THE DIFFERENCE OF BAADER FROM HEGEL Author(s): T.

Davidson and KARL ROSENKRANZ Source: The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Vol. 2, No. 1 (1868), pp. 55-56 Published by: Penn State University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25665634 . Accessed: 25/06/2013 16:57
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Penn State University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Speculative Philosophy.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 37.6.18.146 on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:57:59 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The DifferenceofBaader from Hegel. 55

the principle of contradiction if applying i. e. as he regarded things as phenomenal, It is only wnen outside of their true being. and rays forth creatively through the same Formal Logic and self-relation. negative can never seize any Formal Metaphysic thing in its genesis, hut always goes behind one phase merely to posit the same identi cal distinction that "like tinction and like," produces comes from distinction On over and over again; it holds can that dis and

we, for practical purposes, regard things as 15xed?as being, just as having permanent we them as self they are?that regard

in our first stages of reflection, that we abstract from We apply these principles. the concrete the principle have made. object before us, to the abstraction and apply which we

Thus identical, and as not contradictory. it is not in our rational but consciousness,

not be cancelled.

Such

until we enough in and for itself. Then we have Concrete, to leave these abstract principles for prin ciples as concrete as the truth itself. No abstraction "Form holds when we of Eternity."

a procedure is all well to know the undertake

Speculative cess,?sees thus can comprehend analysis. distinction lest it come with and ena would It does "on

the other hand, the Insight always regards the pro all things in their genesis3 and as well as synthesis not need to keep some hand for seed," fearing, of the world nihilo nihiljit" and Force," of Matter that the phenom he who as "Ex

to the assistance

apply to it the Truth does not need to save it from

that it can never therein. seize

such principles the "Eternity It

comprehend is aware

"different points of view" contradiction: its Negative all distinction

the world

Unity dissolves in its resistless menstruum,

present at its creation, must into the creative thought.

and be rationally, first ascend

THE DIFFERENCE OF BAADER FROM HBGEL.

from Professor Karl Rosen [We lay before our readers the following communication to hear the words of the philosopher from the curiosity naturally awakened Aside kranz. for nearly forty years the chair formerly occupied who has occupied by Kant, the subject as it is discussed in the present connection, itself is one of special interest, particularly for the translation. in several articles of this number. We are indebted toMr. Davidson ?Editor.] To the President of thePhilosophical ety of St. Louis: At the end of the third number of Speculative Philosophy, a letter from Dr. Hoffmann, Soci of the there that I, a Hegelian, had come impression close to it, I feel myself com unusually pelled to remark that I have, in part I., pp. 330 sqq. of my work, drawn a perfectly definite distinction between Baader. myself

Journal

Pro appears fessor at Wiirzburg, wherein he recommends von of Franz the study of the philosophy Dr. Hoffmann is now the most Baader. distinguished ophy. With of this philos representative great personal sacrifices, with en with genuine perseverance,

and

Permit me, Mr. President, in a few words to state as clearly as possible the grounds of this distinction. 1. I have combat the school of opposition Every in my endeavored, the confusion which has logic, arisen to in

admirable

its apostle, thusiasm, he has made himself and has brought out a complete edition of to the works of his master, which deserves be called has had a work a model. In the above mentioned he to communication to you, Mr. President, to make reference the kindness The Science

of Hegel between the concept and that of contradiction.

oppositio, may become a opposition, but in itself it contradiction, repugnantia, one. is not necessarily It is not a contra

diction when

of mine?

cal Idea?in

I cannot be otherwise When, however, tion to Baader's

of the Logi terms of distinction, for which he places than grateful to him. it in such a rela as to give the

philosophy

government and governed, and so on. 2. Opposition becomes contradiction

I say that the human species is opposed to itself in the difference be tween woman and man, or that the state is opposed to itself in the distinction between

This content downloaded from 37.6.18.146 on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:57:59 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

56 The DifferenceofBaader from HegeL

when ifest, man opposed, things, in themselves instead of their proper unity, the thereof.* but This is possibilitv of it is the actualization takes place, the of Baader, which holds to a twofold Nature: a Nature in God, which to be is supposed and a Nature which was without matter, in time and space, as matter, for I have no idea only through the Fall; nor can I, in the of an immaterial Nature, of law which the study of universality produced

diremption necessary, accidental. existence

3. If this actualization will either

(a) be destroyed by the diremption, or (b) overcome the diremp tion, and reinstate itself in the harmonious

Nature

unity Union

of the Southern may

of opposites: the as, for example, has just done in the reconstruction of its Constitution against the insurrection States. as a phenomenon, or (b) a negative,

to us, find any ground discovers in a diabolic production of it. for believing In a skeptical entitled The investigation, ofNature, (in the first vol Transfiguration have gone into some detail on this subject; a work with the same in 1853, I published of the Ugly, tendency, viz.: The ^Esthetics

ume ofmy Studies, 1839, pp. 155-204,) I

Hence, contradiction, have (a) a merely positive result.

&c,

&c.

as (verum index sui etfalsi, Spinoza says) with that of life, that of disease, with that of the beautiful, that of ugliness, with that

that along with the concept of the true, the concept of the false is necessarily given

in the Therefore, concept of the negative, the destructive and the productive direc tions must be It is plain distinguished.

says, Mystical Logic life is a contradiction death; manent hand, itself. found bolical;

of life.

to, the concept On the other living must die. of life to disease is a contradiction All I cannot say All living must be had pro Herr von Baader into the region of the dia he comes to diabolize volcanoes,

I say, Death in, and necessary

example, that of the concept of im is the opposition for

come diseased.

of good, that of evil; but it is also plain that the true, life, the beautiful, the good, are the absolute, the positive conditions of the false, disease, spectively. They tive forms of their-existence, accidental. existences, Now, I have endeavored, as well as of contradiction the evil, re ugliness, are theprius of the nega which

insights but when

are, as

poi such a I reject sons, savage beasts, &c, as much as the doctrine of de doctrine mons, devils, angels, &c, who are supposed to influence us. I consider the world, rational; evils,as which is conscious the good no less making for them. its notwithstanding and I see in the freedom

cold, heat,

rage, hurricanes,

in the doctrine in the doctrine

to deduce and to explain of the negative, all the possible forms of the negative as a moment of the evolution of the idea. In connection points, with in the concepts of monstrosity, degradation, approximated to Herr von Baader; the but as regards in which he derives method such forms which he supposes originally from a "Fall" to lie away beyond the origin of the world a hypothetical ?from have spirit-world?I a position assumed of decided opposition. J have always combatted the main doctrine this, I in certain have, of usurpation, of

of itself, the origin of of the evil, without either angels or devils responsible than

You will, perhaps, much respected Mr. find a page for this brief expla President, of the Society of in the Journal nation which I have the honor to be a member. With much Yours, esteem, very faithfully,

KARL ROSENKRANZ.
Konigsberg, 7th Jan., 1868.

This content downloaded from 37.6.18.146 on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:57:59 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions