第3章 “从伯尔尼到法兰克福再到耶拿时期：失败的计划和新的开始”(5)

That Fichte’s rather abstract philosophical reflections would have served as this kind of flashpoint for poets is not surprising. The idea of the “imagination” as the unifying point between art and philosophy indeed, as the most important part or function of the human mind itself - had been hovering over European thought for some time before the upheaval of Kantian and Fichtean philosophy brought it to the forefront of discussion. Because the moderns had taken themselves to be attempting to understand the nuances of the human mind (in opposition to what they thought were their medieval predecessors’ preoccupation with investigating the nuances involved in God’s creation of the world), the idea of the human “imagination” had come to play a larger and larger role for them. Thus, even Thomas Hobbes, the great proselytizer for jettisoning the shackles of the Aristotelian/Scholastic past in favor of the “new science,” elevated imagination to a high rank, claiming in a late piece, “All that is beautiful or defensible in building . . . and whatsoever distinguisheth the civility of Europe from the barbarity of the American savages, is the workmanship of fancy,” which Hobbes had in earlier works identified with “imagination.”'"-^ The idea of “fancy” or the imagination had gradually been welded into neo-Platonic themes by the early eighteenth-century figure Anthony Ashley Cooper (the third earl of Shaftesbury), who in turn had attributed to the “imagination” the ability to forge a unity of sensibility and reason, of emotion and thought, which enabled us ultimately to be able to discern the “mutual dependency of things.”’'*

    费希特相当抽象的哲学反思也许早已被用作诗人的这种爆发点，这并不令人感到大惊小怪。作为艺术与哲学连接点——更确切地说作为人类精神自身最重要部分或功用——“想象”这一概念早在康德和费希特哲学崛起前就已长期在欧洲思想上空徘徊而且就已被推到欧洲思想探讨的前台。因为现代人早已把他们自己看作在尝试理解（与他们思考的作为他们中世纪先驱对研究涉及上帝创世细微差别的先入之见相对立的）人类精神细微差别，所以人类“想象”这一概念最终对于他们来说发挥着一种越来越大的作用。如此一来，甚至托马斯·霍布斯，这位扔掉亚里士多德哲学或经院哲学历史镣铐转而赞成“新科学”的宗教改革大家，同样也把想象提到一种很高的品类，在一篇后期作品中主张，“所有的建筑中优美或能防御的东西……凡是区分欧洲文明和粗鲁美国人野蛮的东西，皆为幻想力的工艺品”。这被霍布斯在早期著作中等同于“想象”。“幻想力”或“想象”这一概念早已被18世纪初安东尼·阿什利·库珀（第三任沙夫茨伯里伯爵）这个人物逐渐融入新柏拉图主义的主题，这位伯爵反过来把塑造感性与理性或情绪与思想的统一的能力归于“想象”，这就使我们能够最终得以分清“相互依存的东西”。

Indeed, so much attention had been paid to the role of the “imagination” in human affairs that it is not surprising that it suddenly became a central object in philosophical and literary discussions during this period. Kant himself in his Critique of Pure Reason had claimed that it was the faculty of the “transcendental imagination” that united the contributions of sensible intuition and spontaneous conceptual activity into the unity of consciousness; Schiller had taken Kant’s claim even further; and Fichte (typically) had completely radicalized it, claiming that “the whole enterprise of the human spirit issues from the imagination, and the latter cannot be grasped save through the imagination itself.”’^ For Fichte, the imagination suddenly became the faculty of the mind, the basis for all other activities. What had been an emerging theme in European intellectual life was suddenly promoted by Fichte to the status of the first rank. Freedom, the idea supposedly animating the Revolution, was to be shown to be more deeply rooted in human life than had previously been thought, and freedom was now linked firmly with the exercise of the imagination.

    更确切地说，这么多人早就关注“想象”在人类事务中的作用，以至于“想象”突然变成这个阶段哲学和文学探讨中的核心对象，这件事不会令人感到惊奇。康德本人早在他《纯粹理性批判》中就已主张，正是“超验的想象”官能把感性直观和自发概念活动归于意识的统一；席勒使康德的主张走得更远；费希特（典型地）完全把康德主张推向极端，声称人类精神的全部事业出自想象，想象不可能被理解成是依靠想象自身从而得到挽救。“对于费希特来说，想象突然变成心灵这一官能或构成所有其他活动的基础。这个早已成蓬勃兴起的欧洲知识生活主题的东西迅速地被费希特提到第一品类的地位。自由，这个据称激起法国大革命的观念，必将被证明是更加深深地扎根于人类生活而不是以前被人认作的东西，自由现在被牢牢地与想象活动联系在一起。

This only charged the atmosphere all the more at Jena, spurring the development of early Romanticism there. Two of the key figures in the development of Romanticism, August and Friedrich Schlegel, both lived in Jena for a period. August Schlegel moved to Jena in 1795 shortly after his marriage to Caroline Michaelis Bohmer, the daughter of a famous theologian in Gottingen, whose previous husband, a smalltown physician named Bohmer to whom she had been married at an early age, had died in 1788. Caroline Michaelis Bohmer Schlegel, an accomplished intellectual figure in her own right, had led an emancipated life that was to old-fashioned types quite simply scandalous; she had been part of the German Jacobins in Mainz, had been imprisoned by German authorities when they temporarily retook Mainz, and had suffered social banishment from her hometown when it was discovered that she had become pregnant following a short liaison with a younger French officer named Jean-Baptiste Dubois-Crance. August Schlegel, who had become infatuated with her at an early age (she did not reciprocate) offered to marry her, and despite her initial disinclination (she wrote to a friend that she still found the prospect of marriage to August Schlegel “laughable”), she finally decided after her imprisonment that marriage to him would, after all, be the safe and prudent thing to do.

    只是在耶拿才更加充满上述这样的氛围，它刺激了耶拿早期浪漫主义的发展。在浪漫主义发展过程中，奥古斯特·施莱格尔和弗里德里希·施莱格尔堪称两位主将，他们两人都在耶拿住过一段时间。奥古斯特·施莱格尔于1795年移居耶拿，其时他与卡罗利内·米夏埃利斯·伯默尔新婚燕尔，卡罗利内·米夏埃利斯·伯默尔系斯图加特一位著名神学研究家的千金，她的前任丈夫死于1788年，是某小镇内科医生，名叫伯默尔，与伯默尔结婚时她正值豆蔻年华。卡罗利内·米夏埃利斯·伯默尔·施莱格尔，一位凭其本身实力的有造诣的知识分子，早就过着一种解放了的对老派类型生活来说极其丑恶可耻的生活；她早就成为德国美因茨雅各宾俱乐部成员，遭到过德国当局的监视（其时德国当局暂时夺回美因茨），遭受过被她家乡社会团体开除的痛苦，因为有人发现她在跟一位名叫让-巴蒂斯特·迪布瓦-克朗塞的年轻法国军官短暂相好后怀了孕。奥古斯特·施莱格尔，少年时期就已热恋着她的施莱格尔，主动向她求婚（她没有答应），尽管她起初不愿意这桩婚事（她在致朋友信中说道她依旧发觉跟奥古斯特·施莱格尔成婚的前景是“荒唐可笑的”），她出狱后最终还是断定跟他结婚终究将会是做了件稳妥而慎重的事情。

