第3章 “從伯爾尼到法蘭克福再到耶拿時(shí)期：失敗的計(jì)劃和新的開(kāi)始”(5)

That Fichte’s rather abstract philosophical reflections would have served as this kind of flashpoint for poets is not surprising. The idea of the “imagination” as the unifying point between art and philosophy indeed, as the most important part or function of the human mind itself - had been hovering over European thought for some time before the upheaval of Kantian and Fichtean philosophy brought it to the forefront of discussion. Because the moderns had taken themselves to be attempting to understand the nuances of the human mind (in opposition to what they thought were their medieval predecessors’ preoccupation with investigating the nuances involved in God’s creation of the world), the idea of the human “imagination” had come to play a larger and larger role for them. Thus, even Thomas Hobbes, the great proselytizer for jettisoning the shackles of the Aristotelian/Scholastic past in favor of the “new science,” elevated imagination to a high rank, claiming in a late piece, “All that is beautiful or defensible in building . . . and whatsoever distinguisheth the civility of Europe from the barbarity of the American savages, is the workmanship of fancy,” which Hobbes had in earlier works identified with “imagination.”'"-^ The idea of “fancy” or the imagination had gradually been welded into neo-Platonic themes by the early eighteenth-century figure Anthony Ashley Cooper (the third earl of Shaftesbury), who in turn had attributed to the “imagination” the ability to forge a unity of sensibility and reason, of emotion and thought, which enabled us ultimately to be able to discern the “mutual dependency of things.”’'*

? ? 費(fèi)希特相當(dāng)抽象的哲學(xué)反思也許早已被用作詩(shī)人的這種爆發(fā)點(diǎn)，這并不令人感到大驚小怪。作為藝術(shù)與哲學(xué)連接點(diǎn)——更確切地說(shuō)作為人類精神自身最重要部分或功用——“想象”這一概念早在康德和費(fèi)希特哲學(xué)崛起前就已長(zhǎng)期在歐洲思想上空徘徊而且就已被推到歐洲思想探討的前臺(tái)。因?yàn)楝F(xiàn)代人早已把他們自己看作在嘗試?yán)斫猓ㄅc他們思考的作為他們中世紀(jì)先驅(qū)對(duì)研究涉及上帝創(chuàng)世細(xì)微差別的先入之見(jiàn)相對(duì)立的）人類精神細(xì)微差別，所以人類“想象”這一概念最終對(duì)于他們來(lái)說(shuō)發(fā)揮著一種越來(lái)越大的作用。如此一來(lái)，甚至托馬斯·霍布斯，這位扔掉亞里士多德哲學(xué)或經(jīng)院哲學(xué)歷史鐐銬轉(zhuǎn)而贊成“新科學(xué)”的宗教改革大家，同樣也把想象提到一種很高的品類，在一篇后期作品中主張，“所有的建筑中優(yōu)美或能防御的東西……凡是區(qū)分歐洲文明和粗魯美國(guó)人野蠻的東西，皆為幻想力的工藝品”。這被霍布斯在早期著作中等同于“想象”。“幻想力”或“想象”這一概念早已被18世紀(jì)初安東尼·阿什利·庫(kù)珀（第三任沙夫茨伯里伯爵）這個(gè)人物逐漸融入新柏拉圖主義的主題，這位伯爵反過(guò)來(lái)把塑造感性與理性或情緒與思想的統(tǒng)一的能力歸于“想象”，這就使我們能夠最終得以分清“相互依存的東西”。

Indeed, so much attention had been paid to the role of the “imagination” in human affairs that it is not surprising that it suddenly became a central object in philosophical and literary discussions during this period. Kant himself in his Critique of Pure Reason had claimed that it was the faculty of the “transcendental imagination” that united the contributions of sensible intuition and spontaneous conceptual activity into the unity of consciousness; Schiller had taken Kant’s claim even further; and Fichte (typically) had completely radicalized it, claiming that “the whole enterprise of the human spirit issues from the imagination, and the latter cannot be grasped save through the imagination itself.”’^ For Fichte, the imagination suddenly became the faculty of the mind, the basis for all other activities. What had been an emerging theme in European intellectual life was suddenly promoted by Fichte to the status of the first rank. Freedom, the idea supposedly animating the Revolution, was to be shown to be more deeply rooted in human life than had previously been thought, and freedom was now linked firmly with the exercise of the imagination.

? ? 更確切地說(shuō)，這么多人早就關(guān)注“想象”在人類事務(wù)中的作用，以至于“想象”突然變成這個(gè)階段哲學(xué)和文學(xué)探討中的核心對(duì)象，這件事不會(huì)令人感到驚奇?？档卤救嗽缭谒都兇饫硇耘小分芯鸵阎鲝垼恰俺?yàn)的想象”官能把感性直觀和自發(fā)概念活動(dòng)歸于意識(shí)的統(tǒng)一；席勒使康德的主張走得更遠(yuǎn)；費(fèi)希特（典型地）完全把康德主張推向極端，聲稱人類精神的全部事業(yè)出自想象，想象不可能被理解成是依靠想象自身從而得到挽救?！皩?duì)于費(fèi)希特來(lái)說(shuō)，想象突然變成心靈這一官能或構(gòu)成所有其他活動(dòng)的基礎(chǔ)。這個(gè)早已成蓬勃興起的歐洲知識(shí)生活主題的東西迅速地被費(fèi)希特提到第一品類的地位。自由，這個(gè)據(jù)稱激起法國(guó)大革命的觀念，必將被證明是更加深深地扎根于人類生活而不是以前被人認(rèn)作的東西，自由現(xiàn)在被牢牢地與想象活動(dòng)聯(lián)系在一起。

This only charged the atmosphere all the more at Jena, spurring the development of early Romanticism there. Two of the key figures in the development of Romanticism, August and Friedrich Schlegel, both lived in Jena for a period. August Schlegel moved to Jena in 1795 shortly after his marriage to Caroline Michaelis Bohmer, the daughter of a famous theologian in Gottingen, whose previous husband, a smalltown physician named Bohmer to whom she had been married at an early age, had died in 1788. Caroline Michaelis Bohmer Schlegel, an accomplished intellectual figure in her own right, had led an emancipated life that was to old-fashioned types quite simply scandalous; she had been part of the German Jacobins in Mainz, had been imprisoned by German authorities when they temporarily retook Mainz, and had suffered social banishment from her hometown when it was discovered that she had become pregnant following a short liaison with a younger French officer named Jean-Baptiste Dubois-Crance. August Schlegel, who had become infatuated with her at an early age (she did not reciprocate) offered to marry her, and despite her initial disinclination (she wrote to a friend that she still found the prospect of marriage to August Schlegel “l(fā)aughable”), she finally decided after her imprisonment that marriage to him would, after all, be the safe and prudent thing to do.

