Hegel-by-HyperText Resources

1841:The World-Historic Splitin

Western Philosophy
The "Expurgation of
Hegelianis"
As well as having been embraced by the Prussian Monarchy as
a kind of official creed, Hegel left behind him a movement which
inspired powerful revolutionary criticism of the very official
society which had sanctified him.
The ten years after Hegel's death were the apogee of
Hegelianism. His students, who had lived under the master's spell
during his lifetime, went out and popularised his teachings and
translated them into the language of politics or much more
correctly, translated politics into the language of Hegelianism.
!n "#$", the establishment deliberatively moved to %e&punge the
dragon's seed of Hegelian pantheism% from the minds of Prussian
youth. A newlyappointed Minister for 'ulture mobilised (riedrich
)chelling to come to *erlin and do the +ob.
(riedrich )chelling was the second, and in "#$", the only living
representative of 'lassical ,erman Philosophy. The former
Professor of Philosopher at -ena after (ichte's dismissal for heresy,
who as a youth had been a close friend of Hegel, had both
encouraged Hegel and enlisted his support in his struggle against
(ichte. Although pushed into the philosophical background by the
great , . ( Hegel, he had also out-lived Hegel.
/Ask anybody in *erlin today on
what field the battle for dominion
over ,erman public opinion in
politics and religion, that is, over
,ermany itself, is being fought,
and if he has any idea of the
power of the mind over the world
he will reply that this battlefield
is the 0niversity, in particular
1ecture Hall 2o. 3, where
)chelling is giving his lectures on
the Philosophy of 4evelation. (or
at the moment all the separate
oppositions which contend with
Hegel's philosophy for this
dominion are obscured, blurred
and pushed into the background
by the one opposition of
)chelling5 all the attackers who
stand outside philosophy, )tahl,
Hengstenberg, 2eander, are
making way for a fighter who is
e&pected to give battle to the
uncon6uered on his own ground.
And the battle is indeed peculiar
enough. Two old friends of
younger days, room mates at the
T7bingen theological seminary,
are after forty years meeting each
other again face to face as
opponents5 one of them ten years
dead but more alive than ever in
his pupils5 the other, as the latter
say, intellectually dead for three
decades, but now suddenly
claiming for himself the full
power and authority of life.
Anybody who is sufficiently
%impartial% to profess himself
e6ually alien to both, that is, to
be no Hegelian, for surely
nobody can as yet declare
himself on the side of )chelling
after the few words he has said
anybody then, who possesses this
vaunted advantage of
%impartiality% will see in the
declaration of Hegel's death
pronounced by )chelling's
appearance in *erlin, the
vengeance of the gods for the
declaration of )chelling's death
which Hegel himself pronounced
in his time8.
/An imposing, colourful
audience has assembled to
witness the battle. At the front the
notables of the 0niversity, the
leading lights of science, men
everyone of whom has created a
trend of his own5 for them the
seats nearest to the rostrum have
been reserved, and behind them,
+umbled together as chance
brought them to the hall,
representatives of all walks of
life, nations, and religious
beliefs. !n the midst of high
spirited youths there sits here and
there a greybreaded staff officer
and ne&t to him perhaps, 6uite
unembarrassed, a volunteer who
in any other society would not
know what to do for reverence
towards such a highranking
superior. 9ld doctors and
ecclesiastics, the +ubilee of whose
matriculation can soon be
celebrated feel the longforgotten
student haunting their minds
again and are back in college.
-udaism and !slam want to see
what 'hristian revelation is all
about: ,erman, (rench, ;nglish,
Hungarian, Polish, 4ussian,
modern ,reek and Turkish, one
can hear them all spoken
together, then the signal for
silence sounds and )chelling
mounts the rostrum.
