In order to accommodate the needs of the audience of my philosophical lectures for a text, I would like to have this outline of philosophy published a little earlier than I had originally anticipated. Due to the limited nature of the outline, this book not only fails to develop in detail according to the content of the concept, but also particularly restricts the development of the systematic deduction of the concept.And systematic deduction must contain proofs that we know in other sciences, and such proofs are indispensable for a philosophy worthy of the name of science. The title "Outline of the Encyclopedia of Philosophy" is intended to indicate the outline of the whole system on the one hand, and on the other hand to indicate that the development of individual programs has yet to be told orally.

But the compendium is not just compiled and arranged to suit an external purpose, like shortening or summarizing existing ready-made and well-known materials according to a special purpose.The presentation of this book is not so, but to reveal how to give philosophy a new treatment according to a new method, which, I hope, will be recognized as the only truly consistent method.So perhaps this may be more beneficial to the public: if the objective situation allows me to publish other departments of philosophy (natural philosophy and philosophy of spirit) in advance, as I did for the first department of the "Encyclopedia of Philosophy"—— "Logic", once contributed to the public.But in any case I believe that, in the present presentation, the material on the side of approaching representations and familiar experiential content, though limited, is as far as transitional points - which can only arise through the [development] of concepts mediation—it seems at least to make it clear that the method of [contradictory] development is adequate in two respects, namely, first, that it differs from the mere externality sought by other sciences. In parallelism; secondly, it differs from the usual way of dealing with philosophical objects, which assumes a format and then, according to these formats, externally and arbitrarily arranges all the material in parallel, as in the previous method.Furthermore, due to the strangest misunderstanding, the inevitability of the development of concepts is forced to be satisfied with accidental and subjective connections.

We have seen that the same willful style also occupies the content of philosophy and leads to intellectual adventures; It became a kind of arrogance to the point of madness.Astonishing as it is, maddening as it is, its content is often full of familiar fragments of fact, just as its form is mere bits of witty, methodical, readily available ingenuity, queer. It cobbles together flat and affectated skewed opinions, but its ostensible academic seriousness cannot conceal the truth of self-deception.On the other hand, we have also seen that a superficial style of work, which lacks deep thinking, appears as a sign of clever skepticism and self-effacing criticism that cannot understand the thing-in-itself. The level of arrogance is on the contrary increasing.These two tendencies in the academic world have for some time fooled the seriousness of learning among the Germans, smoothed down their deep philosophical claims, and aroused contempt or contempt for the science of philosophy, which even now This attitude, which pretends to be intellectually modest, boldly speaks out on philosophically high questions, claiming that rational knowledge—that is, knowledge we take the form of proofs—has no right to ask.

The first phenomenon just mentioned can be partly regarded as the enthusiasm of young and middle-aged people in the new era.This enthusiasm manifests itself in science as it does in politics.When this enthusiasm welcomes the new dawn of the spirit with a carnival mood, without deep labor, one immediately wants to go directly to appreciate the beauty of ideas, and to revel in the hopes aroused by this enthusiasm for a certain period of time. When it comes to perspectives, it is easy for people to forgive such excessive and uninhibited fantasies.Because basically its core is healthy, and the floating cloud it spreads around this core will soon disappear by itself.But the other phenomenon is more objectionable, because it calls forth an intellectual weakness and incapacity, which it endeavors to cover up with a self-deceived vanity which overwhelms the sages of all ages.

But one other pleasant thing to note and bring up is that, against both tendencies, a philosophical interest, and a serious love of higher knowledge, has remained modest and unostentatious.It is true that this interest is mostly expressed in the form of direct knowledge or emotion, but this is enough to indicate the inner and deep impulse to seek rational insight. ——Only this kind of rational insight can give people human dignity.For this interest, rational insight can at best be the fruit of philosophical knowledge, so that intellectual argument, which at first seems to despise, is at least recognized by it as a condition [preparation to higher knowledge].To satisfy this interest in knowing the truth, I offer this attempt as an introduction or preface.It is to be hoped that such a purpose will be successfully accepted.

Heidelberg, May 1817.