Friedrich Schlegel also moved to Jena in 1799 with his new wife, Dorothea, herself also an intellectual in her own right; and she and Friedrich Schlegel were linked together in their own well-known scandal. The daughter of the famous philosopher, Moses Mendelssohn, she had at eighteen entered into an arranged marriage with Simon Veit, a wealthy banker in Berlin with no serious interest in intellectual matters.  When Friedrich Schlegel was in Berlin, he and Dorothea began an affair, which led to her leaving her husband and divorcing him in 1798.  Friedrich Schlegel then published his famous novel Lucinde, a thinly veiled autobiographical rendering of himself and Dorothea and the union of physical and spiritual passion they found with each other. The book itself caused a scandal - its portrayal of the union of sexuality and love was a bit risque for many temperaments at the time, including Hegel’s own - and made its author famous and notorious. Both Schlegels thereby cultivated a sense of having unconventional marriages in an age that was busy undermining all the old conventions.

    弗里德里希·施莱格尔同样也在1799年携同新任妻子多罗特娅移居耶拿，多罗特娅本人也是一位凭其本身实力的有造诣的知识分子；她和弗里德里希·施莱格尔因他们自己的众所周知的丑闻走到一起。作为著名哲学家莫泽斯·门德尔松的外孙女，她早在18岁时就已步入了与西蒙·法伊特包办的婚姻殿堂，法伊特是柏林腰缠万贯的银行家而拿知识问题不当回事。当弗里德里希·施莱格尔在柏林的时候，他和多罗特娅开始相好，这致使她离开了丈夫且在1798年与丈夫离了婚。弗里德里希·施莱格尔接着发表了一部著名小说《卢辛德》，小说以微带含蓄的自传体形式讲述着他自己与多罗特娅和那被他们俩发觉的彼此肉体激情和精神激情的结合。这部小说本身引起了一场丑闻——它关于性行为和爱情结合的描写对当时人们的很多性格（包括黑格尔自己的性格）相当有伤风化——并使它的作者毁誉参半。施莱格尔夫妇由此弄出了有悖于那个年代常规的婚姻观，这种婚姻观极大地削弱所有的旧有的社会习俗。

The Schlegels quickly attracted a circle of like-minded people to join them in Jena. August Schlegel had been invited to Jena in the first place by Schiller to work on Schiller’s magazine. Die Horen, and on the Allgemeine Literatur Zeitung. He became an “extraordinary” professor at the university. Friedrich Leopold Freiherr von Hardenberg (known better by his pen name, Novalis), who had been Friedrich Schlegel’s friend, also came to join the circle at Jena, as did the early Romantic Ludwig Tieck. (Holderlin had met Novalis during his earlier stay in Jena.) Schelling naturally fit into this circle, becoming the acknowledged philosopher of the group. Friedrich Schlegel himself became an “extraordinary” professor of philosophy (although his lectures on philosophy were by everyone’s admission a bit of a disaster). A whole host of other minor figures complemented the scene, and the intellectual energy created by the group spurred the development of Romanticism. (Indeed, the term “Romanticism” itself was coined and popularized by Friedrich Schlegel.)

    施莱格尔夫妇迅速吸引耶拿志趣相投的圈内人士加入他们的行列。奥古斯特·施莱格尔首先早就受到席勒邀请来耶拿为谢林主办的杂志《时序》和《文学总汇报》担任编辑工作。他当上了耶拿大学“特聘”教授。哈登贝格的弗里德里希·利奥波德·弗赖（以笔名诺瓦利斯闻名），作为弗里德里希·施莱格尔朋友，同样也来耶拿加入这个同仁圈，像早期浪漫派路德维希·蒂克同样也加入这个同仁圈一样。（荷尔德林早先在耶拿逗留期间就已和诺瓦利斯见过面。）谢林自然很适应这个同仁圈，成了这个群体中公认的哲学家。弗里德里希·施莱格尔本人同样也当上了哲学“特聘”教授（尽管他的哲学课使大家大倒胃口），一大批其他轻量级人物完善了这个群体搭建的舞台、由该群体创造出的知识能量促进了浪漫主义的发展。（实际上，术语“浪漫主义”自身由弗里德里希·施莱格尔造出并使之日渐流行。）

Friedrich Schlegel joyously referred to the university at Jena as a “symphony of professors.August and Caroline Schlegel’s house was the center of activity: Dorothea Schlegel wrote to friends in Berlin, “Such an eternal concert of wit, poetry, art, and science as surrounds me here can easily make one forget the rest of the world.Others such as the Romantic theologian Friedrich D. E. Schleiermacher were more or less honorary members of the group even though they did not live in Jena. Together, Friedrich and August Schlegel edited a journal, Athen(ium, which had a short life but which became one of the founding works of the early Romantic movement.

    弗里德里希·施莱格尔提到作为“教授交响乐”的耶拿大学显得非常高兴。“奥古斯特·施莱格尔和卡罗利内·施莱格尔家成了活动中心：多罗特娅·施莱格尔在致柏林朋友信中写道，“包围着我的这样一个关于哲人、诗歌、艺术和科学的永恒协奏曲可能很容易让人忘却其余的世界。”其他人例如浪漫派神学家弗里德里希·D·E·施莱尔马赫或多或少成了这个群体中受人敬重的成员，尽管他们不住在耶拿小镇。弗里德里希和奥古斯特·施莱格尔共同主编《雅典娜神殿》杂志，该杂志不久便停刊了，而它却成了早期浪漫主义运动奠基性作品中的一种。

If anything, the early Romantics took Fichte’s lectures on the freedom of the “I” in positing the “Not-I” as providing a springboard for the new movement, although the early Romantics hovering around the Schlegel circle gave it a twist that Fichte himself would not have condoned. Friedrich Schlegel proclaimed in one of his “fragments” for Athendum: “The French Revolution, Fichte’s philosophy, and Goethe’s Meister are the greatest tendencies of the age. Whoever is offended by this juxtaposition, whoever cannot take any revolution seriously that isn’t noisy and materialistic, hasn’t yet achieved a lofty, broad perspective on the history of mankind.”"^** Schlegel was to use Fichte’s idea about the freedom of the “I” to develop his own theory of “irony,” which in turn was used to undermine the familiar distinction between ancient and modern art (a distinction that had already come under attack from Lessing). Fichte (by following and radicalizing Kant) had shown that all people are radically free, that nothing can count for the “I” unless he actively lets it count; Schlegel argued that a true artist would not let any inherited forms count for him except insofar as he, the artist, “let them” count.