/A man of middle stature, with
white hair and lightblue, bright
eyes, whose e&pression is gay
rather than imposing and,
combined with a certain fullness
of figure, indicates more the
+ovial familyman than the
thinker of genius, a harsh but
strong voice, )wabian*avarian
accent, that is )chelling's
outward appearance8. <;ngels,
Schelling on Hegel, =ecember
"#$">
The audience also included the 4ussian anarchist, Mikhail
*akunin, and )?ren @ierkegaard, who was to be the founder of
;&istentialism. )chelling's proposition was that Hegel had
confused %essence% and %e&istence%, and what was re6uired was a
return to a philosophy of existence. @ierkegaard ridiculed Hegel
for %reconstructing% history in retrospect, %but history has to be
lived forwards, not backwards%. (or his part, ;ngels insisted that
the youth and all enemies of the autocracy must rally to the
defence of Hegel. He characterised )chelling's proposition as a
%philosophy of revelation%, or %positivism% Aas opposed to the
%negative% standpoint of 4easonB.
)chelling did not, as it turned out, win much support for his
position, but the young =anish theologian @ierkegaard, declaring
the bankruptcy of 4eason, can be seen as the founder of
;&istentialism, which is continued through (riedrich 2ietCsche,
;dmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger and through Heidegger is a
significant component of today's philosophical cloudscape.
;&istentialism appears to pick up from )chelling's denunciation of
Hegel's focus on ;ssence, and substitutes for Hegel's study of the
;ssential genesis of notions an analysis of Being.
Arthur )chopenhauer, who had taught at the 0niversity of
*erlin for D$ semesters, and had spoken regularly to an empty
lecture hall, ne&t door and at the same hour when Hegel lectured
to a large and evergrowing audience. !n May "#DE he had
renounced his career to live as a recluse. !n "#$$, an obscure
*erlin bookseller accepted the manuscript of )chopenhauer's oft
re+ected The World as Will and Idea without remuneration and this
book the founding work of Foluntarism, in the style of 'lassical
,erman philosophy but passionately hostile to its spirit gained
)chopenhauer worldwide recognition and caused 2ietCsche to
speak of )chopenhauer as his %great teacher%.
!n *ritain, -ohn )tuart Mill and in (rance Auguste 'omte came
forward as the proponents of Positivism. Positivism is a difficult
thing to characterise, because like any ideology, it is intimately
connected with the fate not of any given proposition or thesis, but
with the fate of a social entity and rises and falls and transforms
itself according to the fate of the social movement it reflects.
Positivism is that current in epistemology which seeks to speak for
science5 it re+ects %speculation% and sees the task of philosophical
knowledge as summing up and e&pressing the positive knowledge
gathered by the sciences. !n the first phase of its development, first
place was given to sociology5 in this it e&pressed a belief in the
liberating power of science and the urgent need for science to
replace religion and all forms of nonscientific %metaphysical% or
religious speculation, and conse6uently the need for a scientific
conception of society, based on the rational analysis of the data of
the senses.
Mikhail Ale&androvich *akunin had studied Hegel in Moscow
but had emigrated in "#$G to +oin the Houng Hegelians in *erlin.
His later career would see *akunin fighting in the 4evolution of
"#$# in Prague and =resden, returning to 4ussia, e&iled to )iberia,
+oining the (irst !nternational but finally e&pelled in "#ID and
founding the 2arodnik and Anarchist movements in 4ussia the
most e&treme of bourgeois radicals, advocating immediate
insurrection and the smashing of all states.
;arlier in "#$", 1udwig (euerbach had published his Essence
of Christianity: /with one blow it pulverised the contradiction, in
that without circumlocutions it placed materialism on the throne
again. 2ature e&ists independently of all philosophy ... the spell
was broken5 the %system% was e&ploded and cast aside ... one must
have e&perienced the liberating effect of this book to get an idea of
it. ;nthusiasm was general ... but a philosophy is not disposed of
by the mere assertion that it is false... it had to be %sublated% in its
own sense, ... the new content which had been won through it had
to be saved ...8 <;ngels' Ludwig euer!ach and the End of
Classical "er#an $hilosophy>.
!n almost a moment, following the sacking of @aiser .ilhelm
(riedrich's 'ulture Minister in "#$", sprung ;&istentialism,
Foluntarism, Anarchism, Positivism and MaterialismJ
;ngels said of )chelling's "#$" speech:
%!t will be our business to follow
the course of his <)chelling's>
thinking and to shield the great
man's <Hegel's> grave from
abuse. .e are not afraid to fight.