? ? 只是在耶拿才更加充滿上述這樣的氛圍，它刺激了耶拿早期浪漫主義的發(fā)展。在浪漫主義發(fā)展過(guò)程中，奧古斯特·施萊格爾和弗里德里?！な┤R格爾堪稱兩位主將，他們兩人都在耶拿住過(guò)一段時(shí)間。奧古斯特·施萊格爾于1795年移居耶拿，其時(shí)他與卡羅利內(nèi)·米夏埃利斯·伯默爾新婚燕爾，卡羅利內(nèi)·米夏埃利斯·伯默爾系斯圖加特一位著名神學(xué)研究家的千金，她的前任丈夫死于1788年，是某小鎮(zhèn)內(nèi)科醫(yī)生，名叫伯默爾，與伯默爾結(jié)婚時(shí)她正值豆蔻年華?？_利內(nèi)·米夏埃利斯·伯默爾·施萊格爾，一位憑其本身實(shí)力的有造詣的知識(shí)分子，早就過(guò)著一種解放了的對(duì)老派類型生活來(lái)說(shuō)極其丑惡可恥的生活；她早就成為德國(guó)美因茨雅各賓俱樂(lè)部成員，遭到過(guò)德國(guó)當(dāng)局的監(jiān)視（其時(shí)德國(guó)當(dāng)局暫時(shí)奪回美因茨），遭受過(guò)被她家鄉(xiāng)社會(huì)團(tuán)體開(kāi)除的痛苦，因?yàn)橛腥税l(fā)現(xiàn)她在跟一位名叫讓-巴蒂斯特·迪布瓦-克朗塞的年輕法國(guó)軍官短暫相好后懷了孕。奧古斯特·施萊格爾，少年時(shí)期就已熱戀著她的施萊格爾，主動(dòng)向她求婚（她沒(méi)有答應(yīng)），盡管她起初不愿意這樁婚事（她在致朋友信中說(shuō)道她依舊發(fā)覺(jué)跟奧古斯特·施萊格爾成婚的前景是“荒唐可笑的”），她出獄后最終還是斷定跟他結(jié)婚終究將會(huì)是做了件穩(wěn)妥而慎重的事情。

Friedrich Schlegel also moved to Jena in 1799 with his new wife, Dorothea, herself also an intellectual in her own right; and she and Friedrich Schlegel were linked together in their own well-known scandal. The daughter of the famous philosopher, Moses Mendelssohn, she had at eighteen entered into an arranged marriage with Simon Veit, a wealthy banker in Berlin with no serious interest in intellectual matters.? When Friedrich Schlegel was in Berlin, he and Dorothea began an affair, which led to her leaving her husband and divorcing him in 1798.? Friedrich Schlegel then published his famous novel Lucinde, a thinly veiled autobiographical rendering of himself and Dorothea and the union of physical and spiritual passion they found with each other. The book itself caused a scandal - its portrayal of the union of sexuality and love was a bit risque for many temperaments at the time, including Hegel’s own - and made its author famous and notorious. Both Schlegels thereby cultivated a sense of having unconventional marriages in an age that was busy undermining all the old conventions.

? ? 弗里德里?！な┤R格爾同樣也在1799年攜同新任妻子多羅特婭移居耶拿，多羅特婭本人也是一位憑其本身實(shí)力的有造詣的知識(shí)分子；她和弗里德里希·施萊格爾因他們自己的眾所周知的丑聞走到一起。作為著名哲學(xué)家莫澤斯·門德?tīng)査傻耐鈱O女，她早在18歲時(shí)就已步入了與西蒙·法伊特包辦的婚姻殿堂，法伊特是柏林腰纏萬(wàn)貫的銀行家而拿知識(shí)問(wèn)題不當(dāng)回事。當(dāng)弗里德里希·施萊格爾在柏林的時(shí)候，他和多羅特婭開(kāi)始相好，這致使她離開(kāi)了丈夫且在1798年與丈夫離了婚。弗里德里?！な┤R格爾接著發(fā)表了一部著名小說(shuō)《盧辛德》，小說(shuō)以微帶含蓄的自傳體形式講述著他自己與多羅特婭和那被他們倆發(fā)覺(jué)的彼此肉體激情和精神激情的結(jié)合。這部小說(shuō)本身引起了一場(chǎng)丑聞——它關(guān)于性行為和愛(ài)情結(jié)合的描寫對(duì)當(dāng)時(shí)人們的很多性格（包括黑格爾自己的性格）相當(dāng)有傷風(fēng)化——并使它的作者毀譽(yù)參半。施萊格爾夫婦由此弄出了有悖于那個(gè)年代常規(guī)的婚姻觀，這種婚姻觀極大地削弱所有的舊有的社會(huì)習(xí)俗。

The Schlegels quickly attracted a circle of like-minded people to join them in Jena. August Schlegel had been invited to Jena in the first place by Schiller to work on Schiller’s magazine. Die Horen, and on the Allgemeine Literatur Zeitung. He became an “extraordinary” professor at the university. Friedrich Leopold Freiherr von Hardenberg (known better by his pen name, Novalis), who had been Friedrich Schlegel’s friend, also came to join the circle at Jena, as did the early Romantic Ludwig Tieck. (Holderlin had met Novalis during his earlier stay in Jena.) Schelling naturally fit into this circle, becoming the acknowledged philosopher of the group. Friedrich Schlegel himself became an “extraordinary” professor of philosophy (although his lectures on philosophy were by everyone’s admission a bit of a disaster). A whole host of other minor figures complemented the scene, and the intellectual energy created by the group spurred the development of Romanticism. (Indeed, the term “Romanticism” itself was coined and popularized by Friedrich Schlegel.)

