Status Updates From Early Philosophical Writings

...And to this extent the Humean system is skeptical and the Critical system is dogmatic— and indeed negatively so.’

‘...the Humean system holds open the possibility that we might someday be able to go beyond the boundary of the human mind, whereas the Critical system proves that such progress is absolutely impossible, and it shows that the thought of a thing possessing existence and specific properties in itself and apart from any faculty of representa­tion is a piece of whimsy, a pipe dream, a nonthought...

Footnote:

‘‘Ich bin schlechthin, weil ich bin.” This striking expression occurs again in exactly the same form at the beginning of Fichte’s Foundations of the Entire Wissenschaftslehre: “I am absolutely, because I am.” Indeed, this formula recurs so frequently in Fichte’s Jena writings that it might well serve as the unofficial motto of the early Wissenschaftslehre.’

... I have discovered a new foundation, out of which it will be easy to develop the whole of philosophy. Kant’s philosophy, as such, is correct— but only in its results and not in its reasons.“

“[Aenesidemus] has overthrown Reinhold in my eyes, has made me suspicious of Kant, and has overturned my whole system from the ground up. One cannot live under the open sky. It cannot be helped; the system must be rebuilt. And this is what I have been faithfully doing for the past six weeks or so. Come celebrate the harvest with me!...

“Fichte is now the soul ofJena,” wrote Hölderlin in a letter to Neuffer of November, 1794.

‘...the Foundations of Natural Right is, in the strictest sense, a true extension of the argument of the Foundation of the Entire Wissenschaftslehre...This [books] ingenious argument, which has no precise parallel in Kant’s writings on practical philosophy, profoundly influenced Hegel and had an important impact upon the subsequent history of European social philosophy.’

...Both the young Hölderlin and the young Friedrich Schlegel expressed admiration for Fichte’s style as a lecturer and author.’

‘...Fichte was a celebrated orator, and for a reader willing to use a bit of imagination the printed texts of Fichte’s public speeches still make stirring reading. See, for example, Concerning Human Dignity and Some Lectures concerning the Scholar's Vocation, which are translated below, Sections II and IV....

“...the Foundations of the Entire Wissenschaftslehre, has, to the best of my knowledge, not been understood at all, and...no one has made any use of it. The book in question does not appear able to dispense with oral assistance.”

After explaining the unfavorable circum­ stances under which the Foundations was written and distinguishing be­ tween his valid ideas and his imperfect presentation of the same, he adds: “As I see it, the presentation of the Wissenschaftslehre will require by itself an entire lifetime.” As it turned out, even an entire lifetime proved insufficient for Fichte’s task...

Reinhold candidly shared with Fichte his reservations and questions concerning the latter’s writings, and Fichte replied with long, detailed explanations and answers. Fichte’s letters to Reinhold con­ tain some of the clearest statements he ever produced of his basic ideas, and for that reason they remain invaluable sources for students of the Wissenschaftslehre.

...Fichte alienated people through his personality before he could make his ideas accessible to them. Fichte lacked the ability to put up with everyday
life.”

...shortest route to the attainment of his goals. And when anything stood in his way, then his inflexibility turned into rudeness, and his energy into recklessness. He was never able to understand that old habits are stronger than new ideas; thus he was continually coming into conflict with the per­sons with whom he had to deal. The reason for most of the conflicts was that..

‘Fichte allowed himself to be drawn into conflicts and polemical quarrels far too often and too easily for his own good. Rudolf Steiner’s diagnosis of the situation is marvelously apt:

“There was something violent about Fichte’s manner of behavior. Again and again a peculiar pathos of ideas—which accompanied his scientific ideas just as much as his political ones—led him to seek the straightest and shortest...

...Few major texts in the history of philosophy cry out more loudly for explanation and clarification.’

I can attest to this!!

English readers interested in Fichte will be familiar with Peter Heath’s 1970 translation of the Foundations. But though the Foundations must be the central text for any interpretation of Fichte’s early (or “Jena”) system, it is a deeply flawed and extraordinarily obscure work—as generations of readers have testified and as Fichte himself recognized from the beginning...

On pause till i read Wissenschaftslehre v1.

‘as soon as he had gained his initial bearings in Kant’s writings, concentrated his attention on some of the most notoriously difficult issues in Kant’s work: the problematic connection between the transcendental I of the First Critique and the moral subject of the Sec­ond, between the realm of nature and the realm of freedom, or, more generally, between the Critique of Pure Reason and the Critique of Practical...

‘The texts assembled in this volume are all concerned, in one way or another, with elucidating the early version of the Wissenschaftslehre.’

‘Because I believe that no informed interpretation of Fichte’s system of philosophy is possible without some familiarity with the context within which it was conceived and articulated, I have limited my editorial efforts to providing information of this sort.’

Fichte surprised the hell out of me with how good he was. After his Attempt at a Critique I was chalking him up to be another confused abberation of transcendental philosophy like Reinhold, when out of nowhere he is changed into something great. After his "Concept Concerning the Wissenschaftlehre" I'm genuinely excited to read his main works