2othing more desirable could
have happened to us than for a
time to be 'The 'hurch
9ppressed'. There the minds part.
.hat is not genuine is proved in
the fire, what is false we shall not
miss in our ranks. The opponents
must grant us that youth has
never before flocked to our
colours in such numbers, that the
thought which dominates us has
never before unfolded itself so
richly, that courage, conviction,
talent have never been so much
on our side as now. Hence we
shall rise confidently against the
new enemy5 in the end, one will
be found among us who will
prove that the sword of
enthusiasm is +ust as good as the
sword of genius.
%1et )chelling see whether he
can muster a school. Many only
+oin him now because they are
opposed to Hegel and accept with
gratitude anybody who attacks
him ...% <Schelling on Hegel,
=ecember "#$">
!n 9ctober "#$K, ;ngels published his %utlines of a Criti&ue of
$olitical Econo#y, which caught the attention of @arl Mar& and
the DKyearolds struck up a correspondence. ...
*y "#$#, the year of publication of the Co##unist 'anifesto,
;urope was ablaCe with 4evolution. (or the first time, the
proletariat came on to the political scene as a force for itself. The
4evolution was defeated, with the -unkers gaining control in
,ermany and the Army in (rance. *ut throughout the following
period, the working class remained the chief threat to bourgeois
society. The (irst !nternational was founded in "#3K, with the
Trades 'ouncils in *ritain and the rapid rise of the ,erman )ocial
=emocratic Party and the Paris 'ommune holding state power for
a short period in "#I".
The emergence of labour as a conscious social force puts a final
end to the classical period of bourgeois epistemology. The
e&plosion of "#$" anticipates this e&plosion and the irreversible
seachange which follows. %2ature% has spoken. (or bourgeois
philosophy prior to this time, the labouring masses Aor what the
postmoderns call the /subaltern8 the /congregation8 who get
spoken of and to, but have themselves no right to speakB were like
2ature, something Lbeyond sensationM, the unconscious.
Irrationalism & Positivism
The period of development of bourgeois philosophy from the
"#$Gs to the "#3Gs is the period in which the tendencies and forces
of a new epoch of development are formed. The period of
e&pansion of capitalism which followed the defeat of the
'ommune in "#I" up to the e&haustion of the period of colonial
e&pansion and the opening of the period of !mperialism at the turn
of the century, marks the ne&t specific period in the development
of bourgeois ideology.
(rom the "#$Gs, it is no longer possible for bourgeois ideology
to be developed in the form of a %secular religion%, but ideology is
worked out in conflict within specific, separate domains of
en6uiry, principally: political economy, psychology, natural
science and sociology.
The figures who launch the initial attack on Hegel, (euerbach
and )chelling, did not gather around them a substantial and lasting
following. -ohn )tuart Mill and Auguste 'omte were already well
known by the end of the "#KGs, and as it turns out, the principal
figures of the first period immediately following "#$" are Mill,
'omte and later Herbert )pencer APositivistsB, )?ren @ierkegaard
and Arthur )chopenhauer Athe precursors to ;&istentialismB, the
Anarchist Mikhail *akunin and 'ommunists @arl Mar& and
(rederick ;ngels.
Politically speaking, these figures cover as wide a field as it is
possible to imagine.
.ithout blurring the differences between Anarchism and
'ommunism and the class basis of these political differences, it is
not sensible to comprehend either Mar&ism or Anarchism as part
of the organism of bourgeois ideology. They will be considered
separately elsewhere.
The others philosophically speaking divide clearly into two
camps. =espite the mutual hostility which is a professional
prere6uisite and despite the political diversity within each camp,
we have on the one hand, the %sociologists% 'omte, Mill and
)pencer, and on the other hand, the %psychologists% @ierkegaard
and )chopenhauer.