? ? 施萊格爾夫婦迅速吸引耶拿志趣相投的圈內(nèi)人士加入他們的行列。奧古斯特·施萊格爾首先早就受到席勒邀請(qǐng)來(lái)耶拿為謝林主辦的雜志《時(shí)序》和《文學(xué)總匯報(bào)》擔(dān)任編輯工作。他當(dāng)上了耶拿大學(xué)“特聘”教授。哈登貝格的弗里德里?！だ麏W波德·弗賴（以筆名諾瓦利斯聞名），作為弗里德里?！な┤R格爾朋友，同樣也來(lái)耶拿加入這個(gè)同仁圈，像早期浪漫派路德維?！さ倏送瑯右布尤脒@個(gè)同仁圈一樣。（荷爾德林早先在耶拿逗留期間就已和諾瓦利斯見(jiàn)過(guò)面。）謝林自然很適應(yīng)這個(gè)同仁圈，成了這個(gè)群體中公認(rèn)的哲學(xué)家。弗里德里?！な┤R格爾本人同樣也當(dāng)上了哲學(xué)“特聘”教授（盡管他的哲學(xué)課使大家大倒胃口），一大批其他輕量級(jí)人物完善了這個(gè)群體搭建的舞臺(tái)、由該群體創(chuàng)造出的知識(shí)能量促進(jìn)了浪漫主義的發(fā)展。（實(shí)際上，術(shù)語(yǔ)“浪漫主義”自身由弗里德里?！な┤R格爾造出并使之日漸流行。）

Friedrich Schlegel joyously referred to the university at Jena as a “symphony of professors.August and Caroline Schlegel’s house was the center of activity: Dorothea Schlegel wrote to friends in Berlin, “Such an eternal concert of wit, poetry, art, and science as surrounds me here can easily make one forget the rest of the world.Others such as the Romantic theologian Friedrich D. E. Schleiermacher were more or less honorary members of the group even though they did not live in Jena. Together, Friedrich and August Schlegel edited a journal, Athen(ium, which had a short life but which became one of the founding works of the early Romantic movement.

? ? 弗里德里?！な┤R格爾提到作為“教授交響樂(lè)”的耶拿大學(xué)顯得非常高興?！皧W古斯特·施萊格爾和卡羅利內(nèi)·施萊格爾家成了活動(dòng)中心：多羅特婭·施萊格爾在致柏林朋友信中寫道，“包圍著我的這樣一個(gè)關(guān)于哲人、詩(shī)歌、藝術(shù)和科學(xué)的永恒協(xié)奏曲可能很容易讓人忘卻其余的世界?！逼渌死缋寺缮駥W(xué)家弗里德里希·D·E·施萊爾馬赫或多或少成了這個(gè)群體中受人敬重的成員，盡管他們不住在耶拿小鎮(zhèn)。弗里德里希和奧古斯特·施萊格爾共同主編《雅典娜神殿》雜志，該雜志不久便停刊了，而它卻成了早期浪漫主義運(yùn)動(dòng)奠基性作品中的一種。

If anything, the early Romantics took Fichte’s lectures on the freedom of the “I” in positing the “Not-I” as providing a springboard for the new movement, although the early Romantics hovering around the Schlegel circle gave it a twist that Fichte himself would not have condoned. Friedrich Schlegel proclaimed in one of his “fragments” for Athendum: “The French Revolution, Fichte’s philosophy, and Goethe’s Meister are the greatest tendencies of the age. Whoever is offended by this juxtaposition, whoever cannot take any revolution seriously that isn’t noisy and materialistic, hasn’t yet achieved a lofty, broad perspective on the history of mankind.”"^** Schlegel was to use Fichte’s idea about the freedom of the “I” to develop his own theory of “irony,” which in turn was used to undermine the familiar distinction between ancient and modern art (a distinction that had already come under attack from Lessing). Fichte (by following and radicalizing Kant) had shown that all people are radically free, that nothing can count for the “I” unless he actively lets it count; Schlegel argued that a true artist would not let any inherited forms count for him except insofar as he, the artist, “l(fā)et them” count.

? ? 如果說(shuō)有什么特別之處的話，早期浪漫主義者把費(fèi)希特關(guān)于“自我”自由設(shè)定“非我”的講座看作是為新的運(yùn)動(dòng)提供了跳板，盡管圍繞施萊格爾小組轉(zhuǎn)的早期浪漫主義者對(duì)這場(chǎng)新的運(yùn)動(dòng)作了一種很可能就連費(fèi)希特本人也不會(huì)寬恕的歪曲。弗里德里?！な┤R格爾在他《雅典娜神殿》雜志“刊頭語(yǔ)”之一中宣稱：“法國(guó)大革命、費(fèi)希特哲學(xué)和歌德《威廉·邁斯特的戲劇使命》代表著這個(gè)年代最大的趨勢(shì)。無(wú)論誰(shuí)都會(huì)對(duì)這三者的并列心服口服，無(wú)論誰(shuí)都根本不可能嚴(yán)肅地看待一場(chǎng)不充滿噪聲和非物質(zhì)主義的仍未實(shí)現(xiàn)人類史上神高而廣遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)景的革命。”施萊格爾必將利用費(fèi)希特關(guān)于“自我”的自由思想從而發(fā)展他自己的“諷刺”理論，這反過(guò)來(lái)常常破壞了古代藝術(shù)與現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)之間熟悉的區(qū)分（一種早已遭到萊辛抨擊的區(qū)分）。費(fèi)希特（借助步康德后塵和使康德激進(jìn)化的費(fèi)希特）早已證明所有人都是徹底自由的，什么東西都不可能比得上“自我”有價(jià)值，條件是人們主動(dòng)地讓“自我”具有價(jià)值；施萊格爾辯稱一個(gè)真藝術(shù)家不應(yīng)該讓任何被繼承的形式使他具有價(jià)值，除非他這個(gè)藝術(shù)家“讓任何被繼承的形式”使他具有價(jià)值。

Schlegel thereby proposed replacing the older distinction between classical and modern art with what he argued was the more fundamental distinction between classical and Romantic art: Romantic art was to be characterized by the artist’s ironic distance from his own works, by his refusal to let himself and his works be completely absorbed into some external (“classical”) ordering. That this new distinction was not just the older distinction in different words was evinced by Schlegel’s including Shakespeare as one of the paradigmatic “Romantic” artists, an artist who was never completely “absorbed” in his plays. The Romantic artist could not let his creative imagination be ordered by rules (such as those of classical tragedy) that he himself did not posit. Indeed, as guided by the imagination, the artist was subject to no rules he did not impose on himself, and ironic distance from even those rules meant that the artist could never be completely absorbed or wholly revealed in his works.