    如果说有什么特别之处的话，早期浪漫主义者把费希特关于“自我”自由设定“非我”的讲座看作是为新的运动提供了跳板，尽管围绕施莱格尔小组转的早期浪漫主义者对这场新的运动作了一种很可能就连费希特本人也不会宽恕的歪曲。弗里德里希·施莱格尔在他《雅典娜神殿》杂志“刊头语”之一中宣称：“法国大革命、费希特哲学和歌德《威廉·迈斯特的戏剧使命》代表着这个年代最大的趋势。无论谁都会对这三者的并列心服口服，无论谁都根本不可能严肃地看待一场不充满噪声和非物质主义的仍未实现人类史上神高而广远远景的革命。”施莱格尔必将利用费希特关于“自我”的自由思想从而发展他自己的“讽刺”理论，这反过来常常破坏了古代艺术与现代艺术之间熟悉的区分（一种早已遭到莱辛抨击的区分）。费希特（借助步康德后尘和使康德激进化的费希特）早已证明所有人都是彻底自由的，什么东西都不可能比得上“自我”有价值，条件是人们主动地让“自我”具有价值；施莱格尔辩称一个真艺术家不应该让任何被继承的形式使他具有价值，除非他这个艺术家“让任何被继承的形式”使他具有价值。

Schlegel thereby proposed replacing the older distinction between classical and modern art with what he argued was the more fundamental distinction between classical and Romantic art: Romantic art was to be characterized by the artist’s ironic distance from his own works, by his refusal to let himself and his works be completely absorbed into some external (“classical”) ordering. That this new distinction was not just the older distinction in different words was evinced by Schlegel’s including Shakespeare as one of the paradigmatic “Romantic” artists, an artist who was never completely “absorbed” in his plays. The Romantic artist could not let his creative imagination be ordered by rules (such as those of classical tragedy) that he himself did not posit. Indeed, as guided by the imagination, the artist was subject to no rules he did not impose on himself, and ironic distance from even those rules meant that the artist could never be completely absorbed or wholly revealed in his works.

    施莱格尔由此提出，用他力主的古典艺术与浪漫派艺术之间更加基本的区分，取代旧有古典艺术与现代艺术之间的区分，浪漫派艺术注定具有艺术家具有讽刺意味的与他们自己作品的保持距离的特点，注定具有艺术家拒绝让他本人和他作品完全被某种外部的（“古典的”）秩序所吸收的特点。新区分与旧区分不只是不同的用语，这个观点由于施莱格尔从而引起人们的注意，他把莎士比亚算作中规中矩的“浪漫派”艺术家中的一个，算作一位绝不会完全“专注”于自己剧作中的艺术家。浪漫派艺术家不可能让他们具有创造性的想象受到不被他们自己设置的规则（例如古典悲剧规则）的约束。更确切地说，作为受到想象指引的人，艺术家根本不受不被他们本人强加于自身的规则的束缚，具有讽刺意味的甚至与这些规则保持距离的艺术家绝不可能完全专注于他们的作品或完整地显露在他们的作品中。

The Romantics took Fichte’s idea of the self-authorization of the “P’ seriously but gave it an existential twist that went far beyond anything that Fichte himself would have envisioned. Fichte had argued that the intrinsic revisability of all our judgments was linked to our complete freedom to make such revisions, that only the “absolute F’ could determine for itself what was to count epistemically, morally, and aesthetically. Thus, the full and “boundless” spontaneity of the subject of thought and action could only be 5c//^bounded. Romantics such as Friedrich Schlegel took this “self’ to be not Fichte’s “absolute F’ but the real, existing self of the poet and critic, the self which can ironically both detach itself from its immediate environment, look on everything as something it could either accept or reject, and still situate itself in terms of a striving for the “absolute” that remains only an infinite “ideal,” not something ever achieved.

    浪漫主义作家认真地领会费希特关于“自我”的自我授权这一概念，但是他们对费希特的这一概念作了存在主义式的歪曲，从而使这一个概念与费希特本人有可能设想出的东西相去甚远。费希特早已论证道，我们一切判断的固有可修改性都与我们完全自由地做出这样的修改密切相关，唯独“绝对自我”可以独立地确定什么必将被算作认识论上、道德上和审美上的东西。这样一来，思想与行动问题的充分而“无穷的”自发性就可能只是自我的限定。浪漫主义作家例如弗里德里希·施莱格尔不是把“自我”看作费希特的“绝对自我”而看作诗人和批评家的真正现存的自我，这样的自我既能够以讽刺方式使它自身摆脱它直接的环境或把一切都看作或者可被它认同或者可被它摒弃的东西，又能够使它自已处于从下列方面来说的位置：追求“绝对”依然只是无限的“理想”而非曾经被得到的东西。

This in turn seemed to them to call for a more personal approach to art. For the Romantics, the exploration of the self, of the personal world of emotions and sensuality within the context of a rather abstract, holistic conception of “Being,” was more important than the abstract determinations of the categories of knowledge that Fichte had sought.  Those people for whom the older ties of religion had weakened but who were still looking for something that could redeem their lives found in Fichte’s call to actualize their own freedom a summons to explore themselves and in doing so to usher in a new world of freedom and reconciliation.

    上述做法反过来在他们看来是在诉诸一种更加个性化的艺术方法。对于浪漫主义作家而言，在一种相当抽象的整体的“存在”观念语境下，探索自我或探索情感与感性的个体化世界，这样做的重要性胜过抽象地确定早就被费希特寻求的知识范畴。对于某些人来说旧有的宗教纽带早已遭到削弱但他们依然在寻找某种可能对他们的生活起着救赎作用的东西，这样的人们在费希特关于实现他们自己自由的号召下发现考察他们自身的召晤并且发现在这样做过程中去迎接自由和和谐的新世界。

The Romantic movement that was born in Jena (partly out of Fichte’s lectures) was the product of a number of different personalities and, despite its professed ideals of unifying philosophy and poetry, was not particularly inclined to the kind of systematic philosophical thought that Fichte championed. Friedrich Schlegel, for example, found the paradoxical aphorism and the “fragment” to be the ideal manner of expressing his ideas on irony and on the essential incompleteness of all experience, of the constant forward movement of self-consciousness in the very activity of its more backward-looking recollections. As a movement, Romanticism tended to oppose itself to all previous schools of thought, and hence it is notoriously difficult to ascribe any unity to the Romantic movement since it self-consciously resisted any systematization or fixed and final categorization of itself.

