people within； and where nothing remarkable is possessed in learning or in science； and least of all
in Philosophy。 Thought is； on the contrary； simply its manifestation； clearness is its nature and itself。
The act of manifestation is not a condition which may be or may not be equally； so that thought
may remain as thought when it is not manifested； but its manifestation is itself； its Being。 Numbers；
as will be remarked in respect of the Pythagoreans； are unsuitable mediums for expressing
thoughts； thus monas； dnas； trias are； with Pythagoras； unity； difference； and unity of the unity
and of the difference。 The two first of the three are certainly united by addition； this kind of union
is； however； the worst form of unity。 In Religion the three make their appearance in a deeper sense
as the Trinity； and in Philosophy as the Notion； but enumeration forms a bad method of
expression。 There is the same objection to it as would exist to making the mensuration of space
the medium for expressing the absolute。 People also quote the Philosophy of the Chinese； of the
Fo？； in which it is said that thoughts are represented by numbers。 Yet the Chinese have explained
their symbols and hence have made their meaning evident。 Universal simple abstractions have been
present to all people who have arrived at any decree of culture。
iii。 We have still to remark in the third place； that Religion； as such； does not merely form its
representations after the manner of art； and also that Poetry likewise contains actual thoughts。 In
the case of the poets whose art has speech as medium； we find all through deep universal thought
regarding reality； these are more explicitly expressed in the Indian Religion； but with the Indians
everything is mixed up。 Hence it is said that such races have also had a Philosophy proper to
themselves； but the universal thoughts of interest in Indian books limit themselves to what is most
abstract； to the idea of rising up and passing away； and thus of making a perpetual round。 The
story of the Phoenix is well known as an example of this； it is one which took its origin in the East。
We are able similarly to find thoughts about life and death and of the transition of Being into
passing away； from life comes death and from death comes life； even in Being； in what is positive；
the negation is already present。 The negative side must indeed contain within it the positive； for all
change； all the process of life is founded on this。 But such reflections only occasionally come forth；
they are not to be taken as being proper philosophic utterances。 For Philosophy is only present
when thought； as such； is made the absolute ground and root of everything else； and in these
modes of representation this is not so。
Philosophy does not reflect on any particular thing or object already existing as a first substratum；
its content is just Thought； universal thought which must plainly come first of all； to put it otherwise；
the Absolute must in Philosophy be in the form of thought。 In the Greek Religion we find the
thought…determination 〃eternal necessity；〃 which means an absolute and clearly universal relation。
But such thought has other subjects besides； it only expresses a relation； the necessity to be the
true and all…embracing Being。 Thus neither must we take this form into our consideration。 We
might speak in that way of a philosophy of Euripides； Schiller or Goethe。 But all such reflection
respecting； or general modes of representing what is true； the ends of men； morality and so on； are
in part only incidentally set forth； and in part they have not reached the proper form of thought；
which implies that what is so expressed must be ultimate； thus constituting the Absolute。
C。 Particular theories found in Religion。
In conclusion； the philosophy which we find within Religion does not concern us。 We find deep；
speculative thoughts regarding the nature of God not only in the Indian Religions； but also in the
Fathers and the Schoolmen。 In the history of dogmatism there is a real interest in becoming
acquainted with these thoughts； but they do not belong to the history of Philosophy。 Nevertheless
more notice must be taken of the Schoolmen than of the Fathers； for they were certainly great
philosophers to whom the culture of Christendom owes much。 But their speculations belong in part
to other philosophies such as to that of Plato； which must in so far be considered for themselves；
partly； too； they emanate from the speculative content of Religion itself which already exists as
independent truth in the doctrine of the Church； and belong primarily to faith。 Thus such modes of
thought rest on an hypothesis and not on Thought itself； they are not properly speaking themselves
Philosophy or thought which rests on itself； but as ideas already firmly rooted； they act on its
behalf either in refuting other ideas and conclusions or in philosophically vindicating against them
their own religious teaching。 Thought in this manner does not represent and know itself as the
ultimate and absolute culmination of the content； or as the inwardly self…determining Thought。