? ? 施萊格爾由此提出，用他力主的古典藝術(shù)與浪漫派藝術(shù)之間更加基本的區(qū)分，取代舊有古典藝術(shù)與現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)之間的區(qū)分，浪漫派藝術(shù)注定具有藝術(shù)家具有諷刺意味的與他們自己作品的保持距離的特點(diǎn)，注定具有藝術(shù)家拒絕讓他本人和他作品完全被某種外部的（“古典的”）秩序所吸收的特點(diǎn)。新區(qū)分與舊區(qū)分不只是不同的用語(yǔ)，這個(gè)觀點(diǎn)由于施萊格爾從而引起人們的注意，他把莎士比亞算作中規(guī)中矩的“浪漫派”藝術(shù)家中的一個(gè)，算作一位絕不會(huì)完全“專注”于自己劇作中的藝術(shù)家。浪漫派藝術(shù)家不可能讓他們具有創(chuàng)造性的想象受到不被他們自己設(shè)置的規(guī)則（例如古典悲劇規(guī)則）的約束。更確切地說(shuō)，作為受到想象指引的人，藝術(shù)家根本不受不被他們本人強(qiáng)加于自身的規(guī)則的束縛，具有諷刺意味的甚至與這些規(guī)則保持距離的藝術(shù)家絕不可能完全專注于他們的作品或完整地顯露在他們的作品中。

The Romantics took Fichte’s idea of the self-authorization of the “P’ seriously but gave it an existential twist that went far beyond anything that Fichte himself would have envisioned. Fichte had argued that the intrinsic revisability of all our judgments was linked to our complete freedom to make such revisions, that only the “absolute F’ could determine for itself what was to count epistemically, morally, and aesthetically. Thus, the full and “boundless” spontaneity of the subject of thought and action could only be 5c//^bounded. Romantics such as Friedrich Schlegel took this “self’ to be not Fichte’s “absolute F’ but the real, existing self of the poet and critic, the self which can ironically both detach itself from its immediate environment, look on everything as something it could either accept or reject, and still situate itself in terms of a striving for the “absolute” that remains only an infinite “ideal,” not something ever achieved.

? ? 浪漫主義作家認(rèn)真地領(lǐng)會(huì)費(fèi)希特關(guān)于“自我”的自我授權(quán)這一概念，但是他們對(duì)費(fèi)希特的這一概念作了存在主義式的歪曲，從而使這一個(gè)概念與費(fèi)希特本人有可能設(shè)想出的東西相去甚遠(yuǎn)。費(fèi)希特早已論證道，我們一切判斷的固有可修改性都與我們完全自由地做出這樣的修改密切相關(guān)，唯獨(dú)“絕對(duì)自我”可以獨(dú)立地確定什么必將被算作認(rèn)識(shí)論上、道德上和審美上的東西。這樣一來(lái)，思想與行動(dòng)問(wèn)題的充分而“無(wú)窮的”自發(fā)性就可能只是自我的限定。浪漫主義作家例如弗里德里?！な┤R格爾不是把“自我”看作費(fèi)希特的“絕對(duì)自我”而看作詩(shī)人和批評(píng)家的真正現(xiàn)存的自我，這樣的自我既能夠以諷刺方式使它自身擺脫它直接的環(huán)境或把一切都看作或者可被它認(rèn)同或者可被它摒棄的東西，又能夠使它自已處于從下列方面來(lái)說(shuō)的位置：追求“絕對(duì)”依然只是無(wú)限的“理想”而非曾經(jīng)被得到的東西。

This in turn seemed to them to call for a more personal approach to art. For the Romantics, the exploration of the self, of the personal world of emotions and sensuality within the context of a rather abstract, holistic conception of “Being,” was more important than the abstract determinations of the categories of knowledge that Fichte had sought.? Those people for whom the older ties of religion had weakened but who were still looking for something that could redeem their lives found in Fichte’s call to actualize their own freedom a summons to explore themselves and in doing so to usher in a new world of freedom and reconciliation.

? ? 上述做法反過(guò)來(lái)在他們看來(lái)是在訴諸一種更加個(gè)性化的藝術(shù)方法。對(duì)于浪漫主義作家而言，在一種相當(dāng)抽象的整體的“存在”觀念語(yǔ)境下，探索自我或探索情感與感性的個(gè)體化世界，這樣做的重要性勝過(guò)抽象地確定早就被費(fèi)希特尋求的知識(shí)范疇。對(duì)于某些人來(lái)說(shuō)舊有的宗教紐帶早已遭到削弱但他們依然在尋找某種可能對(duì)他們的生活起著救贖作用的東西，這樣的人們?cè)谫M(fèi)希特關(guān)于實(shí)現(xiàn)他們自己自由的號(hào)召下發(fā)現(xiàn)考察他們自身的召晤并且發(fā)現(xiàn)在這樣做過(guò)程中去迎接自由和和諧的新世界。

The Romantic movement that was born in Jena (partly out of Fichte’s lectures) was the product of a number of different personalities and, despite its professed ideals of unifying philosophy and poetry, was not particularly inclined to the kind of systematic philosophical thought that Fichte championed. Friedrich Schlegel, for example, found the paradoxical aphorism and the “fragment” to be the ideal manner of expressing his ideas on irony and on the essential incompleteness of all experience, of the constant forward movement of self-consciousness in the very activity of its more backward-looking recollections. As a movement, Romanticism tended to oppose itself to all previous schools of thought, and hence it is notoriously difficult to ascribe any unity to the Romantic movement since it self-consciously resisted any systematization or fixed and final categorization of itself.

? ? 這場(chǎng)誕生于耶拿（部分地源于費(fèi)希特的講課）的浪漫主義運(yùn)動(dòng)是大量不同人格的產(chǎn)物，并且，盡管這場(chǎng)浪漫主義運(yùn)動(dòng)心懷把哲學(xué)和詩(shī)歌統(tǒng)一起來(lái)的公開(kāi)聲稱的理想，仍然不是特別傾向于一種由費(fèi)希特倡導(dǎo)的體系哲學(xué)思想。舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，弗里德里?！な┤R格爾發(fā)覺(jué)悖論式格言和“札記”成了表達(dá)他關(guān)于下列兩類概念的理想方式，反語(yǔ)概念與本質(zhì)上所有的經(jīng)驗(yàn)不完整性概念或本質(zhì)上自我意識(shí)在它更加向后看的反思這個(gè)特有活動(dòng)中不斷向前運(yùn)動(dòng)的不完整性概念。作為一種運(yùn)動(dòng)，浪漫主義易于使它自己跟以前所有的思想流派為敵，因此要把任何統(tǒng)一歸于浪漫主義運(yùn)動(dòng)實(shí)比登天還難，因?yàn)樗杂X(jué)地抵抗它自身的系統(tǒng)化或它自身固定的和終極的分類。

Nonetheless, the Jena Romantics tended to have four related ideals.? First, they tended to believe in the unity of knowledge, not as the Enlightenment had — as a structured tree with various branches - but as a set of fragments developing itself from an inchoate whole, which could therefore not be a matter of “l(fā)ogic” but only of experience and imagination. Second, they fervently upheld the ideal of “subjective inwardness,” Innerlichkeit, the notion of the irreducibility and usually the primacy of subjective experience, all the while holding to a “realist” view of the world, refusing to hold that “Being” itself could be exhaustively comprehended in such subjective experience. They thus rejected Fichte’s idealist notion of the Fs fully comprehending the Not-I, holding instead that the background for any comprehension of experience necessarily includes a large element of uncomprehended (and maybe even incomprehensible) experience and that the function of art and theory is to call our attention to the relative open-endedness of the horizons of conscious life. Third, most of them reacted against the Enlightenment disenchantment of nature by calling for a kind of reenchantment of nature; but they also wished to do this without returning to anything like traditional or orthodox religion. (That the breakdown of the Romantic program would lead some - such as Friedrich Schlegel himself — to convert to Catholicism is not in this respect surprising; certainly Hegel did not find it surprising.) Fourth, and implied by their other views, they championed what they took to be the Fichtean notion of the primacy of the imagination over the “mere” intellect.