The Huan !ondition
The young 1udwig (euerbach e&pressed the common ;ssence of
the downfall of Hegelianism, and he has to be credited with the
fact that he launched his attack on Hegel while Hegel was still
flavour of the decade:
%Modern philosophy has realised
and negated the divine being who
is separated and distinguished
from sensation, the world, and
man. *ut it realised and negated
this divine being only in thought,
in reason, and indeed in that
reason that is also separated and
distinguished from sensation, the
world, and man. 2amely, modern
philosophy has proved only the
divinity of mind5 it recognised
only mind, and indeed the
abstract mind, as the divine and
absolute being.% <s."#, $rinciples
of $hilosophy of the uture,
published D years after The
Essence of Christianity, in "#$K>
.hen 'omte, for instance, says:
%The 0niverse is to be studied
not for its own sake, but for the
sake of ... Humanity. To study it
in any other spirit would not only
be immoral, but also highly
irrational. (or, as statements of
pure ob+ective truth, our
scientific theories can never be
really satisfactory ... !t is for
social feeling to determine these
limits5 outside which our
knowledge will always remain
imperfect as well as useless ... the
intellect would, under Positivism,
accept its proper position of
subordination to the heart%,
there is a significant debt to Hegel, but he also is definitively
calling for an end to %metaphysics%, and when @ierkegaard says:
%science, fully as much as poetry and art, assumes a #ood ... an
error in modulation is +ust as disturbing as an error in the
e&position of thought% we can recognise something of the same
thought. The problem is that 'omte's solution Awhich was
probably the dominant oneB led to a further shattering of the unity
of human labour, with ",GG" %specialists% beavering away in their
own little area. Thus, the great synthesis which Hegel achieved,
albeit idealistically, was lost on the very people who most needed
it.
(euerbach opened the first, historical section of $hilosophy of
the uture with: %The task of the modern era was the realisation
and humanisation of ,od the transformation and dissolution of
theology into anthropology.% And he shows that this begins with
Protestantism. ;veryone was saying that the human agency did not
+ustexpress something Asuch as The Absolute !deaB, this human
%agency% was itself the issue, man was not +ust an %agent%. This
was already implicit in the highly political way in which the
Houng Hegelians were promoting philosophy, and the
establishment knew itJ
@ierkegaard is on about sin5 he wants to not +ust o!serve sin,
e&plain it, call it an illness it must be denounced, and denouncing
sin meant real pain and suffering. He is against %scientific
ob+ectivity%, of dispassionately looking at sin as something
neutral, ob+ective. His whole thing about #oods is a knife aimed at
the whole basis of 1ogic, %4ationalism% Ain the degraded sense of
the wordB and (!solute Idea.
)chopenhauer wanted to place the human, sub+ective .ill at the
centre of the system, not an o!)ective thought for# but a very
sub+ective, human, suffering, painful .ill:
%every stronger or heterogeneous
affection of these senseorgans is
painful, in other words, is against
the .ill5 ... to make them data for
the understanding, <they must>
reach the higher degree at which
they stir the will, that is to say,
e&cite pain or pleasure, though
more often pain.%
And (euerbach is going in a direction which has some point of
contact with this:
%The new philosophy regards and
considers being as it is for us, not
only as thinking but as really
e&isting beings5 thus, it regards
being as an ob+ect of being, as an
ob+ect of itself. *eing as an
ob+ect of being and only this
being is being and deserves the
name of being is the being of
the senses, perception, feeling,
and love. *eing is thus a secret of
perception, of feeling, and of
love.% <s.KK, $rinciples of
$hilosophy of the uture>
"ier#egaard and
Schopenhauer
@ierkegaard and )chopenhauer are united, if in little else, in
their abiding hatred of Hegel.
