Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling
Natura i umysł są dwiema stronami jednej rzeczywistości – natura jest umysłem uwidocznionym – a ludzka wolność obejmuje realną możliwość zła.
Umiejscowienie
Filozofia przyrody i tożsamości: przyroda jest widzialnym duchem, duch – niewidzialną przyrodą.
Kluczowe idee
- Filozofia przyrody
- Tożsamość
- Wolność i zło
Wpływ
Pod wpływem 5
Platon
pod wpływem ✓
As a Tübingen student Schelling wrote a commentary on Plato’s Timaeus (1794, published 1994) that anticipates the world-soul of his philosophy of nature (On the World-Soul, 1798). F. W. J. Schelling, “Timaeus” (1794), ed. H. Buchner (1994); Von der Weltseele (1798)
Platon › 428–348 p.n.e.
Giordano Bruno
pod wpływem ✓
In the dialogue Bruno (1802) Schelling made Giordano Bruno the spokesman of his philosophy of identity, in which the divine and the natural principle of things coincide. F. W. J. Schelling, Bruno oder über das göttliche und natürliche Princip der Dinge (1802); SEP “Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Giordano Bruno › 1548–1600
Baruch Spinoza
pod wpływem ✓
Schelling told Hegel in 1795 that he had become a Spinozist and presented his identity philosophy in Spinoza’s geometrical manner (Presentation of My System, 1801). F. W. J. Schelling, letter to Hegel, 4 Feb. 1795; Darstellung meines Systems der Philosophie (1801); SEP “Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling”
Baruch Spinoza › 1632–1677
Immanuel Kant
pod wpływem ✓
In Ideas for a Philosophy of Nature (1797) Schelling took up Kant’s dynamic theory of matter as attractive and repulsive forces (Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, 1786). F. W. J. Schelling, Ideen zu einer Philosophie der Natur (1797); I. Kant, Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft (1786); SEP “Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling”
Immanuel Kant › 1724–1804
Friedrich Hölderlin
pod wpływem ✓
Hölderlin’s share in Schelling’s turn is debated; D. Henrich reads ‘Urtheil und Seyn’ (1795), which puts Being before subject and object, as a step towards Schelling’s identity philosophy. F. Hölderlin, “Urtheil und Seyn” (1795); D. Henrich, Der Grund im Bewußtsein (1992)
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Friedrich Hölderlin › 1770–1843
Wpływ na 6
Piotr Czaadajew
wpływ na ✓
Chaadaev met Schelling in Karlsbad in 1825 and later corresponded with him; his Philosophical Letters (1829–31) read history as providential, partly in Schelling’s terms. P. Chaadaev, Philosophical Letters (1829–31); A. Walicki, A History of Russian Thought from the Enlightenment to Marxism (1979)
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Piotr Czaadajew › 1794–1856
Włodzimierz Sołowjow
wpływ na
Solovyov’s Lectures on Godmanhood (1878–81) drew on Schelling’s late philosophy of mythology and revelation for history as the union of God and humanity. V. Solovyov, Chteniia o Bogochelovechestve (1878–81); SEP “Vladimir Solov’ëv”
Źródło: szkic AI
Włodzimierz Sołowjow › 1853–1900
Nishitani Keiji
wpływ na
Nishitani’s thesis at Kyoto Imperial University, “The Ideal and the Real in Schelling and Bergson” (1924), began his work on Schelling, alongside Nietzsche and the mystics. Nishitani Keiji, thesis (Kyoto 1924); Nanzan Institute, Philosophers Database “Nishitani Keiji”
Źródło: szkic AI
Nishitani Keiji › 1900–1990
Jürgen Habermas
wpływ na ✓
Habermas wrote his dissertation on Schelling (Das Absolute und die Geschichte, 1954) and later drew materialist conclusions from his idea of God’s contraction (1963). J. Habermas, Das Absolute und die Geschichte. Von der Zwiespältigkeit in Schellings Denken (diss. 1954); “Dialektischer Idealismus im Übergang zum Materialismus”, in Theorie und Praxis (1963)
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Jürgen Habermas › 1929–2026
Enrique Dussel
wpływ na
In Method for a Philosophy of Liberation (1974), subtitled “analectic overcoming of the Hegelian dialectic”, Dussel took up the late Schelling’s positive philosophy as a first step beyond Hegel towards an exteriority that thought does not produce. E. Dussel, Método para una filosofía de la liberación: superación analéctica de la dialéctica hegeliana (1974); P. González San Martín, Hybris. Revista de Filosofía (2016)
Źródło: szkic AI
Enrique Dussel › 1934–2023
Slavoj Žižek
wpływ na ✓
In The Indivisible Remainder (1996) Žižek read Schelling’s Ages of the World as an account of how the Word emerges from a pre-symbolic ground of drives. S. Žižek, The Indivisible Remainder: An Essay on Schelling and Related Matters (1996); The Abyss of Freedom (1997)
Slavoj Žižek › ur. 1949
Krytyka
Wzajemna krytyka 1
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel ⇄ wzajemnie wpływ na
wpływ na ✓