? ? 盡管如此，耶拿浪漫主義者往往具有四個(gè)相互貫通的理想。第一，他們傾向于相信知識(shí)的統(tǒng)一，不像啟蒙運(yùn)動(dòng)認(rèn)為的統(tǒng)一——像一棵具有不同枝葉的主干結(jié)構(gòu)的樹(shù)那樣的統(tǒng)一——而像一系列從不成熟的整體中生發(fā)出它自身的碎片那樣的統(tǒng)一，知識(shí)統(tǒng)一問(wèn)題因此不可能是“邏輯”問(wèn)題而只可能是經(jīng)驗(yàn)與想象問(wèn)題。第二，他們熱烈堅(jiān)持“主觀本質(zhì)”（Innerlichkeit）這個(gè)理想、不可約概念和通常主觀經(jīng)驗(yàn)第一性，始終堅(jiān)信“實(shí)在主義”世界觀，拒不認(rèn)為“存在”本身可以通過(guò)這種主觀經(jīng)驗(yàn)而被徹底領(lǐng)悟。他們因此摒棄費(fèi)希特關(guān)于自我充分領(lǐng)會(huì)非我這一唯心主義看法，反而堅(jiān)信關(guān)于領(lǐng)會(huì)經(jīng)驗(yàn)的背景必然包含大量未被領(lǐng)會(huì)的（甚至也許不可理解的）經(jīng)驗(yàn)因素，反而堅(jiān)信藝術(shù)和理論的功用就是喚起我們關(guān)注意識(shí)生活視域的相對(duì)無(wú)止境性。第三，他們中絕大多數(shù)人依靠要求一種對(duì)自然的返魅來(lái)排斥啟蒙運(yùn)動(dòng)對(duì)自然的祛魅；但是他們同樣也希望在這樣做時(shí)不要回到像傳統(tǒng)或正統(tǒng)的宗教一樣的東西。（打破浪漫主義計(jì)劃將會(huì)致使某些人——例如弗里德里?！な┤R格爾本人——皈依天主教，關(guān)于這件事情絲毫不會(huì)使人感到驚奇；當(dāng)然黑格爾感到這件事不值得使人驚奇。）第四，借助由他們其他觀點(diǎn)暗含的東西，他們倡導(dǎo)他們看作的費(fèi)希特關(guān)于想象優(yōu)于“純粹”智力這一想法。

In all these respects, the Romantic movement in Jena responded to exactly that to which all the rest of Fichte’s admiring students responded: the breakdown of what had been traditionally authoritative, the sense that modern life was up for grabs, the search for something to replace the now-exhausted reconciling force of the older religion. The world of freedom first formulated by Kant and radicalized by Fichte, which the French Revolution had promised but which to many now seemed to be betrayed, was a world in which everything that had counted was in the process of being newly established or reestablished.? Thus, Friedrich Schlegel could write to his friend Novalis that he intended “to write a new Bible and follow in the footsteps of Mohammed and Luther.”’?'

? ? 在以上這四個(gè)方面，耶拿浪漫主義運(yùn)動(dòng)恰好是對(duì)其余一切欽佩費(fèi)希特的學(xué)生回應(yīng)的回應(yīng)：關(guān)于歷來(lái)作為權(quán)威東西的打破，關(guān)于現(xiàn)代生活信手可得的觀點(diǎn)，對(duì)取代現(xiàn)已枯竭的作為調(diào)解力量的舊有宗教?hào)|西的探究。一個(gè)由康德首先系統(tǒng)闡述的、再被費(fèi)希特推向極端的、法國(guó)大革命早已作出承諾而在很多人看來(lái)現(xiàn)在似乎遭到背叛的自由世界是這樣一個(gè)世界，在這個(gè)世界中一切早已被算作有價(jià)值的東西都處在被新確立或重新確立的過(guò)程中。這樣一來(lái)，弗里德里?！な┤R格爾可能在致友人諾瓦利斯信中寫道他想要“撰寫一本新《圣經(jīng)》并沿著穆罕默德和路德的足跡前行?！?br>

Some Romantics thus began to speak in poetic terms about death, denying its opposition to life and seeing it instead as the culmination of life. The Romantic interest in death was, however, not some kind of life-denying fascination with mortality but an attempt to affirm life itself. The Romantics seemed to think that what makes life worth living is what redeems death, but since the older ways of redeeming human mortality had lost their authoritative grip on people, it was necessary to create a new understanding of the relation of life and death that was itself reconciliatory. Thus, Novalis and Schlegel began offering the idea that death was part of life, was its completion, and that it gave the living a reconciling reason for their life. This quickly got out of hand, however, as the Romantic concern with seeing what might redeem life took on more and more the character of a fascination with death per se.? Novalis’s seductive Hymns to the Night, written after his young fiancee, Sophie von Kiihn, died at thirteen, speak of death as the fulfillment of life: “What once sunk us into deep sorrowfulness / now draws us onward with sweet longing”'?^ Even Friedrich Schlegel in Lucinde spoke of the two lovers longing for death in the section of the novel called “Yearning and Rest,” since death would detach their union from the contingencies of the world and render it eternal.

