Chapter 3 Preface to the third edition

Improvements have been made in many places in this third edition, especially in terms of clarity and certainty.However, since this book is a textbook whose purpose is to summarize, the text is still compact, formal and abstract.In order to fulfill its mission, the necessary explanations and illustrations must be given in oral speeches. Since the second edition of this book, there have been many criticisms of my philosophical thinking.Most of these criticisms show that they have done little special research on the field of philosophy.Such a light discussion of a work that has been thought through for many years and has been worked out with seriousness and rigorous scientific method does not give any pleasant impression.And reading through eyes full of arrogance, vanity, jealousy, sarcasm, and other bad emotions will not produce anything instructive.Cicero said: "True philosophy is satisfied with a few judges, and it deliberately avoids the masses. For to the masses, philosophy is disgusting and suspicious. Therefore, if anyone wants to attack philosophy, he is very likely. Approved by the crowd" (Cicero: Tuscul. Quaest. I. II.).So the less insightful and less thorough an attack on philosophy, the more popular it will be.It is not difficult to understand why there is often a narrow hostile passion mixed with vague understanding in the reaction of others.Other objects are presented to the senses, or to representations as a whole of intuitive impressions.If one wishes to discuss these objects, one always feels the necessity of having some degree, however humble, of knowledge of them.At the same time, these objects are also easier to call attention to healthy common sense, because they are based on the familiar fixed present.But a man lacking all this, [without a little knowledge, and not based on healthy common sense], can boldly oppose philosophy, or rather any preposterous and empty image of philosophy, which arises from his ignorance of it. And imagined, fabricated.They had nothing to start their discussions with, so they wandered among vague, empty, and therefore meaningless things. —I have done this unpleasant and fruitless business elsewhere, and have given a naked exposure to a similar phenomenon of ignorance and passion intertwined.

Not so long ago, from the grounds of theology and even religious consciousness, it seemed that a serious scientific inquiry into God, the divine, and reason seemed to have been stimulated on a wider scale. But the movement thwarted that hope from the start.Because this argument starts with a personal attack.Neither the pious side of the accusation, nor the free rational side of the charge, hold arguments that do not touch on substance itself, much less realize that in order to properly discuss substance both must enter the realm of philosophy.A personal attack based on a very specific external aspect of religion shows a kind of megalomaniac pride in wanting to judge an individual's Christian faith from its own arbitrary authority, thus imposing on the individual an earthly or eternal Seal of Conviction.Dante, inspired by the poems of the Divine Comedy, dared to use Peter's key and condemned many of his contemporaries - all dead of course - even popes and emperors to hell.Modern philosophy has come under a disgraceful attack that it condescends the individual man to the status of God.But just contrary to this attack based on false inferences, there is another completely realistic style of presumptuousness, that is, he pretends to be the judge of the world, judging an individual's belief in Christianity, and condemning the innermost crimes of the individual.This mantra of absolute authority is to assume the name of Christ our Lord, and to assert that the Lord dwells in the hearts of these judges.Christ said (Matthew 7, 20): "Know them by their fruits." Such exaggerated and contemptuous condemnations and sentences are not good fruits.He continued: "Not everyone who calls me Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven. Many will say to me on that day: Lord, Lord, did we not preach in your name? We Haven't you cast out demons in your name? Haven't we performed many miracles in your name? I must tell you plainly: I don't know you yet, leave me all, you evildoers!" Those who He who boasts and believes that he has Christianity alone, and demands that others accept his faith, is no better than he who casts out devils in the name of Christ.On the contrary, it is rather said that people like them, like those who believe in the prophetess of Revost, pride themselves on being able to listen to wandering ghosts and awe them, but do not know how to drive out and repel these anti-Christian, Slavish superstitious lies.Likewise, they are seldom sufficiently capable of uttering a few words of wisdom, and quite incapable of the great acts of advancing knowledge and science, which is their mission and duty.Knowledge is not yet science.They use a large number of irrelevant external programs of religious beliefs as their tedious work, but in terms of the content and substance of their beliefs, they only dryly worship the name of Christ our Lord, and only use their prejudices to scorn and slander. They mock the use of academic theory, but they do not know that academic theory is the foundation of the Christian church's beliefs.For the spiritual, full of thought and scientific expansion disturbs, even stops, clears up their subjective self-important grandiosity, that is, their dogmatic self-confidence in the unspiritual, fruitless and fruitful, confident that they Mastered Christianity, and exclusively arranged Christianity.This spiritual enlargement is most definitely distinguished in Scripture from mere faith, and the latter becomes truth only through the former.Jesus said ("John 7, 38"): "Whoever believes in me, out of his belly will flow rivers of living water." This statement is immediately explained and explained in §39 below, which means not believing The temporary, physical, temporal incarnation of Christ can have this effect, and he is not yet the truth itself.In §39 faith is so prescribed that the words are addressed to those who believe in him and will receive the Holy Spirit.Because the Holy Spirit has not yet descended, because Jesus has not yet been glorified—the image of the not yet glorified Christ was then present in time in the flesh, or (the same thing), that is, later conceived as the immediate object of faith personal body.In this world, Christ has revealed his eternal nature and mission to young people in person orally, with the purpose of reconciling himself with God and the world with him, and revealing the way of salvation and moral teaching to people.And the youth's belief in him included all this.In any case, this belief, which is by no means devoid of the strongest certainties, can only be interpreted as a beginning, as a conditional basis, as something unfinished.Those who have such a belief have not yet received the Holy Spirit, though they should have received the Holy Spirit at first—and this Spirit is truth itself.Until this Holy Spirit later becomes a faith, it is sufficient to lead people to all truth.But people with that belief always stay in that certainty and limited condition.But certainty itself is only subjective, and can only lead to the fruit of certainty in a subjective form, which in turn leads to the consequences of arrogance, denigration and punishment of others.They go against the teaching of the Bible and cling to subjective certainty against the Holy Spirit.And the Holy Spirit or Spirit is the magnification of knowledge, which is also the truth.