The ob+ect of @ierkegaard's attention is sin. !n his definitive
attack on Hegel, The Concept of *read, he points out that
%science, fully as much as poetry and art, assumes a #ood ... an
error in modulation is +ust as disturbing as an error in the
e&position of thought%. ... %but the correct mood <for consideration
of sin> is the stouthearted opposition of seriousness. The mood of
psychology is the dread corresponding to its discovery, and in its
dread it delineates sin, while again and again it is alarmed by the
sketch it produces. .hen sin is treated in such a way it becomes
the stronger ... As soon as sin is talked about as a sickness, an
abnormality, a poison, a disharmony, then the concept too is
falsified. )in does not properly belong in any science. !t is the
theme with which the ser#on deals, ...% @ierkegaard goes on to
say that ;thics is also not the correct science to deal with sin as
%;thics is after all an ideal science, ... ;thics bring ideality into
reality5 on the other hand its movement is not designed to raise
reality up into ideality.% )o it is only %dogmatics%, i.e. 'hristian
dogma, which is capable of dealing with sin: %.hile psychology is
fathoming the real possibility of sin, dogmatics e&plains original
sin, which is the ideal possibility of sin%. <e&cerpts from The
Concept of *read, )?ren @ierkegaard, "#$$>
(or Hegel %All that is rational is real, and all that is real is
rational%. 9utraged by the corrupt and sinful character of the
'hurch and society of his day, @ierkegaard it is not content to
e&plain or deplore it. !t must be denounced: %The new ethics
presupposes dogmatics and along with that original sin, and by
this it now e&plains the sin of the individual, while at the same
time it presents ideality as a tas+, not however by a movement
from above down, but fro# !elow up.%
)chopenhauer on the other hand builds a system of the type of
'lassical ,erman Philosophy, but with the Will at the centre: %The
process through which and in which the body e&ists, are nothing
but the phenomenal appearance of the .ill, ... the parts of the
body must correspond completely to the chief demands and
desires by which the .ill manifests itself5 ... Teeth, gullet, and
intestinal canal are ob+ectified hunger5 the genitals are ob+ectified
se&ual impulse.% )chopenhauer's philosophy is thus given the
name of Foluntarism, seeking to resolve the scepticism of @ant by
identifying the thinginitself with .ill Arather than ;go as with
(ichte or 2ature as in the earlier )chellingB.
)chopenhauer's position is, like (ichte, that of sub+ective
idealism: %what other kind of e&istence or reality could we
attribute to the rest of the material worldN (rom what source could
we take the elements out of which we construct such a worldN
*esides the will and the representation, there is absolutely nothing
known or conceivable for us.% <from The World as Will and
,epresentation, Arthur )chopenhauer, "#"O P "#$$>
)chopenhauer has made an important progression from @ant in
that he has recognised the identity between human needs and
sensuous representation: %every stronger or heterogeneous
affection of these senseorgans is painful, in other words, is
against the .ill5 ... to make them data for the understanding, <they
must> reach the higher degree at which they stir the will, that is to
say, e&cite pain or pleasure, though more often pain.% The
pessimistic tenor of )chopenhauer's philosophy is brought out
particularly sharply: e&perience is %pleasure, though more often
pain%J *ut the dualism of the sub+ectob+ect relation is resolved by
totally subordinating the material world to the individual .ill,
resolving the dualism in favour of the sub+ect, for whom the outer
world is +ust so much %pleasure, though more often pain%J
However, within of the secular religious mentality of classical
epistemology, this sub+ective idealism is invariably reactionary in
its political implications because it belittles the creative function
of labour and promotes the unrestricted action of the rulers. The
resistance of 2ature to the .ill is %pain% which must be overcome
by greater force.
Thus both )chopenhauer and @ierkegaard re+ect what they see
as Hegel's %rationalism%, in favour of a turn inward to (aith, in the
case of @ierkegaard, and .ill in the case of )chopenhauer. !n both
cases the value of @nowledge is deliberatively discounted in
favour of eeling, 4eason in favour of Will Abe it =ivine or
humanB, ;&perience in favour of Suffering.
*oth these tendencies have inspired and attracted the political
4ight, and there is certainly nothing progressive or optimistic
about them. *oth were religious but nonconformist, @ierkegaard
a devout 1utheran at war with the established 'hurch,
)chopenhauer a respectable ,erman bourgeois, with a somewhat
/2ew Age8 interest in Hinduism.
