Hegel's Lectures on the History of Philosophy: Volume 3 (of 3)Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
PhilosophyPhilosophy
Hegel's Lectures on the History of Philosophy: Volume 3 (of 3)
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
Philosophy -- History
Additional examples of _quæstiones_ of this kind are given by those
who ridiculed such dialectic, for instance by Erasmus in his _Encomium
moriæ_: “Could there be several sonships (_filiationes_) in Christ? Is
the proposition possible that God the Father hates the Son? Might God
not have also taken the form of a woman, or have passed into the devil?
Might He not also have appeared in the form of an ass or of a pumpkin? In
what manner would the pumpkin have preached and wrought miracles, and how
would it have been crucified?”[49] Thus were intellectual determinations
combined and distinguished in a manner altogether without sense or
thought. The main point is that the Scholastics were like barbarians
in their way of handling divine things and bringing them into sensuous
determinations and relations. They thus introduced a completely sensuous
rigidity and these altogether external and senseless forms into the
purely spiritual, thus bringing it to a lower and unspiritual level;
Hans Sachs similarly made a Nürnberg version of sacred history [die
göttliche Geschichte vernürnbergert]. In such representations as are
given in the Bible of the wrath of God, or of the history of God’s work
of creation, it is said that God did this or that, naming some human and
homely action. God is certainly not to be looked on as something alien
and unapproachable; on the contrary, we are to come to Him with courage
and with all our heart. But to bring Him into the province of thought,
and strive in earnest after a knowledge of Him, is a very different
matter. The reverse of this is to bring forward arguments _pro_ and
_contra_, for they decide nothing, and are of no use; they are no more
than the assumptions which are only sensuous and finite determinations,
and therefore infinite differences and distinctions. This barbarous use
of the understanding is utterly irrational; it is like putting a golden
necklace on a sow. The One is the Idea of the Christian religion, and it
is also the philosophy of the great and noble Aristotle; neither of the
two could have been more bedraggled and besmirched, to so low a pass had
the Christians brought their spiritual Idea.
6. MYSTICS.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account