To arrive at a practical solution in the political problem, one must take the road of aesthetics because, in Schiller’s opinion, it is only through beauty that we arrive at freedom. This can only be demonstrated if we first know the principles by which reason is guided in political legislation; for, although in its aesthetic state human action is truly free and it is free to the highest degree from any constrictions, it is not, nevertheless, beyond laws. Reason and (...) the illumination of the mind, Friedrich Schiller believes, are not enough to make the truth triumph and heal the political: an education of feeling is necessary. The education of feeling represents the most stringent necessity as it becomes both a means to render efficient the improvement of ideas and judgments in practical life, and a cause generating this improvement. For, any amelioration in the sphere of the political must have in view the ennoblement of the character, and the instrument most at hand to this aim is the art of the beautiful.Beauty is the common object of the two impulses or instincts (reason and experience) and is best expressed through the concept of play; it is only play that renders man complete and develops his double nature. Making the beautiful a mere play does not involve a degradation of beauty; restricting the beautiful, which is regarded as an element of culture, to mere play is not in contradiction with the dignity of beauty, but we must look at the idea of play as it was expressed by Johan Huizinga also, and see man as the homo ludens providing the art of life. (shrink)

Contributed seminar papers; the Goethe Society and the Centre of German Studies, JNU, organized a seminar on 17th-18th March 2005, at JNU, New Delhi, commemorating the bi-centenary of Friedrich Schiller, 1759-1805; papers on his work entitled "Über die ästhetische Erziehung des Menschen in einer Reihe von Briefen".

Friedrich Schiller: Über Anmut und Würde Edition Holzinger. Taschenbuch Berliner Ausgabe, 2016 Vollständiger, durchgesehener Neusatz mit einer Biographie des Autors bearbeitet und eingerichtet von Michael Holzinger Entstanden 1793, Erstdruck in: Neue Thalia (Leipzig), 2. Jg., 1793, Heft 2. Textgrundlage ist die Ausgabe: Friedrich Schiller: Sämtliche Werke, Auf Grund der Originaldrucke herausgegeben von Gerhard Fricke und Herbert G. Göpfert in Verbindung mit Herbert Stubenrauch, Band 1-5, 3. Auflage, München: Hanser, 1962. Herausgeber der Reihe: Michael Holzinger Reihengestaltung: Viktor (...) Harvion Umschlaggestaltung unter Verwendung des Bildes: Friedrich Schiller (Pastell von Frenzel nach dem Gemälde von Ludovike Simanowitz, 1793) Gesetzt aus der Minion Pro, 11 pt. (shrink)

The poet and dramatist Friedrich Schiller was also a profound philosopher, who described his work On the Asethetic Education of Man as 'the best thing that I have done in my life'. This impassioned treatise analyses politics, revolution and human nature to define the relationship between beauty, art and morality. Expressed as a series of letters to a patron, it argues that only an aesthetic education--rather than government reform, religion or moral teachings--can achieve a truly free society, and (...) must be placed at the heart of human experience. One of the most important works of German philosophy, its arguments remain as arresting and inspiring as when they were first written. (shrink)

Kallias, oder, Über die Schönheit -- Über Anmut und Würde -- Vom Erhabenen -- Über das Pathetische -- Über die ästhetische Erziehung des Menschen in einer Reihe von Briefen -- Über naive und sentimentalische Dichtung.

Friedrich Schiller’s notion of moral virtue includes self-determination through practical rationality as well as sensual self-determination through the pursuit of aesthetic value, i.e., through beauty. This paper surveys conceptual assumptions behind Schiller’s notions of moral and aesthetic perfections that allow him to ground both, moral virtue and beauty on conceptions of freedom. While Schiller’s notions of grace and dignity describe relations between the aesthetic and the moral aspects of certain determining actions, the ‘aesthetic condition’ conceptualises human (...) beings from the perspective of aesthetic self-determinability. Schiller thereby provides a normative aesthetic standard that not only affects the moral nature of our motives and actions, but also of what we, as human beings, want to and should be conceived of in the first place. As I argue in this paper, considering this aesthetic self-determinability from a moral perspective results in an aesthetic constitution of moral virtue, which in turn justifies aesthetic obligations. Schiller thereby merges the perfections of the two normative domains for an extended anthropological conception of aesthetically infused notion of moral virtue while assuring the conceptual autonomy of each normative domain. Giving aesthetic demands a practical normative role by partly constituting moral virtue and thereby still maintain their aesthetic normative source is a move that opens up many resources for current research on the interactions between various normative demands, such as aesthetic reasons for moral or legal judgements and action, aesthetic obligations or weighing varying sources and elements of normative authority and hegemony against each other. (shrink)

