mode of the existence of matter。 The One Substance of Spinoza； to which French materialism as
naturalism is parallel； really finds its accomplishment here in this object as in all respects the
ultimate； but while in Spinoza this category is a possession which we find ready to hand； here it
appears as the result of the abstraction of the understanding proceeding from empiricism。
The other form of the Aufkl？rung is； on the contrary； when absolute Being is set forth as
something beyond self…consciousness； so that of itself； of its implicit Being； nothing whatever can
be known。 It bears the empty name of God。 For though God may be determined in any way
whatever； all these determinations fall away； He is； like x； the altogether unknown quantity。 This
view is not therefore to be termed atheism； in the first place because it still employs the empty；
meaningless name； and in the second place because it expresses the necessary relations of
self…consciousness； duties； &c。； not as necessary in an absolute sense； but as necessary through
relation to another； namely to the unknown — although there can be no positive relation to an
unknown except by abrogating the self as particular。 Yet it is not matter； because this simple and
empty something is negatively defined as non…existent for self…consciousness。 This all comes to the
same thing； however； for matter is the universal； and is Being…for…self represented as abrogated。
But the true reflection on that unknown is this； that it exists for self…consciousness simply as a
negative of the same； i。e。； as matter； reality； the present； it is this negative for me； this is its Notion。
The difference distinguishing this from what appears to be in its entirety something “other；” and in
which any one side is not permitted to say that what it thinks is such is that particular thing； is the
difference which rests on this last abstraction。
Since then the Notion is present only in its negative form； positive extension remains without a
Notion； it has the form of nature； of an existent； both in the physical and in the moral sphere。 The
knowledge of nature remains the ordinary； scientifically unspeculative knowledge； and as to its
essence； in so far as it claims to be philosophy； it is a general way of speaking that plays with the
words； “forces； relations； manifold connections；” but arrives at nothing definite。 Similarly； in the
spiritual sphere； it is so far true that the metaphysic of the spirit is of such a nature that it is nothing
more nor less than a particular organization by means of which the powers which are termed
sensation； perception； &c。； come into existence； but this is a wearisome way of talking； which can
make nothing intelligible； which accepts appearances and perceptions and reasons about them； but
none the less reduces their implicit existence to certain determinate forces； of the inward nature of
which we know nothing further。 The determination and knowledge of the moral sphere has
similarly for its object to bring man back to his so…called natural promptings； its essence has the
form of a natural impulse； and this natural impulse is termed self…love； selfishness； or benevolence。
It is required that man should live in conformity with nature； but this nature does not reach further
than general expressions and descriptions； such as the state of nature we find depicted by
Rousseau。 What is called the metaphysic of ordinary conceptions is the empiricism of Locke；
which seeks to show their origin； to be in consciousness； in as far as it is individual consciousness；
which； when born into the world； emerges out of unconsciousness in order to acquire knowledge
as sensuous consciousness。 This external origin they confound with the Becoming and Notion of
the matter in point。 If one were to ask vaguely what is the origin and genesis of water； and the
answer were to be given that it comes from the mountains or from rain； this would be a reply in the
spirit of the above philosophy。 In short； it is only the negative aspect that is interesting； and as for
this positive French philosophy； it is out of the question。 But even the negative side of it belongs
properly to culture mainly； with which we have here nothing to do； and the Aufkl？rung likewise
belongs to the same。 In the French philosophic writings； which in this respect are of importance；
what is worthy of admiration is the astonishing energy and force of the Notion as directed against
existence； against faith； against all the power of authority that had held sway for thousands of
years。 On the one hand we cannot help remarking the feeling of utter rebellion against the whole
state of affairs at present prevailing； a state which is alien to self…consciousness； which would fain
dispense with it； and in which self…consciousness does not find itself； there is a certainty of the truth
of reason； which challenges the whole intellectual world as it stands aloof； and is confident of
destroying it。 French atheism； materialism； or naturalism has overcome all prejudices； and has been
victorious over the senseless hypotheses and assumptions of the positive element in religion； which