!t is easy to say that their philosophy was a negative, pessimistic
response to the rise of the proletariat, but why and how is such a
reaction e&pressed in such epistemologyN And why at this timeN
And also, there is a grain of truth: the doctrine of absolute
rationality is itself a form of secular religion, as shown by 1udwig
(euerbach in his "#$" Essence of Christianity.
2ote that )chopenhauer was not
an opponent of science. !n fact,
prior to his philosophical writing,
he was himself active in natural
science Aespecially in the popular
business of analysing sensationsB.
Pragmatism as well as
;&istentialism owes a debt to
Foluntarism and for e&ample in
the form of the 9perationalism of
Percy *ridgman, gets along with
natural science 6uite as well as
empiricism or better. The name
of %!rrationalism% which we can
attach to ;&istentialism and
Foluntarism and to a certain
e&tent also Pragmatism, should
not be taken as a ter# of a!use.
!rrationalism comes forward to
point out the limitations and
failures of reason and e&perience,
and it has its grain of truth.
!ote and $ill
The period following the e&purgation of Hegelianism in
,ermany has -ohn )tuart Mill the leading figure of philosophy in
*ritain and Auguste 'omte in (rance. *oth were great
synthesisers and reflected the scientific optimism of the
bourgeoisie of their time, taking their inspiration from @ant and
Hume, seemingly unmoved by either Hegelianism or its
condemnation in ,ermany. ;ach, however, respond to the changed
social conditions of ;urope by the promotion of ;thics.
Mills' ;thics is that of 0tilitarianism. -eremy *entham,
renowned for his theories of prison reform, should properly be
given credit as originator of 0tilitarianism, but it was Mills was
systematically elaborated the theory and did so in con+unction with
political economy and his theoretical work on the foundations of
the *ritish political system.
'omte coined the term %Positivism%, by which he understood
the %third phase% of development of human society after theology
and metaphysics, in which e&planations were in terms of essences,
final causes, and other abstractions. The modern positive stage, is
distinguished by an awareness of the limitations of human
knowledge. @nowledge, he held, could only be relative to man's
nature as a species and to his social and historical situation.
Absolute e&planations were therefore better abandoned for the
more sensible discovery of laws based on the observable relations
between phenomena. )ociology would reduce social facts to laws
and synthesise the whole of human knowledge.
'omte was no democrat however. His notion of social
organisation imitated the hierarchy and discipline of the 'atholic
church. (rom various ;nlightenment philosophers he adopted the
notion of historical progress, and from )aint)imon he drew the
need for a basic and unifying %sociology% to e&plain e&isting social
organisations and guide social planning for a better future.
1ike Mill, he held that the underlying principles of society are
individual egoism, encouraged by the division of labour, and the
combination of efforts and the maintenance of social cohesion by
means of government and the state. However, 'omte re+ected
democracy, emphasising hierarchy and obedience, and like )aint
)imon, he held that the ideal government would be made up of an
intellectual elite, utilising a kind of humanist religion in order to
secure social cohesion.
*oth men assisted in promoting women's suffrage in the wake
of the tragic death of the love of their life, and both were
advocates of reform of various kinds within their own country. !n
philosophy, both emphasise the rational analysis of the data of
perception and give priority to social development.
!n these two %progressive% bourgeois gentlemen, we see in
classic form the national characteristics of *ritish and (rench
philosophy: Mill, an ethic based on the laws of the political
economy of laisse- faire capitalism, 'omte, an ethic of the benign
dictatorship of 4eason based on laws of sociohistorical formation
of knowledge and belief.
% &e' Period of Essential
(e)elopent
=ecember "#$" marks a discontinuity of spectacular sharpness
in ,erman philosophy. -ust as in ;instein's physics there can be no
simultaneity of events separated in space, so also, in the broader
;uropean scene, the rupture of "#$" is manifested in an array of
changes, reflecting a common underlying process of
transformation, which in turn has its social spectacle in the
4evolutions of "#$#.
!n the period prior to "#$", ;uropean civilisation was working
out socialhistorical problems in a domain of thinking which had
been separated out from the whole, concrete life of society, the
Theory of @nowledge, an abstraction made possible by the highly
developed division of labour, and in particular the e&ploitation of
wage labour.