Jakob Friedrich Fries (1773–1843) zählt sicherlich zu den bedeutendsten Denkern der auf Kant folgenden Phase der deutschen Philosophie. Das wird in eindrucksvoller Weise durch die Beiträge dieses Bandes belegt, die aus Vorträgen auf dem Fries-Symposion hervorgingen, das im Oktober 1997 an der Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena stattfand. Die Autoren beleuchten die Lebensumstände von Fries, ordnen sein Werk philosophiegeschichtlich ein und setzen sich systematisch mit erkenntnistheoretischen, naturphilosophischen, wissenschaftstheoretischen und politischen Aspekten seiner Philosophie auseinander. Auch die Rezeption des Fries’schen Werkes bei (...) Naturwissenschaftlern wie M. J. Schleiden und Philosophen wie E. F. Fries und L. Nelson kommt zur Sprache. (shrink)

Friedrich Schillers Abhandlung Über die ästhetische Erziehung des Menschen in einer Reihe von Briefen aus dem Jahre 1795 gehört zu den wirkmächtigsten theoretischen Texten zur Schönheit und zur Kunst um 1800. Wie aus den Forschungen zu Hölderlin, Jean Paul, Herder, den Brüdern Schlegel, Schelling u.v.m. bekannt ist, wurden Schillers Briefe umgehend nach ihrem Erscheinen gelesen und kritisch für die je eigene Entwicklung verarbeitet. Noch Hegel und Vischer bezogen sich in ihren umfassenden Ästhetiken um die Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts kritisch (...) und affirmativ auf Schillers großen Wurf. Darüber hinaus vermag Schiller der rousseauschen Aufklärungs- und Kulturkritik eine Form zu geben, die bis ins späte 20. Jahrhundert– so bei Habermas– ihre Wirksamkeit behält. In diesen „gelehrten Briefen“ gelingt Schiller mithin nicht nur eine Legitimation der Kunst in Zeiten revolutionären Umbruchs in Europa, sondern auch eine integrative Vermittlung zeitgenössischer Philosophie von Kant über Reinhold bis Fichte im Zeichen der Ästhetik. (shrink)

Fred Beiser, renowned as one of the world's leading historians of German philosophy, presents a brilliant new study of Friedrich von Schiller (1759-1805), rehabilitating him as a philosopher worthy of serious attention. Beiser shows, in particular, that Schiller's engagement with Kant is far more subtle and rewarding than is often portrayed. Promising to be a landmark in the study of German thought, Schiller as Philosopher will be compulsory reading for any philosopher, historian, or literary scholar engaged (...) with the key developments of this fertile period. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

Ausgehend von einer Kritik an der Kultur der Aufklärung entwickelt Friedrich Schiller eine Anthropologie echter idealistischer Denkungsart. In seiner ästhetischen Lehre vom Menschen spürt er den Bedingungen der Möglichkeit von Freiheit und Humanität nach und entdeckt in der Schönheit die Voraussetzung einer jeden Bildung. Mittels einer transzendentalen Explikation wird in der vorgelegten Studie Schillers anthropologischer Entwurf kritisch geprüft und der Zusammenhang von Schönheit, Freiheit und Bildung philosophisch entfaltet. Auf diese Weise kann die ungebrochene Bedeutung ästhetischen Denkens für die (...) Pädagogik der Gegenwart aufgezeigt werden"--Back cover. (shrink)

Critic, poet and philosopher Friedrich von Schlegel was a leading figure of German Romanticism. In the two years before his untimely death, he wrote three cycles of lectures intended as part of a larger project to lay the foundations of a new general philosophy. Two of these cycles, 'Philosophie des Lebens' and 'Philosophie des Sprache und des Wortes', are reissued here in an 1847 English translation. The first presents Schlegel's understanding of philosophy as independent of theology or politics, concerned (...) with the 'inner spiritual life' of humankind. The second explores the nature of communication through language and art. Schlegel argues that full human consciousness cannot be restored by Enlightenment science, but only by divine revelation and redemption. He offers no ready-made solutions, but encourages his listeners to develop their own responses to these questions. (shrink)