Hence； too； when the Fathers； seeing that the content of the Christian Religion can only be
grasped after the speculative form； did； within the teaching of the Church； produce thoughts of a
highly speculative nature； the ultimate justification of these was not found in Thought as such； but in
the teaching of the Church。 Philosophic teaching here finds itself within a strongly bound system
and not as thought which emanates freely from itself。 Thus with the scholastics； too； Thought does
not construct itself out of itself； but depends upon hypotheses； and although it ever rests more and
more upon itself； it never does so in opposition to the doctrine of the Church。 Both must and do
agree； since Thought has to prove from itself what the Church has already verified。
c。 Philosophy proper distinguished from Popular Philosophy。
Of the two departments of knowledge allied to Philosophy we found that the one； that of the
special sciences； could not be called a philosophy in that it； as independent seeing and thinking
immersed in finite matter； and as the active principle in becoming acquainted with the finite； was
not the content； but simply the formal and subjective moment。 The second sphere； Religion； is
deficient in that it only had the content or the objective moment in common with Philosophy。 In it
independent thought was an essential moment； since the subject had an imaginary or historical
form。 Philosophy demands the unity and intermingling of these two points of view； it unites the
Sunday of life when man in humility renounces himself； and the working…day when he stands up
independently； is master of himself and considers his own interests。 A third point of view seems to
unite both elements； and that is popular Philosophy。 It deals with universal objects and
philosophizes as to God and the world； and thought is likewise occupied in learning about these
matters。 Yet this Philosophy must also be cast aside。 The writings of Cicero may be put under this
category； they contain a kind of philosophy that has its own place and in which excellent things are
said。 Cicero formed many experiences both in the affairs of life and mind； and from them and after
observing what takes place in the world； he deduced the truth。 He expresses himself with culture
on the concerns most important to man； and hence his great popularity。 Fanatics and mystics may
from another point of view be reckoned as in this category。 They give expression to a deep sense
of devotion； and have had experiences in the higher regions。 They are able to express the highest
content； and the result is attractive。 We thus find the brightest gleams of thought in the writings of a
Pascal … as we do in his Pensées
But the drawback that attaches to this Philosophy is that the ultimate appeal … even in modern
times … is made to the fact that men are constituted such as they are by nature； and with this Cicero
is very free。 Here the moral instinct comes into question； only under the name of feeling； Religion
now rests not on what is objective but on religious feeling； because the immediate consciousness
of God by men is its ultimate ground。 Cicero makes copious use of the consensus gentium； in
more modern times this appeal has been more or less left alone； since the individual subject has to
rest upon himself。 Feeling is first of all laid hold of； then comes reasoning from what is given； but in
these we can appeal to what is immediate only。 Independent thought is certainly here advanced；
the content too； is taken from the self； but we must just as necessarily exclude this mode of
thinking from Philosophy。 For the source from which the content is derived is of the same
description as in the other cases。 Nature is the source in finite sciences； and in Religion it is Spirit；
but here the source is in authority； the content is given and the act of worship removes but
momentarily this externality。 The source of popular Philosophy is in the heart； impulses and
capacities； our natural Being； my impression of what is right and of God； the content is in a form
which is of nature only。 I certainly have everything in feeling； but the whole content is also in
Mythology； and yet in neither is it so in veritable form。 The laws and doctrines of Religion are that
in which this content always comes to consciousness in a more definite way； while in feeling there
still is intermingled the arbitrary will of that which is subjective。
Introduction
B。 Relation of Philosophy to Other
Departments of Knowledge。
3。 Commencement of Philosophy and of its History。
Now that we have thus defined the Notion of Philosophy to be the Thought which； as the universal
content； is complete Being； it will be shown in the history of Philosophy how the determinations in
this content make their appearance little by little。 At first we only ask where Philosophy and its
History begin。
a。 Freedom of Thought as a first condition。
The general answer is in accordance with what has been said。 Philosophy begins where the
universal is comprehended as the all…e