Religious Pietism was as devoid of scientific and general spiritual content as the Enlightenment, of which it was directly the object of attack and rejection.The Enlightenment, which pays attention to abstract reason, has eliminated all the content of religion by virtue of its abstract and content-free thinking in form, which is completely different from the content-emptiness of the piety, which reduces faith to the mantra of saying "Lord, Lord, Lord". No difference.No one is better than the other.When they argue together, there is no material or common ground that they can touch, so it is impossible to achieve academic exploration and then obtain knowledge and truth.On the one hand, the theology of the Enlightenment insisted on its formalism, and only knew how to call for freedom of conscience, freedom of thought, freedom of teaching, and even reason and science.This liberty is indeed the category of the unlimited right of the mind, and is the first condition of truth for that—

Another special condition of faith.But what are the rational principles and laws contained in a truly free conscience, what are the contents and teachings of free belief and free thought, and so on, when it comes to the substance of the contents, they cannot actually explain, but only stay in a Negative formalism and a kind of "freedom" to express opinions freely and freely.The content itself thus becomes irrelevant.Furthermore, they cannot reach the content of the truth because the Christian community must be a community united by a bond of doctrine and faith.And the general abstraction of the insipid, lifeless intellectualism could not tolerate a Christianity which was fixed in itself and which had developed its particular content and teachings.Contrary to this, on the other hand, the pietists pride themselves on the name of the Lord, and frankly and openly scorn those works which develop or expand faith into spirit, substance, and truth.

So this religious controversy, though it has aroused pride, resentment, personal attacks, and empty talk, has made a lot of noise, but it has not produced fruit.Their debate cannot grasp the substance, cannot lead to reality and knowledge. —Philosophy can only be content to be left out of this game, and philosophy is happy to be out of the territory invaded by personal attacks and abstract generalizations. If it is also involved in this situation, then, It can only meet unpleasant and unhelpful things. When the greatest unconditional interest in human nature lacks depth and richness, the religious consciousness (both pietistic and abstract intellectual) finds only the highest satisfaction without content, and philosophy becomes nothing but An occasional subjective need.The unconditional interest is dealt with in both religious consciousnesses, especially in the abstract theoretical school, in such a way that it does not require philosophy to satisfy that interest.It even thought, and rightly thought, that this newly created philosophic satisfaction would disturb the original religious satisfaction in the narrower sense.In this way, philosophy is completely subordinated to the needs of individual subjective freedom.But for the subjective individual, philosophy is not indispensable.Only when he encounters doubts and criticisms does he feel the need for philosophy to support himself and refute the other party.Philosophy exists only as an inner necessity which is stronger than the subject itself.When the human spirit is restlessly driven by this necessity, it strives to overcome it, and seeks worthwhile enjoyment for the impulse of reason.So without any stimulus, not even that of religious authority, philosophy can be seen as a superfluity and a dangerous, or at least a desirable luxury, and the work of this science can be done more freely. Leave alone the interest in seeking substance and truth.If theory, as Aristotle said, is the highest blessing, the best of things of value, then those who have shared in this happiness may know that what they enjoy, That is, the necessary satisfaction of their spiritual nature, they can not forcefully ask others, but can allow their own needs and satisfaction to be realized within their own scope.What has been considered above is a style that naturally steps into the realm of philosophy.The louder this atmosphere is, the less deeply we engage in philosophical research.Therefore, the more thoroughly and profoundly you engage in philosophical research, the more lonely you will be and the more silent you will be to the outside world.

The culture of shallowness and boredom in philosophy is coming to an end, and will soon force itself into deep research.But seriousness in a business (Sache) that is great in itself and self-satisfying can only be expected to be accomplished after a long period of hard work in its development, and in the task of immersing itself in it for a long time. This book-like outline is the work I have painstakingly completed in accordance with the philosophical mission mentioned above.The second edition of this book sold out very quickly, and I am relieved that there are many people out there engaged in silent and admirable philosophical research besides shallow and idle clamor, which is why I published this book. A new version is expected.

Berlin, September 19, 1830.