Abstract in English: The short essay is about impressive philosophical ideas of the great German dramatist Friedrich Schiller (1749-1805). In his “letters on the aesthetic education…” he critisizes, with respect to human behaviour, too much reason and too stringent principles, leading to a neglect of positive emotions such as empathy; he argues in favour of an aesthetic lifestyle. This is supported by biological as well as mental aspects of human self-understanding. My article follows these lines of thought in (...) a sequence of sections: The nature of human beings – a permanent topic of science, philosophy and the arts. The professional dramatist as temporary philosopher- Schiller’s “Letters on the aesthetic education…”. Against an “egoism of reason”, in favour of empathy. Basic human capabilities allow for an objective view on nature. Positive versus negative effects of the division of labour…and thoughts on a new “wholeness” with an aesthetic lifestyle. After Schiller’s philosophical phase, back to new dramas on stage – Wallenstein’s fragile sense of empathy. Evolution, empathy and the “art of living” – survival of the fittest or survival of the nicest? Self-contradictory self-images – Demetrius the illusiory tsar as rival of Boris Godunow. -/- Deutsche Zusammenfassung: Für uns Menschen gehört zum „guten Leben“, dass wir uns sowohl als Natur- wie auch als Kulturwesen nicht nur erkennen, sondern wirklich annehmen. Dazu spricht sich Schiller besonders für einen Vorrang der Empathie vor Grundsätzen der Vernunft und für eine ästhetisch begründete Lebenskunst aus. Mein Essay folgt solchen Denklinien in einer Sequenz der Abschnitte: Die Natur des Menschen – Dauerthema der Wissenschaft. Der Berufsdramatiker als Philosoph - Schillers Briefe zur ästhetischen Erziehung. Gegen den Egoismus der Vernunft, für den Vorrang der Empathie. Grundfähigkeiten des Menschen: Die Natur betrachten, die Natur denken. Segen und Elend der Arbeitsteilung…und Hoffnung auf neue Ganzheit in Formen ästhetischen Lebens. Zurück zur dramatischen Dichtung - Wallensteins brüchiges Verhältnis zur Empathie. Evolution, Empathie und Lebenskunst - „Survival of the fittest“ oder „Survival of the nicest“? Selbstbilder der Seele im Widerspruch - Der falsche Zar Demetrius als Rivale von Boris Godunow. -/- . (shrink)

Aesth. Hegel, Aesthetics Aesth. Ed. Schiller, On the Aesthetic Education of Man CI1PR Marx, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right Civil War Marx, The Civil War in France CPE Marx, Critique of Political Economy Em. Hegel, Enzyklopadie der ...

Bei Schiller bedeutet Spielen ein Handeln frei von Notwendigkeit und Pflicht und bedeutet dementsprechend das Genießen der Befreiung von der Notwendigkeit. Es ist diese Erfahrung der Freiheit, die das Spiel mit dem ästhetischen Phänomen der Schönheit verbindet und seinen großen erzieherischen Wert ausmacht. Die Eigenschaft, die wir als Schönheit bezeichnen, setzt dieselbe Leichtigkeit des Geistes voraus wie das Spiel. In einem schönen Kunstwerk herrscht weder die Form über den Stoff noch umgekehrt. Ein Kunstwerk ist ein freies Zusammenspiel von Form (...) und Inhalt, von Schönheit und Notwendigkeit, so dass es die höchste Erscheinungsform des Spiels darstellt. Spiele sind Stufen auf dem Weg zur Schönheit, weil sie die Spieler zum Genuss der freien Kreativität erziehen. Im Unterschied zu Schiller verwirft Montessori das Spiel als Erziehungsmittel. Sie behauptet, dass die Kinder arbeiten sollen, um sich ihren eigenen Weg durch die Schwierigkeiten der Realität zu bahnen. Allerdings lassen sich beim näheren Hinsehen in ihren Methoden viele Elemente der Freiheit erkennen, welche Schiller dem Spiel zuschreibt. Beispielsweise können sich die Kinder die Gegenstände aussuchen, mit denen sie „arbeiten” wollen. Sie brauchen sie auch nicht zwingend auf die Art einzusetzen, wie es ihnen die ErzieherInnen vormachen. Und vor allem genießen die Kinder ihre „Arbeit” voll und ganz. In der folgenden Abhandlung erläutert die Autorin zunächst Schillers Gedanken zur Erziehung durch Spiel, insbesondere im Hinblick auf das Phänomen der Phantasie. Im zweiten Teil setzt sich die Autorin mit der Frage auseinander, ob es richtig ist zu behaupten, dass Montessori die Phantasie als Erziehungsmittel ablehnt. (shrink)