! have characterised this struggle as an alienated formulation of
the struggle to understand the relation of human labour and human
needs. *ut this by no means takes away form the fact that real
con6uests were made in the Theory of @nowledge. Human society
was long, long ago shattered by the social division of labour, and
the transcendence of this rupture is a long drawn out historical
struggle. The mystical character of the process follows from the
limitations imposed on professional thinkers under conditions
where the real contact with 2ature, real production and the real
satisfaction of natural human needs is unspoken and unconscious
because the producing class itself is silent. .ell, it is not silent
but it is not heard.
The period of transformation of bourgeois ideology we are
looking at is the period, in *ritain, from the publication of the
$eople.s Charter in "#K# which continued up to the final 'hartist
demonstrations in "#$#, the same year which saw the popular
uprising in Paris in (ebruary, bringing down the -uly Monarchy,
the rioting in Fienna which led to the fall of Metternich and the
emancipation of the peasantry, the nationalist uprisings in
Hungary, the movement for representative government in
,ermany and the publication of the Co##unist 'anifesto, and
leads up to the founding of the (irst !nternational and The
American 'ivil .ar in "#3K and the Paris 'ommune in "#I". The
uprisings and revolutions of "#$# are all defeated but all in one
way or another see many of their ob+ectives achieved during the
period of relative stability and prosperity which followed.
The theory of knowledge has already gone as far as it can go in
the "#$$ Manuscripts of @arl Mar&. *ut the bourgeoisie has
already declared for the e&purgation of Hegel and young Mar&'s
investigations have arrived at the founding of the 'ommunist
1eague and publication of the Co##unist 'anifesto calling for
the overthrow of all e&isting social conditions.
Meanwhile mechanics has attained a fairly high level of
development, but science generally is however still at an
embryonic level insofar as it relates to the human condition. The
%rigin of Species is not to be published until "#EO, while the
science of psychology is still embroiled in mysticism. HelmholtC
formulates the law of conservation of energy in "#$I and his work
on nerve signals and body heat during the "#EGs cut the ground
away from vitalism. The sciences of anthropology and sociology
begin from this period.
!n other words, speculation about the human condition had
taken bourgeois society as far as it could, it was now necessary to
begin the positive en6uiry and work out the details. !n a sense, one
must give 'omte his due: in declaring the end of the period of
metaphysical speculation and the beginning of the period of
natural scientific investigation with sociology at the centre, he
stated with fair accuracy e&actly what was taking place.
Hegel himself had e&pressed the same idea in his Lectures on
the $hilosophy of History:
Ana&agoras was the first to
enunciate the doctrine that
0nderstanding generally, or
4eason, governs the world. !t is
not intelligence as selfconscious
4eason, not a )pirit as such that
is meant5 and we must clearly
distinguish these from each other.
The movement of the solar
system takes place according to
unchangeable laws. These laws
are 4eason, implicit in the
phenomena in 6uestion. *ut
neither the sun nor the planets,
which revolve around it
according to these laws, can be
said to have any consciousness of
them.
A thought of this kind that
2ature is an embodiment of
4eason5 that it is unchangeably
subordinate to universal laws,
appears nowise striking or
strange to us. .e are accustomed
to such conceptions, and find
nothing e&traordinary in them.
And ! have mentioned this
e&traordinary occurrence, partly
to show how history teaches, that
ideas of this kind, which may
seem trivial to us, have not
always been in the world5 that on
the contrary, such a thought
makes an epoch in the annals of
human intelligence. Aristotle
says of Ana&agoras, as the
originator of the thought in
6uestion, that he appeared as a
sober man among the drunken.
)ocrates adopted the doctrine
from Ana&agoras, and it
forthwith became the ruling idea
in Philosophy, e&cept in the
school of ;picurus, who ascribed
all events to chance.
%! was delighted with the
sentiment,% Plato makes
)ocrates say %and hoped ! had
found a teacher who would show
me 2ature in harmony with
4eason, who would demonstrate
in each particular phenomenon
its specific aim, and in the whole,
the grand ob+ect of the 0niverse.