    这场诞生于耶拿（部分地源于费希特的讲课）的浪漫主义运动是大量不同人格的产物，并且，尽管这场浪漫主义运动心怀把哲学和诗歌统一起来的公开声称的理想，仍然不是特别倾向于一种由费希特倡导的体系哲学思想。举例来说，弗里德里希·施莱格尔发觉悖论式格言和“札记”成了表达他关于下列两类概念的理想方式，反语概念与本质上所有的经验不完整性概念或本质上自我意识在它更加向后看的反思这个特有活动中不断向前运动的不完整性概念。作为一种运动，浪漫主义易于使它自己跟以前所有的思想流派为敌，因此要把任何统一归于浪漫主义运动实比登天还难，因为它自觉地抵抗它自身的系统化或它自身固定的和终极的分类。

Nonetheless, the Jena Romantics tended to have four related ideals.  First, they tended to believe in the unity of knowledge, not as the Enlightenment had — as a structured tree with various branches - but as a set of fragments developing itself from an inchoate whole, which could therefore not be a matter of “logic” but only of experience and imagination. Second, they fervently upheld the ideal of “subjective inwardness,” Innerlichkeit, the notion of the irreducibility and usually the primacy of subjective experience, all the while holding to a “realist” view of the world, refusing to hold that “Being” itself could be exhaustively comprehended in such subjective experience. They thus rejected Fichte’s idealist notion of the Fs fully comprehending the Not-I, holding instead that the background for any comprehension of experience necessarily includes a large element of uncomprehended (and maybe even incomprehensible) experience and that the function of art and theory is to call our attention to the relative open-endedness of the horizons of conscious life. Third, most of them reacted against the Enlightenment disenchantment of nature by calling for a kind of reenchantment of nature; but they also wished to do this without returning to anything like traditional or orthodox religion. (That the breakdown of the Romantic program would lead some - such as Friedrich Schlegel himself — to convert to Catholicism is not in this respect surprising; certainly Hegel did not find it surprising.) Fourth, and implied by their other views, they championed what they took to be the Fichtean notion of the primacy of the imagination over the “mere” intellect.

    尽管如此，耶拿浪漫主义者往往具有四个相互贯通的理想。第一，他们倾向于相信知识的统一，不像启蒙运动认为的统一——像一棵具有不同枝叶的主干结构的树那样的统一——而像一系列从不成熟的整体中生发出它自身的碎片那样的统一，知识统一问题因此不可能是“逻辑”问题而只可能是经验与想象问题。第二，他们热烈坚持“主观本质”（Innerlichkeit）这个理想、不可约概念和通常主观经验第一性，始终坚信“实在主义”世界观，拒不认为“存在”本身可以通过这种主观经验而被彻底领悟。他们因此摒弃费希特关于自我充分领会非我这一唯心主义看法，反而坚信关于领会经验的背景必然包含大量未被领会的（甚至也许不可理解的）经验因素，反而坚信艺术和理论的功用就是唤起我们关注意识生活视域的相对无止境性。第三，他们中绝大多数人依靠要求一种对自然的返魅来排斥启蒙运动对自然的祛魅；但是他们同样也希望在这样做时不要回到像传统或正统的宗教一样的东西。（打破浪漫主义计划将会致使某些人——例如弗里德里希·施莱格尔本人——皈依天主教，关于这件事情丝毫不会使人感到惊奇；当然黑格尔感到这件事不值得使人惊奇。）第四，借助由他们其他观点暗含的东西，他们倡导他们看作的费希特关于想象优于“纯粹”智力这一想法。

In all these respects, the Romantic movement in Jena responded to exactly that to which all the rest of Fichte’s admiring students responded: the breakdown of what had been traditionally authoritative, the sense that modern life was up for grabs, the search for something to replace the now-exhausted reconciling force of the older religion. The world of freedom first formulated by Kant and radicalized by Fichte, which the French Revolution had promised but which to many now seemed to be betrayed, was a world in which everything that had counted was in the process of being newly established or reestablished.  Thus, Friedrich Schlegel could write to his friend Novalis that he intended “to write a new Bible and follow in the footsteps of Mohammed and Luther.”’®'

    在以上这四个方面，耶拿浪漫主义运动恰好是对其余一切钦佩费希特的学生回应的回应：关于历来作为权威东西的打破，关于现代生活信手可得的观点，对取代现已枯竭的作为调解力量的旧有宗教东西的探究。一个由康德首先系统阐述的、再被费希特推向极端的、法国大革命早已作出承诺而在很多人看来现在似乎遭到背叛的自由世界是这样一个世界，在这个世界中一切早已被算作有价值的东西都处在被新确立或重新确立的过程中。这样一来，弗里德里希·施莱格尔可能在致友人诺瓦利斯信中写道他想要“撰写一本新《圣经》并沿着穆罕默德和路德的足迹前行。”

Some Romantics thus began to speak in poetic terms about death, denying its opposition to life and seeing it instead as the culmination of life. The Romantic interest in death was, however, not some kind of life-denying fascination with mortality but an attempt to affirm life itself. The Romantics seemed to think that what makes life worth living is what redeems death, but since the older ways of redeeming human mortality had lost their authoritative grip on people, it was necessary to create a new understanding of the relation of life and death that was itself reconciliatory. Thus, Novalis and Schlegel began offering the idea that death was part of life, was its completion, and that it gave the living a reconciling reason for their life. This quickly got out of hand, however, as the Romantic concern with seeing what might redeem life took on more and more the character of a fascination with death per se.  Novalis’s seductive Hymns to the Night, written after his young fiancee, Sophie von Kiihn, died at thirteen, speak of death as the fulfillment of life: “What once sunk us into deep sorrowfulness / now draws us onward with sweet longing”'®^ Even Friedrich Schlegel in Lucinde spoke of the two lovers longing for death in the section of the novel called “Yearning and Rest,” since death would detach their union from the contingencies of the world and render it eternal.

    那些浪漫主义者因而着手以诗歌语言谈论死亡，否认死亡构成生命的对立面，反而把死亡当作生命的顶峰看待。然而浪漫主义者对死亡的兴趣不是用必死性来否定对生命的某种迷恋而是尝试肯定生命本身。浪漫主义者看来好像认为使生命值得存在的是救赎死亡的东西，但是因为救赎人类必死性的那些旧有方式早已丧失了它们对人们的权威性支配，所以必须对生命与死亡关系自身具有一致性作出新的理解。这样一来，诺瓦利斯和施莱格尔着手提出下列的想法：死亡是生的一部分，是生命的完成；它为生者提供他们生活的和谐的理由。不过，这样的想法很快变得一发而不可收，正像浪漫主义者对看看什么可以救赎生命的关注越来越呈现出对死亡自身的迷恋特点一样。诺瓦利斯在他正值豆蔻年华未婚妻索菲·冯·屈恩13岁时死去后创作的富有魅力的《黑夜赞美诗》把死亡说成是生命的完成：“曾使我们陷入深度悲痛之物/现在吸引我们带着甜蜜渴望前进。”甚至就连弗里德里希·施莱格尔也在《卢辛德》这部小说中被称作“怀念与长眠”这个部分谈到两个渴望死亡的情侣，因为死亡将会使他们俩摆脱再次意外结合并使生命变得永垂不朽。

The incendiary personalities that made up the Jena Romantic movement, however, soon found multiple reasons to squabble with each other. The Schlegel brothers, typically quarreling with all the others connected with the editorial board of the Allgemeine Literatur Zeitung, had resigned from the board in the autumn of 1799; this in turn had led Christian Gottfried Schiitz - the influential editor of the journal, an important philologist who was a key figure in Jena’s promotion of the ideals of Greek art and life - to publish an article in the journal that more or less accused the Schlegel brothers of mental instability.’®^ All of this internal squabbling finally led to the Romantic circle’s full dissolution by 1803. The ideas that they set into motion, though, were to be significant for Hegel’s development; he took over some of them himself, all the while attempting to distance himself from what he saw as their extravagances and having very strained personal relations with many members of the movement.