Resumo O entendimento de Friedrich Nietzsche sobre Friedrich Schiller é bem conhecido e culmina em 1888, na desqualificação que se tem com “Schiller: ou o trompetista moral de Säckingen”. Mas é sabido que suas considerações são contraditórias, mudando com frequência nas diferentes etapas de sua vida produtiva. A monografia de Nicholas Martin marca um ponto de viragem no que diz respeito a este tema, refutando a disseminada compreensão de que somente o jovem Nietzsche teria experimentado admiração (...) por Schiller, depois vindo a assumir distância cada vez maior. A dívida de Nietzsche para com Schiller, segundo Martin, é constante, e manifesta-se sobretudo em sua recepção das cartas estéticas. O que se pretende fazer ver aqui, seguindo a tradição de Wolfgang Riedel, é que o ensaio Sobre a poesia ingênua e sentimental [Über naive und sentimentalische Dichtung] é tão ou mais importante neste contexto sobretudo quando dirigimos nosso enfoque para o contexto da crítica cultural. Várias declarações de Nietzsche, por exemplo, formulada em 1870, “não estou em condições de empregar essa terminologia esplendorosamente schilleriana para o inteiro e mais amplo domínio de toda a arte”, confirmam tal suposição, e uma vez que, no mesmo momento de elaboração de O nascimento da tragédia no espírito da música, ele se propõe a “[…] fortalecer o conceito do ingênuo e do sentimental”, tem-se justificada a intenção de relacionar ambas as obras-chave de ambos os Dichterphilosophen [filósofos poetas] do ponto de vista da crítica cultural.Friedrich Nietzsche's opinion about Friedrich Schiller is well known and culminates in 1888 in the disqualification “Schiller: oder der Moral-Trompeter von Säckingen”, but at the same time it is recognized that his considerations are contradictory and that they change in the different moments of his productive life. Nicholas Martin's study from 1996 marks a caesura in this subject by refuting the widespread view that only the young Nietzsche experienced admiration for Schiller and that there was a growing distance afterwards. Nietzsche's debt to Schiller, according to Martin, is constant and is manifested above all in his reception of the aesthetic letters. We would like to demonstrate in the tradition of Wolfgang Riedel that the essay Über naive und sentimentalische Dichtung is equally or even more important in this context, especially when it is approached from the standpoint of cultural criticism. Several statements by Nietzsche, such as the one formulated in 1870 “Ich bin nicht im Stande, jene herrliche Schillersche Terminologie auf das ganze weiteste Bereich aller Kunst anzuwenden” confirm this assumption, and when, at the very moment when Die Geburt der Tragödie aus dem Geist der Musik was being prepared, Nietzsche proposed that the “[…] Begriff des Naiven und des Sentimentalistischen ist zu steigern”, the attempt to link both key works of the two Dichterphilosophen from the point of view of cultural criticism is justified. (shrink)

Schiller’s importance for the Romantic generation is discussed in relation to three writers and thinkers whose work arose in close connection—and by no means always consonance—with Schiller’s thought. The authors discussed—Friedrich Hölderlin, Heinrich von Kleist, and Johann Wolfgang Goethe—were writers of a broadly Romantic disposition who, nevertheless, often stood apart from the Romantic mainstream. Of the three, Hölderlin and Kleist give prominence to philosophical concerns, absorbing key influences from Kant as well as Schiller. Goethe, by contrast, (...) drew writerly influences from Schiller rather than philosophical ones, though it is also true that his acceptance of a philosophical objection Schiller had raised brought about the literary experiment that was to achieve fabled significance in German letters under the heading of Weimar Classicism. (shrink)

This essay examines the earliest reception of Johann Gottlieb Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre focusing on his notion of consciousness as “Wechselbestimmung”. The adoption of this notion leads to a divergent discussion which casts doubts on the idea of a reliable continuity in the history of reception. At this point in history, Fichte’s readers seem to be interested in a cultural aspect of his philosophical argument that is not discussed by him. Fichte is looking for a way to explain the unity of consciousness (...) in a strictly epistemological sense, whereas his poetically orientated readers identify his concept of conflicting consciousness with a cultural problem. Only Holderlin discusses the logical problem addressed by Fichte, but deliberately transfers it into his poetics. Schiller and Friedrich Schlegel discuss the concept of “Wechselwirkung” in respect of problems within modern culture partially evoking a theory of alienation. They are not interested in Fichte’s epistemological problem, even though it also is central to modern subjectivity in philosophical terms.Der Aufsatz untersucht die fruheste Rezeption der Wissenschaftslehre Johann Gottlieb Fichtes im Blick auf seinen Begriff vom Bewusstsein: die „Wechselbestimmung“. Dabei zeigt die Momentaufnahme ein divergentes bis disparates Bild der philosophischen Diskussion, das zur Geltung kommen soll gegenuber einer idealisierten Auffassung von hermeneutisch zuverlassiger Rezeptionsgeschichte. Es wird gezeigt, dass die ‚Rezipienten‘ sich gewisserma.en fur einen externen Aspekt des Theorems interessieren, das in dem philosophischen Werk nicht Thema ist. Wahrend Fichte mit der in Frage stehenden Einheit des Bewusstseins ein Grundproblem der theoretischen Philosophie diskutiert, behandeln seine poetisch ausgerichteten Leser die „Wechselbestimmung“ eher aus kulturkritischer Perspektive. Allein Holderlin setzt sich mit Fichtes eigentlich gemeintem, logischen Widerspruch auseinander, verschiebt seine Darstellung und ‚Losung‘ jedoch bewusst auf die Ebene seiner philosophischen Dichtung. Schiller und Friedrich Schlegel diskutieren unter „Wechselwirkung“ ein Problem der modernen Kultur, das teilweise Zuge einer Entfremdungstheorie annimmt. Sie gehen nicht auf den epistemologischen Gedankengang Fichtes ein, auch wenn dieser ebenfalls ein typisch modernes Problem behandelt: die Moglichkeit von Gewissheit im Rahmen der Subjektivitatsphilosophie. (shrink)

Biographical note: Jochen Golz, Goethe-Gesellschaft; Manfred Koltes, Goethe- und Schiller-Archiv an der Klassik Stiftung Weimar.

