Berlin. At this time Friedrich Wilhelm IV
      wanted him (and Schelling whose late philosophy was beside Savigny's
      historicism Stahl's inspiring example) to fight against Hegel's
      'rationalism' and its left Hegelian consequences. Stahl wanted to found
      the philosophy of right on ethical and religion (Protestant) principles
      and was against the separation of state and society. He was one of these
      intellectual who owed much to Hegel's philosophy but then perverted it
      in its opposite. So in the 20th-century one could throw both into the
      same pot.

      Beat Greuter
    • Show all 5 messages in this topic