    然而那构成耶拿浪漫主义运动的具有煽动性的个性不久便成了人们彼此争吵的充分理由。施莱格尔兄弟，由于常常与所有的其他跟《文学总汇报》杂志编委会有联系的人们争吵，于1799年秋退出杂志编委会；这件事进而致使克里斯蒂安·戈特洛布·许茨——《文学总汇报》杂志颇具影响力的编辑，一位十分重要的语文学家兼一位在耶拿对古希腊人艺术与生活理想的提升方面关键性人物——在《文学总汇报》杂志上发表一篇或多或少指责施莱格尔兄弟精神错乱的文章。所有这些内部争吵最终导致浪漫主义小组到1803年彻底解散。尽管如此，浪漫主义者确立的思想注定对黑格尔思想发展具有非常重要的意义；他本人接受了其中某些思想，始终试图使他自己与他所看作的他们的放浪形骸保持距离，并跟耶拿浪漫主义运动中很多成员个人关系非常紧张。

Jena’s Decline, Hegel’s Entry

耶拿的衰落，黑格尔的进场

Hegel was certainly drawn by Jena’s fame and was personally attracted to the Fichtean ideal of the university. Although he was always much better disposed to the Classicism coming out of Goethe’s Weimar than to the specific kind of Romanticism that found its birth in Jena, his sojourn in Jena was to involve a personal struggle about how to combine these intellectual movements within his own thought. Nonetheless, the young man from an up-and-coming family in Wiirttemberg, always touchy about his status in the world, would have found the more or less bourgeois environment of Jena more to his taste than the aristocratic pretensions of Gottingen. In Gottingen, the riding stables were among the largest and most conspicuous buildings; in Jena, the professors lived like paupers but engaged in constant conversation and had a sense of themselves as engaged in the common project of creating modern life from the ground up. Unlike Gottingen’s semiaristocratic mission to produce “well-rounded” people, Jena’s intellectuals were selfconsciously edgy, more interested in Bi/dung. Moreover, Goethe’s own increasing interest in the content of classical models and in the emerging natural science of the day helped the Jena university to become a center of new learning and not merely a place for the transmission of outdated knowledge.

    黑格尔无疑被耶拿名声所吸引并且作为个人受到费希特大学理想的吸引。虽然他总是非常喜爱源于歌德的魏玛古典主义而不喜爱诞生于耶拿特有的浪漫主义，但是他在耶拿的逗留注定让他卷入一场怎么把这些知识运动融入他自己的思想的个人斗争。尽管如此，这位来自符腾堡看重功名家庭的青年人，这位动辄对他现世地位过于敏感的青年人，大概已经发觉耶拿或多或少的中产阶级环境比起哥廷根贵族的虚伪环境更加符合他的口味。在哥廷根，坐落在最大建筑物与最显眼建筑物之间的是马厩；在耶拿，教授居住类似贫民居住而忙于不断交流并感到完全是在投身于创造现代生活这个共同工程。和哥廷根培养“具有多方面能力的”人这一半贵族的使命不同，耶拿知识分子自觉对教养更加敏感和更感兴趣。尚不止于此，歌德自己逐渐对古典模式的内容和对时代新兴的自然科学感兴趣，这有助于使耶拿大学成为新的学术重镇而不仅仅是传播陈旧知识的场所。

Unfortunately for Hegel, the university that had spawned this intellectual explosion had already begun to fall apart even before he arrived.  Although the university had become a magnet for intellectuals, not all people in the university were particularly thrilled by the new colleagues surrounding them. The older “ordinary” professors felt especially threatened by the newcomers. The incomes of the “extraordinary” professors was not dependent on that of the guildlike structure of the medieval universities (as were those of the “ordinary” professors) but came directly from the government itself The sudden upsurge in the number of more distinguished “extraordinary” professors thus was not only a threat to the status of the older, established “ordinary” professors, it was also a threat to their continued governance of the university.

    对于黑格尔来说令人遗憾的是，耶拿大学已经造成知识分子人心涣散，甚至早在他到达之前就已开始出现四分五裂的局面。虽然耶拿大学引来了一批知识分子，但是耶拿大学有些人却被他们身边的新同事弄得特别不爽。旧有“普通”教授尤其觉得受到新加盟者的威胁。“特聘”教授的收入不依赖于类似中世纪大学行会机构的收入（“普通”教授收入依赖于这个机构的收入）而可直接来自政府自身的拨款。出类拔萃的“特聘”教授数量猛增因此不仅仅对旧有的在岗“普通”教授地位构成威胁，这种情况同样也对“普通”教授继续把持耶拿大学形成威胁。

The appointment of Schiller is a case in point about the emerging tensions in the structure of the university at Jena. Because of his book, the History of the Secession of the United Netherlands from the Spanish Government^ Schiller had been called to Jena to serve as a professor of history. However, the “ordinary” historians scoffed at the fact that Schiller had no formal historical training, and they scoffed even more at the fact that he was not capable of delivering his lectures in Latin (surely a prerequisite for a historian). One “ordinary” professor of history at the university, Christian Gottlob Heinrich, led an uncompromising campaign against Schiller’s appointment, and Schiller finally had to have his title changed to “extraordinary” professor of philosophy instead of history. (Denying Schiller an appointment to the historyfaculty was, unfortunately for Professor Heinrich, the only thing of note he ever did.) The two “ordinary” professors of philosophy, however, Justus Christian Hennings and Johann August Heinrich Ulrich, were no more happy than the historians about the new appointments and tended to resist the intrusions of the new Kantian and post-Kantian philosophy with as much vehemence as the historians had rejected Schiller.