Inhalt: TEIL I Dominik SCHMIDIG: Sprachliche Vermittlung philosophischer Einsichten nach Fichtes Frühphilosophie. Thomas Sören HOFFMANN: Die Grundlage der gesamten Wissenschaftslehre und das Problem der Sprache bei Fichte. Jere Paul SURBER: Fichtes Sprachphilosophie und der Begriff einer Wissenschaftslehre. Holger JERGIUS: Fichtes »geometrische« Semantik. TEIL II Günter MECKENSTOCK: Beobachtungen zur Methodik in Fichtes Grundlage der gesammten Wissenschaftslehre. Hartmut TRAUB: Wege zur Wahrheit. Zur Bedeutung von Fichtes wissenschaftlich- und populär-philosophischer Methode. Jürgen STAHL: System und Methode - Zur methodologischen Begründung transzendentalen Philosophierens in Fichtes (...) »Begriffsschrift«. Kunihiko NAGASAWA: Eine neue Möglichkeit der Philosophie nach der Grundlage der gesammten Wissenschaftslehre. Teil III Katsuaki OKADA: Der erste Grundsatz und die Bildlehre. Hisang RYUE: Die Differenz zwischen »Ich bin« und «Ich bin Ich«. Christian KLOTZ: Der Ichbegriff in Fichtes Erörterung der Substantialität. Alois K. SOLLER: Fichtes Lehre vom Anstoß. Nicht-Ich und Ding an sich in der Grundlage der gesamten Wissenschaftslehre. Eine kritische Erörterung. Heinz EIDAM: Fichtes Anstoß. Anmerkungen zu einem Begriff der Wissenschaftslehre von 1794. Virginia LÓPEZ-DOMÍNGUEZ: Die Deduktion des Gefühls in der Grundlage der gesammten Wissenschaftslehre. Reinhard LOOCK: Gefühl und Realität. Fichtes Auseinandersetzung mit Jacobi in der Grundlage der Wissenschaft des Praktischen. TEIL IV Marek SIEMEK: Wissen und Tun. Zur Handlungsweise der transzendentalen Subjektivität in der ersten Wissenschaftslehre Fichtes. Daniel BREAZEALE: Der fragwürdige »Primat der praktischen Vernunft« in Fichtes Grundlage der gesamten Wissenschaftslehre. Marcin POREBA: Das Problem der transzendentalen Freiheit in semantischer Formulierung. Giuseppe DUSO: Absolutheit und Widerspruch in der Grundlage der gesamten Wissenschaftslehre. Manuel JIMÉNEZ-REDONDO: Der Begriff des Grundes in Fichtes Wissenschaftslehre. TEIL V Helmut GIRNDT: Das »Ich« des ersten Grundsatzes der Grundlage der gesamten Wissenschaftslehre in der Sicht der Wissenschaftslehre von 18042. Josef BEELER-PORT: Zum Stellenwert der Grundlage aus der Sicht von 1804. Eine Interpretation des Wechsels von analytisch-synthetischer und genetischer Methode in 5 der Grundlage. (shrink)

Text: Reproduktion der 2. Ausgabe Berlin 1924. - Eine gänzlich andere, eine fundamental neue Form der Beziehung des Besonderen aufs Allgemeine waltet in Goethes Naturbetrachtung, die von dem Urphänomen des Lebens ihren Ausgang nimmt. Darin zwar stimmt diese Betrachtung mit der wissenschaftlichen Physik überein, dass auch in ihr der Wert und die Kraft des Allgemeinen rückhaltlos anerkannt wird. Das Vergängliche, das zeitlich Wandelbare und Verfließende wird zum Gleichnis. Die morphologische Erkenntnis der Gestalten und des Gestaltenwandels, wie Goethe sie versteht, geht (...) niemals im Sinnlich-Einzelnen oder in einem Analogon des Sinnlich-Einzelnen auf. [Auszug aus dem Buch]. (shrink)

Die kantischen Studien Schillers und die Komposition des Wallenstein ist ein unveränderter, hochwertiger Nachdruck der Originalausgabe aus dem Jahr 1889. Hansebooks ist Herausgeber von Literatur zu unterschiedlichen Themengebieten wie Forschung und Wissenschaft, Reisen und Expeditionen, Kochen und Ernährung, Medizin und weiteren Genres. Der Schwerpunkt des Verlages liegt auf dem Erhalt historischer Literatur. Viele Werke historischer Schriftsteller und Wissenschaftler sind heute nur noch als Antiquitäten erhältlich. Hansebooks verlegt diese Bücher neu und trägt damit zum Erhalt selten gewordener Literatur und historischem Wissen (...) auch für die Zukunft bei. (shrink)

