Goethe, Kant, and Hegel: Discovering the Mind. Volume one.

A difficult work that I found to be unfair to Kant. Kaufmann has a bias that causes his interpretations to manifest antagonism where none is really needed. I'm not sure the origin of this antagonism toward Kant, but it spoiled what was otherwise expected to be a fair-minded review of these three brilliant and necessary souls in their time whose contributions to mankind's spiritual evolution are the exemplars of their forte.At the end of Section II, Kaufmann offers us some insight into his feelings about his critical review of Kant:“Looking back upon my account of Kant, I feel like quoting the conclusion of Lessing'sDuplik, the polemic in which the image of the two hands of God is found:‘I had meant to let the reader gather casually the reasonsfor this judgment; and yet I have often literally pronouncedthe judgment myself. What shall I do? Apologize? Ask forforgiveness witli the silly mien of anincompetent hypocrite? Promise that next time I'll bemore careful?‘Can I do that? Promise? Yes, yes, I promise-nevereven to resolve to remain cold and indifferent in certainmatters. If a human being is not permitted to generatewarmth and take sides when he recognizes clearly thatreason and scripture have been abused, when arid whereis it permitted?’“In my juxtaposition of Goethe and Kant I might have taken the time and trouble to conceal my feelings better, but decided against that, not only for the reasons stated by Lessing. It would be perverse to try to discover the minds of several dead writers while taking pains not to discover one's own. By seeing how we react *emotionally* to Goethe and Kant, Hegel and Nietzsche, Heidegger and Buber, Freud and jung, we can find out a great deal about ourselves. While I see no need to burden my discussion of these men with the discoveries I have made about myself in the course of writing about them, I believe that not hiding my emotions may make it easier for you to discover your feelings and your mind. “Disapproval, of course, can be based on intellectual considerations, but a little observation of ourselves and others shows quickly that the emotion accompanying it is not always proportionate to our reasons. Whenever this is the case, the question arises why we have such strong feelings about some faults and not about others. Usually, though not always, powerful negative feelings are an indication that we sense the same faults in ourselves and have taken some trouble not to give in to them. When this is not the case, we generally associate these faults with someone else or with a group of people whom we dislike intensely, possibly for very good reasons. I am far from hating Kant and if, contrary to my pronounced opposition to Manichaeism, I were to divide writers into good and evil people, I should certainly include Kant among the good. Why, then, does a certain animus against him come through here and there? And why do I bother to discuss him at such length when I think that in important respects he was a disaster?“I love philosophy and have given much of my life to it, put it seems to me to be in very poor health, and this, as I have tried to show, is due in no small measure to Kant who, with lhe best intentions, came close to ruining it. To restore its health, we need to understand what has gone wrong. Actually, I doubt that mainstream philosophy will ever become strong enough to be of much help in the discovery of the mind. Nor do I think, upon reflection, that it was strong enough before Kant came along. In many ways he is an embodiment on a large scale of what is wrong with philosophy, but he also had an enormous influence, and its very enormity makes one wonder what might have happened if he had pushed philosophy in a different direction. Suppose he had not insisted on certainty, necessity, and completeness! This, it seems to me, was his most fateful error, and his obscure style may be considered a mere corollary of that. Suppose he had been more like Lessing! Such questions are obviously unanswerable. If one thing had been different, ever so many others might have been different as well; for example, all the professors of philosophy who took to Kant like fish to water might in that case have found Kant much less attractive. At the very least they might not have followed his example in this respect. One only needs to compare the Nietzsche literature with Nietzsche to appreciate that point, or the Kierkegaard literature with Kierkegaard. One might well consider reflections of what might have happened if only Kant had done things differently so futile that they are not even worth mentioning if it were not for the fact that reading Hegel makes such questions almost inescapable. For the bizarreness of Hegel's philosophy is due largely to his misguided attempt to reconcile Goethe and •Kant, and it is fruitful to separate out these two strains and see what remains when the Kantian elements are eliminated."