    对席勒的任命引起耶拿大学办公机构的紧张就是一个适例。由于《尼德兰离叛史》这部著作，席勒已经被邀请到耶拿大学担任历史学教授。可是，“普通”历史学教授嘲笑席勒没受过正规的历史学训练，他们甚至还嘲笑他不能用拉丁语讲课（这肯定是担任历史学教授的先决条件）。耶拿大学一位“普通”历史学教授，克里斯蒂安·戈特洛布·海因里希，发起一场坚决反对任命席勒的运动，而席勒最终具有的头衔不得不被改成哲学“特聘”教授而非历史学“特聘”教授。（抵制席勒到历史系执教是海因里希教授曾做过的唯一被记录在案的事情，这对海因里希教授是件非常令人遗憾的事情。）然而，两位“普通”哲学教授，尤斯图斯·克里斯蒂安·亨宁斯和约翰·弗里德里希·海因里希·乌尔里希，对于这项新的任命比起历史学教授高兴不到哪里去，倾向于抵制新康德哲学和后康德哲学打入耶拿大学，正像历史学学者激烈反对席勒一样。

Thus, Fichte’s success at the lectern, which had caused student enrollments at the university to shoot up, served only to anger the old guard at Jena. Moreover, since students paid fees to individual professors to attend their lectures, the old guard saw the students’ attendance at Fichte’s lectures as cutting into their incomes.

    这样一来，费希特在讲坛上取得的成功，由于引起了耶拿大学学生入学人数陡增，只会起到激怒耶拿大学老人员的作用。尚不止于此，因为学生是付费给每位教授以便去听他们讲课的，所以耶拿老人员把学生去听费希特讲课看作削减了他们的收入。

Fichte soon gave them a wider target at which to aim. In a wellintentioned but presumptuous act, Fichte scheduled some lectures on Sunday morning at the same time as church services in town. (Fichte firmly believed that the moral content of his lectures absolved him of any charge of interfering with piety.) This provided the springboard for those resentful of the newcomers to undermine Fichte, who was already rumored to be a dangerous Jacobin because of his 1793 published defense of the French Revolution. Fichte also helped to edit a journal (the Philosophisches Journal einer Gesellschaft Teutscher Gelehrten, i.e., the Philosophical Journal of a Society of German Scholars) together with Immanuel Niethammer, a transplanted Swabian who had also been a student at the Tubingen Seminary and who after first being on the philosophical faculty at Jena had shifted to the theological faculty. (Niethammer had been good friends with Holderlin at the Seminary and had tried to further Holderlin’s career as a philosopher when Holderlin was at Jena; he was later to play a crucial role in furthering Hegel’s career.) When Fichte published a piece in the journal on the ethical basis of religion, insisting all the while that such religion required practical postulates about the existence of God, he was accused of atheism by the old guard. A series of articles began to circulate that accused Fichte of this and, by implication, imputed Jacobin sympathies to him. Karl August, the duke of Weimar, was particularly upset with his minister, Goethe, for not keeping a more watchful eye on what he regarded as the subversive tendencies surrounding “his” university.  Goethe himself, who could not have cared less about Fichte’s alleged atheism even if it were true, was incensed at what he saw as Fichte’s obdurate imprudence and did nothing to help him. After Fichte bungled the whole affair by assuming a strikingly haughty and moralistic stance towards the obviously and patently unfair charges against him, Christian Gottlob Voigt, Goethe’s aide in charge of the university, refused to defend him further. By March 27, 1799, the decision was made to remove Fichte from his professorship, and at meetings on April 14 and 25, the decision was finalized.

    费希特不次赋予他们更高远的目标以便他们去追求。由于出于好意而自行其是，费希特把某些课程排在周日早晨此时正值镇里教堂做礼拜。（费希特坚信他讲课中道德方面内容可以使他免受干扰虔诚的指责。）这就为某些对新加盟者忠忠不平的耶拿老人员诃毁费希特提供了口舌，这批老人员在此之前就因费希特1793年发表过为法国大革命辩护的言论而谣传他是个险恶的雅各宾派分子。费希特还帮助编辑过一份杂志（Philosophisches Journal der Gesellschaft Teutscher Gelehrter，即《德国学者协会哲学杂志》，合作者有伊曼努尔·尼特哈默尔这位斯瓦比亚移民，他同样也曾是图宾根神学院学生，起初就读耶拿大学哲学系而后转到神学院。尼特哈默尔在神学院时跟荷尔德林成了好朋友，早在荷尔德林在耶拿时就已试图促使荷尔德林走哲学家这条路；他后来在促使黑格尔选择人生道路方面起到了至关重要的作用。）当费希特在杂志上发表一篇关于宗教的伦理基础文章和始终坚持认为宗教需要对上帝存在作出切合实际的系统阐述的时候，费希特受到耶拿老教师无神论的控告。一系列文章开始围绕着无神论指责费希特并含蓄地把同情雅各宾派强加到他头上。魏玛公爵卡尔·奥古斯特特别被他属下歌德这位部长弄得心烦意乱，因为歌德没有时刻多加留意这位公爵所看作的“他的”大学周遭的颠覆性倾向。歌德本人，不可能不大关注费希特被指控的无神论，即使此事是真实的，因他所看作的费希特固执己见的鲁莽行为而感到非常愤怒，从而对费希特根本没有作出任何提携。在费希特由于对这种明显非常不公正的指责抱着惹人注目的傲慢和道德主义者的态度而搞砸了整个事情后，克里斯蒂安·戈特洛布·福格特这位负责耶拿大学事务工作的歌德助手拒绝进一步为费希特寻找俸禄。到1799年3月27日，校方作出将撤销费希特教授职称的决定，经过4月14日和25日两次校学术委员会会议讨论从而这个决定最终定了下来。

The old guard was overjoyed with Fichte’s dismissal, particularly Professor Ulrich in philosophy (who dismissed the students’ calls for Fichte’s reappointment as the moral equivalent of calls for the construction of a bordello).When other professors threatened to leave if Fichte were dismissed, the university authorities wrote it all off as empty threats. However, as the number of students attending Jena suddenly began to sink after Fichte’s dismissal, the “extraordinary” professors who had made Jena’s fame suddenly began to become more aware of Jena’s provinciality and its abysmally low pay. They had felt themselves compensated by Jena’s unprecedented freedom, but Fichte’s dismissal showed how precarious that freedom actually was, and, to add to their unease, as “extraordinary” professors, the newcomers did not have secure positions or incomes but were wholly dependent on the benevolence of the officials of the government in Weimar. At the same time, the university at Halle was rebuilding itself, and after 1803, the university at Wurzburg (which had just come under Bavarian control) had been declared free from clerical control, thus offering the newcomers a way out of the Jena malaise. In the midst of all this turmoil and new competition from other places, Karl August, the duke of Weimar, only made things worse by deciding to build himself a new palace, and money that might have been spent on competing with Halle and Wiirzburg was instead directed to the construction of the palace (the work on which, according to Voigt, employed 400 people). Karl August was spending 4,000 Thalers per week on the construction of the palace, almost none on the university, and the result was that the most prominent among the professors began looking for better offers elsewhere.

