AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO THE NINTH EDITION. As the eighth edition of this work appeared simultaneously with my second principal work, so I issue the ninth simultaneously with my third principal work. If at the close of the preface of the eighth edition I described the "Philosophy of the Unconscious" as the programme of my life, the two other extant chief works yield the proof that hitherto at any rate good will has not been wanting to carry out the programme. The " Phänomenologie des sittlichen Bewusstseins," which appeared at the end of the year 1878, is no complete system of Ethics, but only the first introductory part of such, and therefore described by its title as "Prolegomena to every future Ethics." The System of Ethics would with me embrace, besides this introductory ethical doctrine of Principles, a Social Ethic and an Individual Ethic. The working out of an Individual Ethic appeared to me least urgent, that of Social Ethic, on the contrary, very desirable indeed, but yet bound up with considerable material difficulties, which it is hoped will receive some illumination by the progress of social-political legislation. Accordingly, while for the treatment of Social Ethics some delay might appear desirable, I had excellent reasons for the speedy presentation of my "Religious Philosophy;" for, for the treatment which Social Ethics might eventually experience at my hands there were numerous hints to be found, both in the "Phänomenologie des sittlichen Bewusstseins" as well as in other of my writings; but my attitude towards Religious Philosophy could on the basis of the "Philosophy of the Unconscious" and the little monograph on the Self-disintegration of Christianity hardly even approximately be rightly estimated. The Phänomenologie des sittlichen Bewesstseins" turned the polemic of the philosophers and theologians against me into a new phase. Hitherto I had been met with the argument that Pessimism must be intrinsically without an Ethic; but now, when the Ethics of Pessimism had in principle come to light, that argument could no longer hold water, and it was now contended that this Ethics was worth nothing, because it was the Ethics of Pessimism. Thereby the contest concerning Pessimism was renewed, but also at the same time carried over to a new battlefield. I felt moved to plunge into this discussion with some journalistic disquisitions and essays, which, at the end of 1880, were collected, and appeared in pamphlet form under the title "Zur Geschichte und Begründung des Pessimismus." The first shows that not Schopenhauer but Kant is the father of the Pessimism advocated by me, whereas Schopenhauer has one-sidedly disfigured and spoilt the Kantian Pessimism; the second refutes the objections which deny that Pessimism is a problem of science, or soluble by science; the third has the task of sharply separating the ethically valuable Pessimism advocated by me from sundry ethically questionable and injurious varieties of Pessimism, and the fourth gives a phenomenology of Suffering, as it were, which already serves as a transitional chord from Ethics to the Philosophy of Religion. The effects of my "Phänomenologie" on the public reach manifestly less widely and more deeply than those of the" Philosophy of the Unconscious;" the polemic called forth by the former is, it is true, not yet free from obliquities and misunderstandings, but it is far more scientific, more intelligent and thorough than that, which, in the first four years after the appearance of the "Philosophy of the Unconscious," saw the light. The polemic on the Phänomenologie" has manifestly not a little contributed to correct the previous judgment of the "Philosophy of the Unconscious," and to silence much superficial chatter. I hope that this will be the case in still higher degree with my "Philosophy of Religion," which yields the proof that my philosophy is just as little non-religious as non-ethical, but in both respects stands in perfect continuity with the previous course of development of the consciousness of humanity. In the " Philosophy of Religion" my standpoint, as I have already indicated in the closing section of the "Self-disintegration of Christianity," specially represents a synthesis of the Christian and Indian Religions, or a synthesis of Hegelianism and Schopenhauerism. For that purpose it was important to me to come to terms with the present leading representatives of a speculative Christian Theology, as this has been developed from the twofold startingpoint of Hegel and Schleiermacher. I have done this in the memoir: "Die Krisis des Christenthums in der modernen Theologie." As in the " Self-disintegration " I had criticised the vulgar liberal Protestantism, so here speculative Protestantism, and by how much the latter is philosophically more considerable and of greater religious worth than the former, so much the more important is also the critique of the latter than that of the former. But as the subject is more difficult and requires a subtler handling, the later writing has by no means received the same amount of notice as the former; it may be that this is owing in part to the circumstances of the times. My third principal work consists now of two parts; the first, historically critical part, appeared at the end of 1881, under the title: "Das religiöse Bewusstsein der Menschheit im Stufengang seiner Entwickelung;" the second, systematic part, is issued simultaneously with this ninth edition. of the "Philosophy of the Unconscious," under the title, "Die Religion des Geistes." The first part deduces from the previous course of evolution of the religious conscious ness of humanity by immanent criticism that stage as historical postulate, to which Religion must accordingly in consistency be elevated; the second part systematically carries out the point of view merely hinted at in the first, not, however, in dogmatic, but in phenomenological form, i.e., by a psychological analysis of the religious consciousness and by deduction of its metaphysical postulates and ethical consequences. EDUARD VON HARTMANN. BERLIN, August 1882. |