? ? 那些浪漫主義者因而著手以詩(shī)歌語(yǔ)言談?wù)撍劳?，否認(rèn)死亡構(gòu)成生命的對(duì)立面，反而把死亡當(dāng)作生命的頂峰看待。然而浪漫主義者對(duì)死亡的興趣不是用必死性來(lái)否定對(duì)生命的某種迷戀而是嘗試肯定生命本身。浪漫主義者看來(lái)好像認(rèn)為使生命值得存在的是救贖死亡的東西，但是因?yàn)榫融H人類必死性的那些舊有方式早已喪失了它們對(duì)人們的權(quán)威性支配，所以必須對(duì)生命與死亡關(guān)系自身具有一致性作出新的理解。這樣一來(lái)，諾瓦利斯和施萊格爾著手提出下列的想法：死亡是生的一部分，是生命的完成；它為生者提供他們生活的和諧的理由。不過(guò)，這樣的想法很快變得一發(fā)而不可收，正像浪漫主義者對(duì)看看什么可以救贖生命的關(guān)注越來(lái)越呈現(xiàn)出對(duì)死亡自身的迷戀特點(diǎn)一樣。諾瓦利斯在他正值豆蔻年華未婚妻索菲·馮·屈恩13歲時(shí)死去后創(chuàng)作的富有魅力的《黑夜贊美詩(shī)》把死亡說(shuō)成是生命的完成：“曾使我們陷入深度悲痛之物/現(xiàn)在吸引我們帶著甜蜜渴望前進(jìn)。”甚至就連弗里德里?！な┤R格爾也在《盧辛德》這部小說(shuō)中被稱作“懷念與長(zhǎng)眠”這個(gè)部分談到兩個(gè)渴望死亡的情侶，因?yàn)樗劳鰧?huì)使他們倆擺脫再次意外結(jié)合并使生命變得永垂不朽。

The incendiary personalities that made up the Jena Romantic movement, however, soon found multiple reasons to squabble with each other. The Schlegel brothers, typically quarreling with all the others connected with the editorial board of the Allgemeine Literatur Zeitung, had resigned from the board in the autumn of 1799; this in turn had led Christian Gottfried Schiitz - the influential editor of the journal, an important philologist who was a key figure in Jena’s promotion of the ideals of Greek art and life - to publish an article in the journal that more or less accused the Schlegel brothers of mental instability.’?^ All of this internal squabbling finally led to the Romantic circle’s full dissolution by 1803. The ideas that they set into motion, though, were to be significant for Hegel’s development; he took over some of them himself, all the while attempting to distance himself from what he saw as their extravagances and having very strained personal relations with many members of the movement.

? ? 然而那構(gòu)成耶拿浪漫主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的具有煽動(dòng)性的個(gè)性不久便成了人們彼此爭(zhēng)吵的充分理由。施萊格爾兄弟，由于常常與所有的其他跟《文學(xué)總匯報(bào)》雜志編委會(huì)有聯(lián)系的人們爭(zhēng)吵，于1799年秋退出雜志編委會(huì)；這件事進(jìn)而致使克里斯蒂安·戈特洛布·許茨——《文學(xué)總匯報(bào)》雜志頗具影響力的編輯，一位十分重要的語(yǔ)文學(xué)家兼一位在耶拿對(duì)古希臘人藝術(shù)與生活理想的提升方面關(guān)鍵性人物——在《文學(xué)總匯報(bào)》雜志上發(fā)表一篇或多或少指責(zé)施萊格爾兄弟精神錯(cuò)亂的文章。所有這些內(nèi)部爭(zhēng)吵最終導(dǎo)致浪漫主義小組到1803年徹底解散。盡管如此，浪漫主義者確立的思想注定對(duì)黑格爾思想發(fā)展具有非常重要的意義；他本人接受了其中某些思想，始終試圖使他自己與他所看作的他們的放浪形骸保持距離，并跟耶拿浪漫主義運(yùn)動(dòng)中很多成員個(gè)人關(guān)系非常緊張。

Jena’s Decline, Hegel’s Entry

耶拿的衰落，黑格爾的進(jìn)場(chǎng)

Hegel was certainly drawn by Jena’s fame and was personally attracted to the Fichtean ideal of the university. Although he was always much better disposed to the Classicism coming out of Goethe’s Weimar than to the specific kind of Romanticism that found its birth in Jena, his sojourn in Jena was to involve a personal struggle about how to combine these intellectual movements within his own thought. Nonetheless, the young man from an up-and-coming family in Wiirttemberg, always touchy about his status in the world, would have found the more or less bourgeois environment of Jena more to his taste than the aristocratic pretensions of Gottingen. In Gottingen, the riding stables were among the largest and most conspicuous buildings; in Jena, the professors lived like paupers but engaged in constant conversation and had a sense of themselves as engaged in the common project of creating modern life from the ground up. Unlike Gottingen’s semiaristocratic mission to produce “well-rounded” people, Jena’s intellectuals were selfconsciously edgy, more interested in Bi/dung. Moreover, Goethe’s own increasing interest in the content of classical models and in the emerging natural science of the day helped the Jena university to become a center of new learning and not merely a place for the transmission of outdated knowledge.

? ? 黑格爾無(wú)疑被耶拿名聲所吸引并且作為個(gè)人受到費(fèi)希特大學(xué)理想的吸引。雖然他總是非常喜愛(ài)源于歌德的魏瑪古典主義而不喜愛(ài)誕生于耶拿特有的浪漫主義，但是他在耶拿的逗留注定讓他卷入一場(chǎng)怎么把這些知識(shí)運(yùn)動(dòng)融入他自己的思想的個(gè)人斗爭(zhēng)。盡管如此，這位來(lái)自符騰堡看重功名家庭的青年人，這位動(dòng)輒對(duì)他現(xiàn)世地位過(guò)于敏感的青年人，大概已經(jīng)發(fā)覺(jué)耶拿或多或少的中產(chǎn)階級(jí)環(huán)境比起哥廷根貴族的虛偽環(huán)境更加符合他的口味。在哥廷根，坐落在最大建筑物與最顯眼建筑物之間的是馬廄；在耶拿，教授居住類似貧民居住而忙于不斷交流并感到完全是在投身于創(chuàng)造現(xiàn)代生活這個(gè)共同工程。和哥廷根培養(yǎng)“具有多方面能力的”人這一半貴族的使命不同，耶拿知識(shí)分子自覺(jué)對(duì)教養(yǎng)更加敏感和更感興趣。尚不止于此，歌德自己逐漸對(duì)古典模式的內(nèi)容和對(duì)時(shí)代新興的自然科學(xué)感興趣，這有助于使耶拿大學(xué)成為新的學(xué)術(shù)重鎮(zhèn)而不僅僅是傳播陳舊知識(shí)的場(chǎng)所。

Unfortunately for Hegel, the university that had spawned this intellectual explosion had already begun to fall apart even before he arrived.? Although the university had become a magnet for intellectuals, not all people in the university were particularly thrilled by the new colleagues surrounding them. The older “ordinary” professors felt especially threatened by the newcomers. The incomes of the “extraordinary” professors was not dependent on that of the guildlike structure of the medieval universities (as were those of the “ordinary” professors) but came directly from the government itself The sudden upsurge in the number of more distinguished “extraordinary” professors thus was not only a threat to the status of the older, established “ordinary” professors, it was also a threat to their continued governance of the university.