As with volume two of this series Kaufmann provides a clear insightful analysis of German philosophical writing in the 19th century. Kaufmann’s command of the German and English language is of immense value in being able to provide a clear analysis of his subject. Again his approach in this volume is to demonstrate how these individuals came to provide a clearer understanding of human reasoning and basic psychology.With the three important German authors he only comes across favorably to Goethe. He takes Kant and Hegel to task for the obscurity of their writing style. He blames Kant for introducing this type of writing into German philosophy. He does recognize the brilliance of Kant and Hegel. He goes into the background of these men highlighting the impact on their thoughts and writing. It is noteworthy that Kaufmann resists the tide of popular opinion in regard to Kant and Hegel and dares to bring their obvious shortcomings into sharp focus.I found this volume helpful in clarifying issues with philosophy in general. His criticism of struggling to find meaning where none actually exists can save a person from hours of futility.

As advertised and quick.

Goethe, Kant, Hegel is the first book of the Discovering the mind trilogy. This trilogy was Kaufmann's final work. The ideas discussed in this book are not new to his work but rather make it more complete. All of Kaufmann's work taken together forms an organic seamless whole. In this book as with his others Kaufmann is interested in uncovering, exploring, defining and evaluating what is the essence of being human. He also extends this search beyond mere identifying to an exploration of what he considers are the human qualities worthy of cultivation and represent the best of humanity. To my knowledge his approach of a philosophical study of individuals breaks some original ground and because Kaufmann is building on previous work he is hugely successful in this task. This book should be a classic, recognized for its pioneering effort toward discovery of the mind (Kaufmann's definition of mind here is a "term for feeling and intelligence, reason and emotion, perception and will). Not only is it scholarly (in the best sense of the word) but it has a clear vision that Kaufmann is able to communicate clearly.It is not enough for Kaufmann to present compelling reasons why life is most meaningful when meaning and purpose come from within, nor that the autonomous life (he discusses autonomy at length in Without guilt or Justice) is the key to finding that meaning. Kaufmann knows that even a dictator and tyrant can become such a person. Kaufmann goes on to articulate his vision of morality (a theme developed in his earlier work- The Faith of a Heretic). In this and the two subsequent volumes he shows us what attributes of these various men of varying greatness he sees as most representative of both qualities which give personal meaning to that individual but also elevate for us all the human spirit, as well as those qualities that do not. In Goethe, Kant, Hegel, Kaufmann rigourously illuminates that interior terrain into the minds of each of these men taking us on a journey of understanding. While it's clear that Kaufmann's vision (what is it to be human) is his own, the seeds of that vision can be found in his profound empathy of Goethe , Nietzsche(vol.ll), and Freud(vol.lll). In fact, implicit to reading this work is that we come to understand Kaufmann's mind as well. The book also provides us with the tools to be our own explorers and thus continue the contribution. In Goethe, Kant, Hegel, Kaufmann quotes from a letter written by someone who knew Goethe. In reading the attributes ascribed to Goethe one cannot help but feel that the description is just as apt of Kaufmann."He is violent in all of his emotions but often has a great deal of self-control. His way of thinking is noble; free of prejudices, he acts as he feels without caring whether others like it, whether it is the fashion, whether the way one lives permits it. All compulsion is hateful to him... He is not what one calls orthodox. But not from pride or caprice or to make an impression. About certain very important issues he speaks to few and does not like to disturb others in their calm ideas...I wanted to describe him, but it would become too lengthy, for there is much that could be said about him. He is, in one word, a very remarkable human being."This book is well worth reading.

Kaufmann's re-reading of 19th-century German thought as the history of a tension between two irreconcilable models provided by Kant and Goethe is nothing short of inspired. Add to this his examination (exhumation?) of Kant's unstated debt to the figure of Moses, and one has already recovered the price of admission before one has even gotten to Hegel. Kaufmann's re-reading repays re-reading.

Everything that Walter Kaufmann wrote deserves to be studied

Da etliche Worte erforderlich sind: das Buch ist schön aufgemacht, der Inhalt, dem Autor und dem Thema entsprechend gut aufbereitetallerdings sinkt jeder in meiner Achtung, der seine Kaufentscheidung für ein solches Buch von dieser Kritik abhängig machtAchtung es handelt sich nicht um Harry Potter