is associated with habits； manners； opinions； determinations as to law and morality and civil
institutions。 With the healthy human understanding and earnestness of spirit； and not with frivolous
declamations； it has rebelled against the condition of the world as legally established； against the
constitution of the state； the administration of justice； the mode of government； political authority；
and likewise against art。
Contrasting with this barren content there is the other and fertile side。 The positive is in its turn
constituted by so…called immediately enlightening truths of the healthy human understanding； which
contains nothing except this truth and the claim to find itself； and beyond this form does not pass。
But in so doing there arises the endeavour to grasp the absolute as something present； and at the
same time as an object of thought and as absolute unity： an endeavour which； as it implies denial of
the conception of design both in the natural and in the spiritual sphere — the former involving the
idea of life； and the latter that of spirit and freedom — only reaches to the abstraction of a nature
undetermined in itself； to sensation； mechanism； self…seeking； and utility。 It is this then that we shall
have to make evident in the positive side of French philosophy。 In their political constitutions the
French have； it is true； started from abstractions； but they have done so as from universal thoughts；
which are the negative of reality； the English； on the other hand； proceed from concrete reality；
from the unwieldy structure of their constitution； just as their writers even have not attained to
universal principles。 What Luther began in the heart only and in the feelings — the freedom of spirit
which； unconscious of its simple root； does not comprehend itself； and yet is the very universal
itself； for which all content disappears in the thought； that fills itself with itself — these universal
determinations and thoughts the French asserted and steadfastly adhered to： they are universal
principles； in the form of the conviction of the individual in himself。 Freedom becomes the
condition of the world； connects itself with the world's history and forms epochs in the same； it is
the concrete freedom of the spirit； a concrete universality； fundamental principles as regards the
concrete now take the place of the abstract metaphysic of Descartes。 Among the Germans we
find mere chatter； they would have liked to offer explanations also； but all they have to give is in
the form of miserable phenomena and individualism。 The French； from their starting…point of the
thought of universality； and the German liberty of conscience starting from the conscience which
teaches us to “Prove all things；” to “hold fast that which is good；” have； however； joined hands
with one another； or they follow the same path。 Only the French； as though they were without
conscience； have made short work of everything； and have systematically adhered to a definite
thought — the physiocratic system； while the Germans wish to leave themselves a free retreat； and
examine from the standpoint of conscience whether a certain course is permissible。 The French
warred against the speculative Notion with the spirit； the Germans did so with the understanding。
We find in the French a deep all…embracing philosophic need； different from anything in the English
and Scotch and even in the Germans； and full of vitality： it is a universal concrete view of all that
exists； with entire independence both of all authority and of all abstract metaphysics。 The method
employed is that of development from perception； from the heart； it is a comprehensive view of the
entire matter； which keeps the whole ever in sight； and seeks to uphold and attain to it。
This healthy human understanding； this sound reason； with its content taken from the human breast；
from natural feeling； has directed itself against the religious side of things in various moments： on
the one hand and first of all； as French philosophy； it did so against the Catholic religion； the fetters
of superstition and of the hierarchy； on the other hand； in less pronounced form； as the German
“illumination；” against the Protestant religion； in as far as it has a content which it has derived
from revelation； from ecclesiastical authority in general。 On the one hand the form of authority in
general was challenged； and on the other hand its matter。 The content can be easily enough
disposed of by this form of thought； which is not what we understand by reason； but which must
be termed understanding； it is easy for the understanding to show objections to the ultimate
principles of what can be comprehended only by means of speculation。 The understanding has
thus tried the content of religion by its standard； and has condemned it； the understanding
proceeds in the same way against a concrete philosophy。 What of religion has in many theologies
been very commonly left remaining is what is termed theism； faith in general； this is the same
content which is found also in M