? ? 對(duì)于黑格爾來(lái)說(shuō)令人遺憾的是，耶拿大學(xué)已經(jīng)造成知識(shí)分子人心渙散，甚至早在他到達(dá)之前就已開(kāi)始出現(xiàn)四分五裂的局面。雖然耶拿大學(xué)引來(lái)了一批知識(shí)分子，但是耶拿大學(xué)有些人卻被他們身邊的新同事弄得特別不爽。舊有“普通”教授尤其覺(jué)得受到新加盟者的威脅?！疤仄浮苯淌诘氖杖氩灰蕾囉陬愃浦惺兰o(jì)大學(xué)行會(huì)機(jī)構(gòu)的收入（“普通”教授收入依賴于這個(gè)機(jī)構(gòu)的收入）而可直接來(lái)自政府自身的撥款。出類拔萃的“特聘”教授數(shù)量猛增因此不僅僅對(duì)舊有的在崗“普通”教授地位構(gòu)成威脅，這種情況同樣也對(duì)“普通”教授繼續(xù)把持耶拿大學(xué)形成威脅。

The appointment of Schiller is a case in point about the emerging tensions in the structure of the university at Jena. Because of his book, the History of the Secession of the United Netherlands from the Spanish Government^ Schiller had been called to Jena to serve as a professor of history. However, the “ordinary” historians scoffed at the fact that Schiller had no formal historical training, and they scoffed even more at the fact that he was not capable of delivering his lectures in Latin (surely a prerequisite for a historian). One “ordinary” professor of history at the university, Christian Gottlob Heinrich, led an uncompromising campaign against Schiller’s appointment, and Schiller finally had to have his title changed to “extraordinary” professor of philosophy instead of history. (Denying Schiller an appointment to the historyfaculty was, unfortunately for Professor Heinrich, the only thing of note he ever did.) The two “ordinary” professors of philosophy, however, Justus Christian Hennings and Johann August Heinrich Ulrich, were no more happy than the historians about the new appointments and tended to resist the intrusions of the new Kantian and post-Kantian philosophy with as much vehemence as the historians had rejected Schiller.

? ? 對(duì)席勒的任命引起耶拿大學(xué)辦公機(jī)構(gòu)的緊張就是一個(gè)適例。由于《尼德蘭離叛史》這部著作，席勒已經(jīng)被邀請(qǐng)到耶拿大學(xué)擔(dān)任歷史學(xué)教授?？墒牵捌胀ā睔v史學(xué)教授嘲笑席勒沒(méi)受過(guò)正規(guī)的歷史學(xué)訓(xùn)練，他們甚至還嘲笑他不能用拉丁語(yǔ)講課（這肯定是擔(dān)任歷史學(xué)教授的先決條件）。耶拿大學(xué)一位“普通”歷史學(xué)教授，克里斯蒂安·戈特洛布·海因里希，發(fā)起一場(chǎng)堅(jiān)決反對(duì)任命席勒的運(yùn)動(dòng)，而席勒最終具有的頭銜不得不被改成哲學(xué)“特聘”教授而非歷史學(xué)“特聘”教授。（抵制席勒到歷史系執(zhí)教是海因里希教授曾做過(guò)的唯一被記錄在案的事情，這對(duì)海因里希教授是件非常令人遺憾的事情。）然而，兩位“普通”哲學(xué)教授，尤斯圖斯·克里斯蒂安·亨寧斯和約翰·弗里德里?！ずＲ蚶锵！鯛柪锵?，對(duì)于這項(xiàng)新的任命比起歷史學(xué)教授高興不到哪里去，傾向于抵制新康德哲學(xué)和后康德哲學(xué)打入耶拿大學(xué)，正像歷史學(xué)學(xué)者激烈反對(duì)席勒一樣。

Thus, Fichte’s success at the lectern, which had caused student enrollments at the university to shoot up, served only to anger the old guard at Jena. Moreover, since students paid fees to individual professors to attend their lectures, the old guard saw the students’ attendance at Fichte’s lectures as cutting into their incomes.

? ? 這樣一來(lái)，費(fèi)希特在講壇上取得的成功，由于引起了耶拿大學(xué)學(xué)生入學(xué)人數(shù)陡增，只會(huì)起到激怒耶拿大學(xué)老人員的作用。尚不止于此，因?yàn)閷W(xué)生是付費(fèi)給每位教授以便去聽(tīng)他們講課的，所以耶拿老人員把學(xué)生去聽(tīng)費(fèi)希特講課看作削減了他們的收入。

Fichte soon gave them a wider target at which to aim. In a wellintentioned but presumptuous act, Fichte scheduled some lectures on Sunday morning at the same time as church services in town. (Fichte firmly believed that the moral content of his lectures absolved him of any charge of interfering with piety.) This provided the springboard for those resentful of the newcomers to undermine Fichte, who was already rumored to be a dangerous Jacobin because of his 1793 published defense of the French Revolution. Fichte also helped to edit a journal (the Philosophisches Journal einer Gesellschaft Teutscher Gelehrten, i.e., the Philosophical Journal of a Society of German Scholars) together with Immanuel Niethammer, a transplanted Swabian who had also been a student at the Tubingen Seminary and who after first being on the philosophical faculty at Jena had shifted to the theological faculty. (Niethammer had been good friends with Holderlin at the Seminary and had tried to further Holderlin’s career as a philosopher when Holderlin was at Jena; he was later to play a crucial role in furthering Hegel’s career.) When Fichte published a piece in the journal on the ethical basis of religion, insisting all the while that such religion required practical postulates about the existence of God, he was accused of atheism by the old guard. A series of articles began to circulate that accused Fichte of this and, by implication, imputed Jacobin sympathies to him. Karl August, the duke of Weimar, was particularly upset with his minister, Goethe, for not keeping a more watchful eye on what he regarded as the subversive tendencies surrounding “his” university.? Goethe himself, who could not have cared less about Fichte’s alleged atheism even if it were true, was incensed at what he saw as Fichte’s obdurate imprudence and did nothing to help him. After Fichte bungled the whole affair by assuming a strikingly haughty and moralistic stance towards the obviously and patently unfair charges against him, Christian Gottlob Voigt, Goethe’s aide in charge of the university, refused to defend him further. By March 27, 1799, the decision was made to remove Fichte from his professorship, and at meetings on April 14 and 25, the decision was finalized.