Jakob Friedrich Fries (1773-1843): A Philosophy of the Exact Sciences -/- Shortened version of the article of the same name in: Tabula Rasa. Jenenser magazine for critical thinking. 6th of November 1994 edition -/- 1. Biography -/- Jakob Friedrich Fries was born on the 23rd of August, 1773 in Barby on the Elbe. Because Fries' father had little time, on account of his journeying, he gave up both his sons, of whom Jakob Friedrich was the elder, to (...) the Herrnhut Teaching Institution in Niesky in 1778. Fries attended the theological seminar in Niesky in autumn 1792, which lasted for three years. There he (secretly) began to study Kant. The reading of Kant's works led Fries, for the first time, to a deep philosophical satisfaction. His enthusiasm for Kant is to be understood against the background that a considerable measure of Kant's philosophy is based on a firm foundation of what happens in an analogous and similar manner in mathematics. -/- During this period he also read Heinrich Jacobi's novels, as well as works of the awakening classic German literature; in particular Friedrich Schiller's works. In 1795, Fries arrived at Leipzig University to study law. During his time in Leipzig he became acquainted with Fichte's philosophy. In autumn of the same year he moved to Jena to hear Fichte at first hand, but was soon disappointed. -/- During his first sojourn in Jenaer (1796), Fries got to know the chemist A. N. Scherer who was very influenced by the work of the chemist A. L. Lavoisier. Fries discovered, at Scherer's suggestion, the law of stoichiometric composition. Because he felt that his work still need some time before completion, he withdrew as a private tutor to Zofingen (in Switzerland). There Fries worked on his main critical work, and studied Newton's "Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica". He remained a lifelong admirer of Newton, whom he praised as a perfectionist of astronomy. Fries saw the final aim of his mathematical natural philosophy in the union of Newton's Principia with Kant's philosophy. -/- With the aim of qualifying as a lecturer, he returned to Jena in 1800. Now Fries was known from his independent writings, such as "Reinhold, Fichte and Schelling" (1st edition in 1803), and "Systems of Philosophy as an Evident Science" (1804). The relationship between G. W. F. Hegel and Fries did not develop favourably. Hegel speaks of "the leader of the superficial army", and at other places he expresses: "he is an extremely narrow-minded bragger". On the other hand, Fries also has an unfavourable take on Hegel. He writes of the "Redundancy of the Hegelistic dialectic" (1828). In his History of Philosophy (1837/40) he writes of Hegel, amongst other things: "Your way of philosophising seems just to give expression to nonsense in the shortest possible way". In this work, Fries appears to argue with Hegel in an objective manner, and expresses a positive attitude to his work. -/- In 1805, Fries was appointed professor for philosophy in Heidelberg. In his time spent in Heidelberg, he married Caroline Erdmann. He also sealed his friendships with W. M. L. de Wette and F. H. Jacobi. Jacobi was amongst the contemporaries who most impressed Fries during this period. In Heidelberg, Fries wrote, amongst other things, his three-volume main work New Critique of Reason (1807). -/- In 1816 Fries returned to Jena. When in 1817 the Wartburg festival took place, Fries was among the guests, and made a small speech. 1819 was the so-called "Great Year" for Fries: His wife Caroline died, and Karl Sand, a member of a student fraternity, and one of Fries' former students stabbed the author August von Kotzebue to death. Fries was punished with a philosophy teaching ban but still received a professorship for physics and mathematics. Only after a period of years, and under restrictions, he was again allowed to read philosophy. From now on, Fries was excluded from political influence. The rest of his life he devoted himself once again to philosophical and natural studies. During this period, he wrote "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" (1822) and the "History of Philosophy" (1837/40). -/- Fries suffered from a stroke on New Year's Day 1843, and a second stroke, on the 10th of August 1843 ended his life. -/- 2. Fries' Work Fries left an extensive body of work. A look at the subject areas he worked on makes us aware of the universality of his thinking. Amongst these subjects are: Psychic anthropology, psychology, pure philosophy, logic, metaphysics, ethics, politics, religious philosophy, aesthetics, natural philosophy, mathematics, physics and medical subjects, to which, e.g., the text "Regarding the optical centre in the eye together with general remarks about the theory of seeing" (1839) bear witness. With popular philosophical writings like the novel "Julius and Evagoras" (1822), or the arabesque "Longing, and a Trip to the Middle of Nowhere" (1820), he tried to make his philosophy accessible to a broader public. Anthropological considerations are shown in the methodical basis of his philosophy, and to this end, he provides the following didactic instruction for the study of his work: "If somebody wishes to study philosophy on the basis of this guide, I would recommend that after studying natural philosophy, a strict study of logic should follow in order to peruse metaphysics and its applied teachings more rapidly, followed by a strict study of criticism, followed once again by a return to an even closer study of metaphysics and its applied teachings." -/- 3. Continuation of Fries' work through the Friesian School -/- Fries' ideas found general acceptance amongst scientists and mathematicians. A large part of the followers of the "Fries School of Thought" had a scientific or mathematical background. Amongst them were biologist Matthias Jakob Schleiden, mathematics and science specialist philosopher Ernst Friedrich Apelt, the zoologist Oscar Schmidt, and the mathematician Oscar Xavier Schlömilch. Between the years 1847 and 1849, the treatises of the "Fries School of Thought", with which the publishers aimed to pursue