    耶拿大学老人员对费希特被解职感到格外高兴，特别是哲学教授乌尔里希更感到格外高兴（他把学生提出重聘费希特的要求批成是道德上等同于提出建个妓院的要求）。“当其他教授威胁说假如费希特遭解职他们也离开耶拿大学的时候，校领导根本不去理睬这番话而只把它当作是空洞的威胁看待。然而，当在费希特遭解聘后报考耶拿大学学生数量突然开始出现锐减的时候、为耶拿大学建功立业的“特聘”教授们突然开始变得更加意识到耶拿大学的小家子气和它极度低下的薪水。他们一直觉得耶拿大学空前的学术自由是对他们自己物质利益的补偿，但是解聘费希特表明耶拿大学学术自由实际上是多么不稳定，他们感到更为心神不安的是，作为“特聘”教授，新加盟者没有稳定的职位或收入而完全仰赖于魏玛政府官员的恩惠。同时，哈勒大学在着手重组，1803年后，维尔茨堡大学（该校刚刚划归巴伐利亚管辖）就已被宣布摆脱教士的控制，因而这就为新加盟者提供一条摆脱受到耶拿抑郁的道路。正当出现上述这些混乱和跟其他大学进行新的竞争的时候、卡尔·奥古斯特这位魏玛公爵不料由于决定为他自己修建一座新宅邸而使得事情变得更加糟糕，一笔可能被花在与哈勒大学和维尔茨堡大学展开竞争的资金反倒被命令用来建造公爵宅邸（按照福格特统计这项工程动用了400人）。卡尔·奥古斯特每个星期都在宅邸建造上花费4000泰勒，几乎在大学身上没有花费一分钱，这导致教授中最为杰出者着手到其他地方寻找更好的工作。

Hegel would have known about the decline of Jena as he arrived in 1801 to join Schelling, and he thus arrived with some anxiety but with confidence that he was finally at a place that was proper for a person of his station and his ambitions. On January 21, 1801, Hegel arrived and took up residence at Schelling’s place at “Klipsteinishchen Garten.” The only likely picture of him at this time (a silhouette) shows him sporting the very fashionable “Titus” haircut (probably best known as Napoleon’s haircut), a style identified with “modernity” (and sometimes with the Revolution), which he was to keep all his life.'°^ (A silhouette of him during his university period shows that he probably never sported the more traditional, long-haired, braided look of the generation immediately preceding his own; indeed, he seemed to have had an unkempt, rather spiky, “revolutionary” haircut during his university years.)

    黑格尔也许在1801年到达耶拿投奔谢林时就已知晓耶拿大学在走下坡路，因此他到达的时候有些焦虑不安但自信终于找到适合于他身份和志向的地方。1801年1月21日，黑格尔到达耶拿大学并暂时住在谢林的“克利普施泰尼希肯花园”。那时关于他可能仅有的画像（一张侧面像）表明他在炫耀当时非常时髦的“蒂图斯”发式（很可能以拿破仑的发式最为闻名），一种被等同于“现代性”（有时被等同于法国大革命）的发型，这种发型将被他终身保持。（一张他在大学阶段的侧面像表明他很可能从未炫耀过这样的一种神态，这种神态完全优于他自己这代人的神态，代表着较为传统的、较为古典的、扎头发的神态；更确切地说，他在大学岁月里看来好像具有蓬乱的、相当长而尖的、“革命性的”发式。）

Having got his bearings, Hegel moved shortly after his arrival to a garden apartment directly beside Schelling’s place and set himself to working to have himself named an “extraordinary” professor at Jena.  For the time being, though, he had to make do with being a Privatdozent - a private, unpaid lecturer - at the university, and, indeed, his hopes of becoming an “extraordinary professor” were to be disappointed until 1805. The position of Privatdozent was not altogether a happy one; not paid any salary by the university, the Privatdozent charged fees for lectures and thus was dependent for all of his income on how many paying students he could coax to hear him profess; had Hegel not had his small inheritance to live on during this period, being a Privatdozent would not even have been an option for him, since no Privatdozent could live on the meager fees gained from lectures. However, even to obtain this hardly elevated status, he had to convince the philosophical faculty (which, it must be remembered, comprised more than what would be included in a twentieth century “philosophy department”) that his degree from Tubingen was a sufficient license for him to be a teacher, and he had to submit a “habilitation” thesis (part of the traditional German university system in which a kind of second dissertation is required in order to obtain the right to give lectures) and defend it.

    由于有了压力，黑格尔到达耶拿后不久就搬到紧挨谢林住处的花园公寓，并开始起劲地为使他本人将被提名为耶拿“特聘”教授而工作。“但是，有段时间，他不得不放下身段担任大学Privatdozent（私人的无俸讲师），而实际上他希望成为“特聘教授”，这样的希望必将使他失望直到1805年为止。无俸讲师职位根本就不是一件美差事；由于大学不发给薪水，无俸讲师只能收取学生听课费，因而他所有的收入全都依赖于他能够吸引多少付费学生前来听课；假如黑格尔没有小笔遗产维持这个阶段生活，做无俸讲师甚至很可能就不会成了他的选择，因为所有无俸讲师都不可能靠讲课获得的微薄费用生活。然而，甚至就连为弄到这个难以提升的职位，他还不得不使哲学系确信（必须记住那时哲学系涵盖的内容超过20世纪“哲学系”通常所包含的内容）他从图宾根神学院获得的学位足以作为他做大学教师的通行证，同时他必须提交一篇“任职资格”论文（根据传统德国大学制度部分内容，要求受聘者提交一种辅助性论文以获得授课权利）并就论文进行答辩。

He therefore immediately set about preparing a short Latin thesis.  the materials for which he had apparently brought with him from Frankfurt.'”’ There was a bit of a mix-up between Hegel and some members of the faculty about how and whether he was entitled to defend a thesis, but the matter was finally decided in his favor, and on his birthday, August 27, 1801, Hegel defended a short habilitation called, “On the Orbit of the Planets.”'”" Hegel’s defense took the form of his defending some theses, with some official “supporters” of his view' and some official “opponents” to his view present. Hegel’s “opponents” were Schelling himself — not much of an “opponent,” since Hegel was defending some more or less Schellingian theses - and another Swabian, Immanuel Niethammer. On his own side as a “supporter” he had Schelling’s brother, Karl. Needless to say, Hegel passed his defense. With that, Hegel’s life in Jena more or less officially began.

