按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
itself in all its objects。 Since all the modes of finitude hitherto considered （consciousness；
self…consciousness； etc。） are embraced in its single totality； it may use each and all of
these various modes as the media through and in which to appear。 When it appears in
and through these modes of finitude we have the attitude of Religion。 Since these modes；
as we saw； differ； the religious attitude differs； and accordingly we have various types or
forms of religion。
Each of these forms； in and through which the Absolute appears； is circumscribed in its
nature and process； each is per se inadequate to the revelation of complete absolute
self…consciousness： hence the variety of religion is necessitated by and is indirectly due to
the failure of any one type and the inadequacy of every single type to reveal the Absolute
completely。 A form of appearance or self…manifestation of the absolute is therefore
demanded which will reveal Absolute Spirit adequately to itself as it essentially is in itself。
Here it will know itself； so to say； face to face； and with perfect completeness。 This form is
Absolute Knowledge。 Hence Religion and Absolute Knowledge are the final stages in the
argument of the Phenomenology。 The former is dealt with in the immediately succeeding
section （VII） and its various subsections； the latter forms the subject of the concluding
section （VIII） of the work。
A。 Natural Religion
Translator's comments： The arrangement of the analysis of Religion and the divisions into
the various subsections are； as indicated in the preceding note （p。 683）； determined by
the general development of experience。 That development is from the immediate through
mediation to the fusion of immediacy and mediation。 The stages of the development of
experience are Consciousness； Self…consciousness； Reason； the latter leading to its
highest level — finite Spiritual existence。 The development of Religion follows these various
ways in which objects are given in experience； and the three chief divisions of Religion are
determined accordingly： Natural Religion is religion at the level of Consciousness； Art；
Religion at the level of Self…consciousness； Revealed Religion is Religion at the level of
Reason and Spirit。 Each of these is again subdivided； and the subdivision follows more or
less closely the various subdivisions of these three ultimate levels of experience —
Consciousness； etc。 Thus； in Natural Religion； we have Religion at the level of
Sense…certainty — 〃Light〃： Religion at the level of Perception — 〃Life〃： and Religion at the
level of Understanding — the reciprocal relation constituted by the 〃play of forces〃 appears
as the relation of the 〃Artificer〃 to his own product。
The general principle is not worked out in detail； with the same obviousness； in the case of
the other two primary types of Religion — Art and Revealed Religion。 But the same general
method of development is pursued in these cases。
The historical material before the mind of the writer is； as might be expected； the various
religions which have historically appeared amongst mankind。 These religions are treated；
however； as illustrations of principles dominating the religious consciousness m general；
rather than as merely historical phenomena。
With the succeeding argument should be read Hegel's Philosophy of Religion； Part II；
Sections I and II； and Part III。
B。 Religion in the form of Art
a。 The abstract work of art
b。 The living work of art
c。 The spiritual work of art
C。 Revealed Religion
（DD）。 Absolute Knowledge
VIII。 Absolute Knowledge
PREFACE
On scientific knowledge
In the case of a philosophical work it seems not only superfluous； but； in view of the nature of
philosophy； even inappropriate and misleading to begin； as writers usually do in a preface； by
explaining the end the author had in mind； the circumstances which gave rise to the work； and the
relation in which the writer takes it to stand to other treatises on the same subject； written by his
predecessors or his contemporaries。 For whatever it might be suitable to state about philosophy in
a preface — say； an historical sketch of the main drift and point of view； the general content and
results； a string of desultory assertions and assurances about the truth — this cannot be accepted
as the form and manner in which to expound philosophical truth。
Moreover； because philosophy has its being essentially in the element of that universality which
encloses the particular within it； the end or final result seems； in the case of philosophy more than
in that of other sciences； to have absolutely expressed the complete fact itself in its very nature；
contrasted with that the mere process of bringing it to light would seem； properly speaking； to
have no essential significance。 On the other hand； in the general idea of e。g。 anatomy…the
knowledge of the parts of the body regarded as lifeless — we are quite sure we do not possess the
objective concrete fact； the actual content of the science； but must； over and above； be concerned
with particulars。 Further； in the case of such a collection of items of knowledge； which has no real
right to the name of science； any talk about purpose and suchlike generalities is not commonly very
different from the descriptive and superficial way in which the contents of the science these nerves
and muscles； etc。…are themselves spoken of。 In philosophy； on the other hand； it would at once be
felt incongruous were such a method made use of and yet shown by philosophy itself to be
incapable of grasping the truth。
In the same way too； by determining the relation which a philosophical work professes to have to
other treatises on the same subject； an extraneous interest is introduced； and obscurity is thrown
over the point at issue in the knowledge of the truth。 The more the ordinary mind takes the
opposition between true and false to be fixed； the more is it accustomed to expect either
agreement or contradiction with a given philosophical system； and only to see reason for the one
or the other in any explanatory statement concerning such a system。 It does not conceive the
diversity of philosophical systems as the progressive evolution of truth； rather； it sees only
contradiction in that varietv。 The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through； and we might
say that the former is refuted by the latter； in the same way when the fruit comes； the blossom may
be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence； for the fruit appears as its true nature in
place of the blossom。 These stages are not merely differentiated； they supplant one another as
being incompatible with one another。 But the ceaseless activity of their own inherent nature makes
them at the same time moments of an organic unity； where they not merely do not contradict one
another； but where one is as necessary as the other； and this equal necessity of all moments
constitutes alone and thereby the life of the whole。 But contradiction as between philosophical
systems is not wont to be conceived in this way； on the other hand； the mind perceiving the
contradiction does not commonly know how to relieve it or keep it free from its onesidedness； and
to recognize in what seems conflicting and inherently antagonistic the presence of mutually
necessary moments。
The demand for such explanations； as also the attempts to satisfy this demand； very easily； pass
for the essential business philosophy has to undertake。 Where could the inmost truth of a
philosophical work be found better expressed than in its purposes and results？ and in what way
could these be more definitely known than through their distinction from what is produced during
the same period by others working in the same field？ If； however； such procedure is to pass for
more than the beginning of knowledge； if it is to pass for actually knowing； then we must； in point
of fact； look on it as a device for avoiding the real business at issue； an attempt to combine the
appearance of being in earnest and taking trouble about the subject with an actual neglect of the
subject altogether。 For the real subject…matter is not exhausted in its purpose； but in working the
matter out； nor is the mere result attained the concrete whole itself； but the result along with the
process of arriving at it。 The purpose of itself is a lifeless universal； just as the general drift is a
mere activity in a certain direction； which is still without its concrete realization； and the naked
result is the corpse of the system which has left its guiding tendency behind it。 Similarly； the
distinctive difference of anything is rather the boundary； the limit； of the subject； it