philosophy according to the model of the natural sciences appeared. In the Kant-Fries philosophy, they saw the realisation of this ideal. The history of the "New Fries School of Thought" began in 1903. It was in this year that the philosopher Leonard Nelson gathered together a small discussion circle in Goettingen. Amongst the founding members of this circle were: A. Rüstow, C. Brinkmann and H. Goesch. In 1904 L. Nelson, A. Rüstow, H. Goesch and the student W. Mecklenburg travelled to Thuringia to find the missing Fries writings. In the same year, G. Hessenberg, K. Kaiser and Nelson published the first pamphlet from their first volume of the "Treatises of the Fries School of Thought, New Edition". -/- The school set out with the aim of searching for the missing Fries' texts, and re-publishing them with a view to re-opening discussion of Fries' brand of philosophy. The members of the circle met regularly for discussions. Additionally, larger conferences took place, mostly during the holidays. Featuring as speakers were: Otto Apelt, Otto Berg, Paul Bernays, G. Fraenkel, K. Grelling, G. Hessenberg, A. Kronfeld, O. Meyerhof, L. Nelson and R. Otto. On the 1st of March 1913, the Jakob-Friedrich-Fries society was founded. Whilst the Fries' school of thought dealt in continuum with the advancement of the Kant-Fries philosophy, the members of the Jakob-Friedrich-Fries society's main task was the dissemination of the Fries' school publications. In May/June, 1914, the organisations took part in their last common conference before the gulf created by the outbreak of the First World War. Several members died during the war. Others returned disabled. The next conference took place in 1919. A second conference followed in 1921. Nevertheless, such intensive work as had been undertaken between 1903 and 1914 was no longer possible. -/- Leonard Nelson died in October 1927. In the 1930's, the 6th and final volume of "Treatises of the Fries School of Thought, New Edition" was published. Franz Oppenheimer, Otto Meyerhof, Minna Specht and Grete Hermann were involved in their publication. -/- 4. About Mathematical Natural Philosophy -/- In 1822, Fries' "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" appeared. Fries rejects the speculative natural philosophy of his time - above all Schelling's natural philosophy. A natural study, founded on speculative philosophy, ceases with its collection, arrangement and order of well-known facts. Only a mathematical natural philosophy can deliver the necessary explanatory reasoning. The basic dictum of his mathematical natural philosophy is: "All natural theories must be definable using purely mathematically determinable reasons of explanation." Fries is of the opinion that science can attain completeness only by the subordination of the empirical facts to the metaphysical categories and mathematical laws. -/- The crux of Fries' natural philosophy is the thought that mathematics must be made fertile for use by the natural sciences. However, pure mathematics displays solely empty abstraction. To be able to apply them to the sensory world, an intermediatory connection is required. Mathematics must be connected to metaphysics. The pure mechanics, consisting of three parts are these: a) A study of geometrical movement, which considers solely the direction of the movement, b) A study of kinematics, which considers velocity in Addition, c) A study of dynamic movement, which also incorporates mass and power, as well as direction and velocity. -/- Of great interest is Fries' natural philosophy in view of its methodology, particularly with regard to the doctrine "leading maxims". Fries calls these "leading maxims" "heuristic", "because they are principal rules for scientific invention". -/- Fries' philosophy found great recognition with Carl Friedrich Gauss, amongst others. Fries asked for Gauss's opinion on his work "An Attempt at a Criticism based on the Principles of the Probability Calculus" (1842). Gauss also provided his opinions on "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" (1822) and on Fries' "History of Philosophy". Gauss acknowledged Fries' philosophy and wrote in a letter to Fries: "I have always had a great predilection for philosophical speculation, and now I am all the more happy to have a reliable teacher in you in the study of the destinies of science, from the most ancient up to the latest times, as I have not always found the desired satisfaction in my own reading of the writings of some of the philosophers. In particular, the writings of several famous (maybe better, so-called famous) philosophers who have appeared since Kant have reminded me of the sieve of a goat-milker, or to use a modern image instead of an old-fashioned one, of Münchhausen's plait, with which he pulled himself from out of the water. These amateurs would not dare make such a confession before their Masters; it would not happen were they were to consider the case upon its merits. I have often regretted not living in your locality, so as to be able to glean much pleasurable entertainment from philosophical verbal discourse." -/- The starting point of the new adoption of Fries was Nelson's article "The critical method and the relation of psychology to philosophy" (1904). Nelson dedicates special attention to Fries' re-interpretation of Kant's deduction concept. Fries awards Kant's criticism the rationale of anthropological idiom, in that he is guided by the idea that one can examine in a psychological way which knowledge we have "a priori", and how this is created, so that we can therefore recognise our own knowledge "a priori" in an empirical way. Fries understands deduction to mean an "awareness residing darkly in us is, and only open to basic metaphysical principles through conscious reflection.". -/- Nelson has pointed to an analogy between Fries' deduction and modern metamathematics. In the same manner, as with the anthropological deduction of the content of the critical investigation into the metaphysical object show, the content of mathematics become, in David Hilbert's view, the object of metamathematics. -/-. (shrink)