! would not have surrendered this
hope for a great deal. *ut how
very much was ! disappointed,
when, having Cealously applied
myself to the writings of
Ana&agoras, ! found that he
adduces only e&ternal causes,
such as Atmosphere, ;ther,
.ater, and the like.% !t is evident
that the defect which )ocrates
complains of respecting
Ana&agoras's doctrine, does not
concern the principle itself, but
the shortcoming of the
propounder in applying it to
2ature in the concrete. 2ature is
not deduced from that principle:
the latter remains in fact a mere
abstraction, inasmuch as the
former is not comprehended and
e&hibited as a development of it
an organisation produced by and
from 4eason. ! wish, at the very
outset, to call your attention to
the important difference between
a conception, a principle, a truth
limited to an a!stract form and
its determinate application, and
concrete development.
<$hilosophy of History,
!ntroduction>
The problem is that the Theory of @nowledge has been left as
%unfinished business%.
.hat is more, ;uropean society is undergoing a further leap in
the social division of labour, and the pursuit of the natural sciences
will be manifested in a division of labour in the production of
ideas which further e&acerbates the problem. *ritish political
economy and (rench social theory have the elements of the
puCCle, but they cannot put it all together. The ,erman bourgeoisie
has suffered humiliating defeat at the hands of the -unkers, and
,erman !dealism has been debunked.
This time marks the beginning of a new epoch of essential
development of bourgeois ideology. /ature has spo+en. !n
searching for an understanding of the human condition, one side,
which ! will call Irrationalis#, wants to turn away, to turn inward,
re+ecting the value of knowledge in favour of (aith or .ill5 the
other side,$ositivis# seeks an ethic of knowledge based on the
accumulation of the positive knowledge of the sciences.
An Historic Split
The essential reason for this rupture in bourgeois ideology is the
birth of a selfconscious workers' movement. (oremost among
those who gave voice to this new historic force is @arl Mar&.
Mar&'s theory developed on the basis of bourgeois society and the
whole history of bourgeois thought5 it was not an transcription of
the thoughts of proletarians and nor did it base itself on a non
e&istent %proletarian culture%. !t is nevertheless the theoretical
e&pression of the social interests and historical destiny of the new
social force to which bourgeois society had given birth. !t is the
independent historic destiny of the working class which gives to
Mar&ism its essential character. Try as it may, bourgeois ideology
can no longer represent the %whole people%.
The split within bourgeois ideology comes from the fact that it
has recoiled from monism and returned to one or another form of
scepticism.
However, the proletariat e&ists only as a part of bourgeois
society. Any ideology which expresses its fate, must also share its
fate. 4evolutionary socialist ideology has its own essential path of
development, different and distinct from that of bourgeois
ideology. However, the two intersect and mutually affect one
another. .ithout for a moment suggesting that Mar&ism develops
in some pure and independent way, isolated from the development
of bourgeois culture, it is still necessary to recognise two distinct
organisms bourgeois and revolutionarysocialist ideology.
%narchis and !ounis
4evolutionary socialist ideology also developed in a struggle.
*oth theoretical anarchism and modern socialism sprung from the
dissolution of the Houng Hegelians and drew upon the whole of
bourgeois culture. The struggle between Anarchism A*akunin,
Proudhon, and othersB and 'ommunism AMar& and ;ngelsB was
the principal a&is of development of the workers' movement
throughout the ne&t two generations including the (irst
!nternational, the Paris 'ommune and the 4ussian 4evolution.
Andy Blunden, 1998.
Further reading
Q Principles of the Philosophy of the (uture , 1udwig (euerbach "#$K
Q Attack on Hegel , by (riedrich )chelling, "#$"
Q )chelling R Hegel , ;ngels "#$"
Q The 'oncept of =read , )?ren @ierkegaard "#$$
Q Mar&Ms "#$$ Manuscripts
Q Theses on (euerbach , Mar& "#$E
Q ,od R the )tate , *akunin "#ID
Q /1udwig (euerbach8 , ;ngels "##G
Value_of_Knowledge | Hegel-by-HyperText