Hegel defended Schelling’s philosophy of identity against Fichte in the Difference essay (1801) and co-edited with him the Critical Journal of Philosophy (1802–03). G. W. F. Hegel, Differenz des Fichte’schen und Schelling’schen Systems der Philosophie (1801); Kritisches Journal der Philosophie (1802–03); SEP “Hegel”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
krytykuje
Schelling objected that Hegel’s ‘negative’ philosophy of pure concepts cannot reach actual existence, nor explain why the Idea should release itself into nature (Munich lectures, 1833–34). F. W. J. Schelling, Zur Geschichte der neueren Philosophie (Munich lectures, c. 1833–34; publ. 1856), on Hegel; Berlin lectures 1841–42; SEP “Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling”
Źródło: szkic AI
krytyka ze strony
Hegel’s Preface to the Phenomenology (1807) mocked an absolute of pure identity as ‘the night in which all cows are black’; Schelling took it as aimed at him. G. W. F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes (1807), Preface; Schelling to Hegel, 2 Nov. 1807
Źródło: szkic AI
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel › 1770–1831
Krytyka ze strony 2
Søren Kierkegaard wpływ na
wpływ na ✓
Kierkegaard heard Schelling’s Berlin lectures (1841–42) and took detailed notes; scholars trace in part to them his contrast between conceptual thought and actual existence. S. Kierkegaard, notes on Schelling’s Berlin lectures (1841–42); SEP “Søren Kierkegaard”
krytyka ze strony
Kierkegaard, who heard Schelling’s Berlin lectures in 1841–42, was first delighted by his talk of ‘actuality’, then judged them endless nonsense and left Berlin early (letters, 1842). S. Kierkegaard, notes on Schelling’s Berlin lectures (1841–42); letters to E. Boesen, 1842; SEP “Søren Kierkegaard”
Źródło: szkic AI
Søren Kierkegaard › 1813–1855
Fryderyk Engels
krytyka ze strony
Attending Schelling’s Berlin lectures, the young Engels defended Hegel against him and attacked his philosophy of revelation for subordinating reason to faith (Schelling und die Offenbarung, 1842). F. Engels, “Schelling über Hegel”, Telegraph für Deutschland (1841); Schelling und die Offenbarung (1842)
Źródło: szkic AI
Fryderyk Engels › 1820–1895
Krytykuje 2
Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi
krytykuje
Schelling answered Jacobi’s Of Divine Things (1811), which accused him of atheistic naturalism, arguing against Jacobi that God can be known, not only believed (Denkmal, 1812). F. W. J. Schelling, Denkmal der Schrift von den göttlichen Dingen etc. des Herrn Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1812); F. H. Jacobi, Von den göttlichen Dingen und ihrer Offenbarung (1811)
Źródło: szkic AI
Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi › 1743–1819
Johann Gottlieb Fichte pod wpływem
pod wpływem ✓
In Of the I as Principle of Philosophy (1795) Schelling started from Fichte’s absolute I; his System of Transcendental Idealism (1800) still followed the Wissenschaftslehre’s method. F. W. J. Schelling, Vom Ich als Princip der Philosophie (1795); System des transcendentalen Idealismus (1800); SEP “Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
krytykuje
Schelling objected that Fichte reduced nature to a mere obstacle for the striving I, whereas nature is itself productive (Darlegung des wahren Verhältnisses, 1806). F. W. J. Schelling, Darlegung des wahren Verhältnisses der Naturphilosophie zu der verbesserten Fichteschen Lehre (1806); Fichte–Schelling correspondence 1800–1801; SEP “Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling”
Źródło: szkic AI
Johann Gottlieb Fichte › 1762–1814
Dzieła
Sztuka jako organon filozofii.
Wolność jako zdolność do dobra i zła.
Stanowisko
Schelling pushed idealism beyond Fichte by giving nature its own dignity: nature is “visible spirit”, a living, self-organising productivity from which consciousness itself emerges. In his philosophy of identity, nature and mind are two expressions of one absolute, and art is the place where this unity becomes visible. His essay on human freedom confronted a darker question: how can evil exist if everything is grounded in God? His answer – a ground in God that is not God himself, and freedom as the capacity for good and evil – opened a path toward existential thought. His late “positive philosophy” insisted that the sheer fact of existence precedes all concepts.
Życie i kontekst
A prodigy from Württemberg, Schelling studied at the Tübingen seminary with Hegel and Hölderlin and became a professor in Jena at 23, at the centre of the Romantic movement. He later taught in Würzburg, Munich and Erlangen. In 1841 he was called to Berlin to counter Hegelianism; Kierkegaard, Engels and Bakunin sat in his lectures.
Dalsze główne dzieła
- Ideas for a Philosophy of Nature (1797)
- System of Transcendental Idealism (1800)
- Philosophical Investigations into the Essence of Human Freedom (1809)
- The Ages of the World, drafts (1811–1815)
- Philosophy of Revelation, lectures (1841–1842)
Stan na listopad 2026 · Źródła · Ulepsz tę stronę · Jak powstaje Agora