Die Reihe Studien zur deutschen Literatur präsentiert herausragende Untersuchungen zur deutschsprachigen Literatur von der Frühen Neuzeit bis zur Gegenwart. Offen besonders auch für komparatistische, kulturwissenschaftliche und wissensgeschichtliche Fragestellungen, bietet sie ein traditionsreiches Forum für innovative literaturwissenschaftliche Forschung. Alle eingesandten Manuskripte werden doppelt begutachtet. Informationen zum Bewerbungsverfahren und zu Druckkostenzuschüssen erhalten Sie beim Verlag. Wenden Sie sich dazu bitte an den zuständigen Lektor Dr. Marcus Böhm.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Ideas 61.1 (2000) 115-132 [Access article in PDF] Schiller's Theory of Landscape Depiction Jason Gaiger This paper offers a critical discussion of the theory of landscape depiction which Friedrich Schiller developed in an important but neglected article on the work of Friedrich Matthisson, published in 1794. 1 The question of the value and status of landscape painting and poetry was (...) far from settled at the end of the eighteenth century, and Schiller's essay should be seen as making an important contribution to an ongoing debate. 2 The second half of the eighteenth century is marked by a profound ambivalence towards the natural world. On the one hand there is a remarkable "rediscovery" of nature, evidenced in such diverse but related phenomena as the vogue for English gardens and the appreciation of wild and "untamed places," such as the Alps and the Herz mountains. It is also the age of "sentiment," embracing a heightened sensitivity to all aspects of the physical world. And yet when we turn to the visual arts, we find landscape painting ranked far below history painting and portraiture. Precedence is given to the representation of human actions and emotions, and the depiction of the human figure remains the highest goal of ambitious art.The modern hierarchy of the genres was first established on a firm theoretical and practical basis with the founding of the French Royal Academy in the seventeenth century. The painter of living animals is ranked higher than the [End Page 115] painter of inanimate nature who depicts "choses mortes et sans mouvement." 3 The painter of human subjects, who imitates "the most perfect work of God," stands higher still. The highest achievement to which the artist can aspire, however, is history painting, the depiction of groups of figures in themes derived from biblical and mythical sources. To achieve this, the artist cannot depict what he sees but must employ both knowledge and imagination. The fundamental opposition here is between painting as a merely imitative or mechanical art, which is addressed to the eye alone, and painting as a work of "invention" or "imagination," which is addressed to the mind. Only the latter constitutes a properly liberal art, entitling the painter to stand alongside the poet as "un auteur ingénieux et savant" over and above the mere artisan or skilled laborer.The great popularity enjoyed by landscape painting in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was not met by any comparable elevation in its status as a fine art. Addressing students of the Royal Academy in London in 1770, Joshua Reynolds could continue to dismiss landscape and still-life as the "meaner walks of painting" which require only "mechanical" expertise. 4 For Reynolds the status of painting as a fine art is established through its treatment of the great subjects of history painting, that is, the depiction of human passions and the intellect. Only in tackling such themes does the artist succeed in addressing the imagination, which Reynolds describes as the "great end of art." 5 Although of comparatively recent origin, the genre of "landscape poetry" remained equally problematic and could not easily be reconciled with classicist ideals. New categories seemed to be required to comprehend the work of poets such as Albrecht von Haller and James Thomson, in which the varied and ever-changing aspects of the natural landscape were made the central protagonists of the poetic drama. While traditional forms such as the bucolic, the Arcadian, and the pastoral allowed the depiction of rural existence, the new "descriptive poetry" sought to celebrate the life of nature independently of man's intervening presence: it is nature itself rather than man's relation to nature which is made the poet's primary concern.Schiller's review of the third, expanded edition of Matthisson's poetry appeared in two parts in the Jenaer Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung, 11-12 September 1794. While the second half of the review is given over to a detailed discussion of Matthisson's poetry, the first part is reserved for an extended theoretical discussion in which Schiller... (shrink)

From the contents: Hoelderlins Trennung von Fichte (Sven Juergensen).- Die Deduktion der Philosophie nach Fichte und Friedrich von Hardenberg (Frank Ruehling).- Fruehromantische Subjektkritik (Christian Iber).- Das Verhaeltnis des Selbst zu Gott in Fichtes Wissenschaftslehre (Akira Omine).- Das Wir in der spaeten Wissenschaftslehre (Urs Richli).- Etre et Apparition selon la doctrine de la science de 1812 (Miklos Veto).