    他因此立刻着手准备一篇简短的拉丁文论文，论文所用材料显然是他之前从法兰克福带过来的。“对于黑格尔应该怎样进行论文答辩和是否有资格进行论文答辩问题他与哲学系某些成员之间有些争议，但这件事的最终决定对他有利，在他生日1801年8月27日这天，他就题为“论行星运行轨道”这篇短小的任职资格论文进行答辩。”黑格尔的答辩采用他为某些论题进行答辩的形式，到场的有他观点的某些官方“支持者”和他观点的某些官方“反对者”。黑格尔的“反对者”是谢林本人——没有提出许多“反驳”，因为黑格尔或多或少在为谢林哲学某些论题进行辩护——和另一个斯瓦比亚人伊曼努尔·尼特哈默尔。作为“支持者”站在黑格尔自己这方的有谢林的兄弟卡尔。不用说，黑格尔通过了他的答辩。由于这样，黑格尔的耶拿生活或多或少正式开始了。

The thesis gave rise to one of the oldest Hegel legends, that in his habilitation thesis he had a priori deduced the impossibility of there being anything between the planets Jupiter and Mars, only for it to turn out that an Italian astronomer at virtually the same time had empirically discovered the existence of some asteroids in exactly the area where Hegel had supposedly declared that it was a priori impossible for them to be. As with many legends about Hegel, this one is untrue. The basis of the legend lies in Hegel’s discussion at the end of the thesis about various disputes concerning the mathematical descriptions of the distances of the planets from each other. He began the discussion by making the quasi-Schellingian remark, “There remains a bit to be added about the ratios of the distances of the planets, which to be sure appears only to belong to experience. But the ratios cannot form a measure and a number of nature which are alien to reason: Experience and the knowledge of natural laws bases itself on nothing other than that we believe that nature is formed out of reason, and that we are convinced of the identity of all natural laws.” He then added that different researchers approach that “identity” differently: After giving mathematical expression to a natural law and then finding that not all observations fit the equation, some come to doubt the veracity of the preceding experiments and try to smooth things out, whereas some are convinced that if the equation says something is there, then it simply must be there, and since “the distances of the planets from each other suggests a ratio of a mathematical series, according to which for the fifth member of the series there exists no planet in nature, it comes to be suspected that between Mars and Jupiter a certain planet must really exist, which - indeed, unknown to us - makes its way in space, and is zealously sought in research. Because this series is arithmetical and does not even follow a numerical series that the numbers produce out of themselves, i.e., out of potencies, they have no significance whatsoever for philosophy.” He then discussed various Pythagorean speculations about the force of such numerical series, about how they were taken up by Plato in his Timeciiis as the arithmetical series in terms of which the demiurge had constructed the universe, and he noted, “if in case this series yields the true order of nature, then it is clear that between the fourth and the fifth place there is a large space and no planet will be missing there.” He never endorsed the idea that Plato’s numerological series offered anything like the true description; but he did not explicitly say it was wrong, and thus the legend began. The context makes it clear, though, that in the circumstances surrounding a hastily written thesis, he was only throwing this out as one possibility and not one he seriously entertained.'”’

    这篇论文产生了最早的黑格尔名人轶事中的一种：在他任职资格论文中，他先天地推演了木星与火星之间不可能存在任何东西，仅仅因为结果一位意大利天文学家实际上在同一时期借助经验发现了恰恰在这个区域存在一些小行星，尽管黑格尔早就带着假定口吻宣称在先天意义上这些小行星是不可能存在的。正如其他很多有关黑格尔名人轶事的情况一样，这件名人轶事是不真实的。这件名人轶事的基础在于黑格尔在这篇论文结尾处探讨了关于用数学描述行星彼此之间距离的各种不同的争论。他借助作出标准的谢林式评论着手进行他的探讨，“对于行星间距离的比率仍然需要加上一点东西，这个问题无疑仅仅属于经验范畴。但是这个比率不可能构成自然的尺度和数目，因为这个比率是有悖于理性的：经验与对自然法则的认识本身仅仅奠基于我们相信自然因理性而被构成和我们确信所有自然法则的同一性。”他接着补充说不同的研究者采用不同的方法对待这样的“同一性”：在赋予自然法则以数学表达和继而发现有些观察不符合某个等式后，一些人逐渐怀疑先前试验的真实性且试图消除某些东西，尽管一些人确信如果某个等式表明某种东西在那里那么它就绝对必须在那里；因为“行星彼此之间的距离使人想到数学级数的比率，依据这个比率，对于这个数学级数第五项，自然中不存在任何行星，所以火星与木星之间必然确实存在着某颗行星这一判断开始遭到怀疑，这样的判断——实际上鲜为人知的判断——时下仍然大行其道，仍然被人狂热地设法进行探究。因为这个数学级数是算术级数且甚至不遵循从它们自身产生例如从潜能产生的数词级数，所以这个数学级数无论对于什么哲学都没有什么重要意义。”他继而探讨毕达哥拉斯学派各种不同的猜测，它们涉及这样的数词级数的影响，涉及它们怎么被柏拉图在《蒂迈欧篇》中用作算术级数，根据算术级数，造物主构建了宇宙，他强调指出，“如果万一数词级数生出自然的真秩序，那么在第四与第五位置之间显然存在着一个很大的空间且行星不可能不在那里。”他从未赞同这样的想法，即柏拉图的数字命理学级数提供像真实描述一样的东西；但他没有明确地说数字命理学级数错了，因而这件名人轶事传开了。尽管如此、这里的上下文语境使人清楚地看出，在这围绕一篇应时草成的论文情况下，他只不过是抛出这篇有可能自相矛盾的论文而非一篇被他当回事的论文。

He began immediately offering lectures during the winter semester of 1801-02; the public announcements of the lectures show him offering a course on “Logic and Metaphysics” and two courses with Schelling, an “Introduction to the Idea and Limits of True Philosophy” and a “Philosophical Disputorium” in which students were obliged to defend certain theses every week. One student - a Mr. Bernhard Rudolf Abeken, later to be the rector of a Gymnasium in Osnabriick and to remain on friendly terms with Hegel - reported in his memoirs how little talent he had in philosophy and how against his better judgment he joined the class, only to find himself being forced to defend theses such as “History repeats itself ideally in art; the project of a history of art would be therefore to show how the unity in art corresponds to the multiplicity in history” and “Epic and tragedy stand to each other as identity and totality; lyrical poetry stands in the middle and exhibits doubledness {Duplizitcity - all very clearly Schellingian themes of the time."”

    他紧接着开始准备1801年至1802年冬季学期课程；课程公告显示他开设一门“逻辑与形而上学”课，与谢林合开“真哲学观念与限度引论”和“哲学争论”这两门课，在这三门课上，学生必须每个星期都要就某些论题进行答辩。一个学生——一个名叫伯恩哈德·鲁道夫·阿贝肯的学生，他后来做了奥斯纳布吕克高级中学校长，一直与黑格尔关系很好——凭记忆描述他在哲学上如何缺乏天分，他怎样靠他良好的判断力加入这个班级，只是发觉他自己被迫就诸如以下这样的论题进行答辩：“历史理想地重现它自身于艺术中；艺术史计划因此应该成为展示艺术同一性怎样符合历史多样性”和“史诗与悲剧作为同一性和和整体性相互支撑；抒情诗处在史诗和悲剧之间且展示双重性（Duplicitt）”——所有这些都非常清楚地表明那时谢林哲学的主题。