? ? 費(fèi)希特不次賦予他們更高遠(yuǎn)的目標(biāo)以便他們?nèi)プ非蟆Ｓ捎诔鲇诤靡舛孕衅涫?，費(fèi)希特把某些課程排在周日早晨此時(shí)正值鎮(zhèn)里教堂做禮拜。（費(fèi)希特堅(jiān)信他講課中道德方面內(nèi)容可以使他免受干擾虔誠(chéng)的指責(zé)。）這就為某些對(duì)新加盟者忠忠不平的耶拿老人員訶毀費(fèi)希特提供了口舌，這批老人員在此之前就因費(fèi)希特1793年發(fā)表過(guò)為法國(guó)大革命辯護(hù)的言論而謠傳他是個(gè)險(xiǎn)惡的雅各賓派分子。費(fèi)希特還幫助編輯過(guò)一份雜志（Philosophisches Journal der Gesellschaft Teutscher Gelehrter，即《德國(guó)學(xué)者協(xié)會(huì)哲學(xué)雜志》，合作者有伊曼努爾·尼特哈默爾這位斯瓦比亞移民，他同樣也曾是圖賓根神學(xué)院學(xué)生，起初就讀耶拿大學(xué)哲學(xué)系而后轉(zhuǎn)到神學(xué)院。尼特哈默爾在神學(xué)院時(shí)跟荷爾德林成了好朋友，早在荷爾德林在耶拿時(shí)就已試圖促使荷爾德林走哲學(xué)家這條路；他后來(lái)在促使黑格爾選擇人生道路方面起到了至關(guān)重要的作用。）當(dāng)費(fèi)希特在雜志上發(fā)表一篇關(guān)于宗教的倫理基礎(chǔ)文章和始終堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為宗教需要對(duì)上帝存在作出切合實(shí)際的系統(tǒng)闡述的時(shí)候，費(fèi)希特受到耶拿老教師無(wú)神論的控告。一系列文章開(kāi)始圍繞著無(wú)神論指責(zé)費(fèi)希特并含蓄地把同情雅各賓派強(qiáng)加到他頭上。魏瑪公爵卡爾·奧古斯特特別被他屬下歌德這位部長(zhǎng)弄得心煩意亂，因?yàn)楦璧聸](méi)有時(shí)刻多加留意這位公爵所看作的“他的”大學(xué)周遭的顛覆性傾向。歌德本人，不可能不大關(guān)注費(fèi)希特被指控的無(wú)神論，即使此事是真實(shí)的，因他所看作的費(fèi)希特固執(zhí)己見(jiàn)的魯莽行為而感到非常憤怒，從而對(duì)費(fèi)希特根本沒(méi)有作出任何提攜。在費(fèi)希特由于對(duì)這種明顯非常不公正的指責(zé)抱著惹人注目的傲慢和道德主義者的態(tài)度而搞砸了整個(gè)事情后，克里斯蒂安·戈特洛布·福格特這位負(fù)責(zé)耶拿大學(xué)事務(wù)工作的歌德助手拒絕進(jìn)一步為費(fèi)希特尋找俸祿。到1799年3月27日，校方作出將撤銷費(fèi)希特教授職稱的決定，經(jīng)過(guò)4月14日和25日兩次校學(xué)術(shù)委員會(huì)會(huì)議討論從而這個(gè)決定最終定了下來(lái)。

The old guard was overjoyed with Fichte’s dismissal, particularly Professor Ulrich in philosophy (who dismissed the students’ calls for Fichte’s reappointment as the moral equivalent of calls for the construction of a bordello).When other professors threatened to leave if Fichte were dismissed, the university authorities wrote it all off as empty threats. However, as the number of students attending Jena suddenly began to sink after Fichte’s dismissal, the “extraordinary” professors who had made Jena’s fame suddenly began to become more aware of Jena’s provinciality and its abysmally low pay. They had felt themselves compensated by Jena’s unprecedented freedom, but Fichte’s dismissal showed how precarious that freedom actually was, and, to add to their unease, as “extraordinary” professors, the newcomers did not have secure positions or incomes but were wholly dependent on the benevolence of the officials of the government in Weimar. At the same time, the university at Halle was rebuilding itself, and after 1803, the university at Wurzburg (which had just come under Bavarian control) had been declared free from clerical control, thus offering the newcomers a way out of the Jena malaise. In the midst of all this turmoil and new competition from other places, Karl August, the duke of Weimar, only made things worse by deciding to build himself a new palace, and money that might have been spent on competing with Halle and Wiirzburg was instead directed to the construction of the palace (the work on which, according to Voigt, employed 400 people). Karl August was spending 4,000 Thalers per week on the construction of the palace, almost none on the university, and the result was that the most prominent among the professors began looking for better offers elsewhere.

? ? 耶拿大學(xué)老人員對(duì)費(fèi)希特被解職感到格外高興，特別是哲學(xué)教授烏爾里希更感到格外高興（他把學(xué)生提出重聘費(fèi)希特的要求批成是道德上等同于提出建個(gè)妓院的要求）?！爱?dāng)其他教授威脅說(shuō)假如費(fèi)希特遭解職他們也離開(kāi)耶拿大學(xué)的時(shí)候，校領(lǐng)導(dǎo)根本不去理睬這番話而只把它當(dāng)作是空洞的威脅看待。然而，當(dāng)在費(fèi)希特遭解聘后報(bào)考耶拿大學(xué)學(xué)生數(shù)量突然開(kāi)始出現(xiàn)銳減的時(shí)候、為耶拿大學(xué)建功立業(yè)的“特聘”教授們突然開(kāi)始變得更加意識(shí)到耶拿大學(xué)的小家子氣和它極度低下的薪水。他們一直覺(jué)得耶拿大學(xué)空前的學(xué)術(shù)自由是對(duì)他們自己物質(zhì)利益的補(bǔ)償，但是解聘費(fèi)希特表明耶拿大學(xué)學(xué)術(shù)自由實(shí)際上是多么不穩(wěn)定，他們感到更為心神不安的是，作為“特聘”教授，新加盟者沒(méi)有穩(wěn)定的職位或收入而完全仰賴于魏瑪政府官員的恩惠。同時(shí)，哈勒大學(xué)在著手重組，1803年后，維爾茨堡大學(xué)（該校剛剛劃歸巴伐利亞管轄）就已被宣布擺脫教士的控制，因而這就為新加盟者提供一條擺脫受到耶拿抑郁的道路。正當(dāng)出現(xiàn)上述這些混亂和跟其他大學(xué)進(jìn)行新的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的時(shí)候、卡爾·奧古斯特這位魏瑪公爵不料由于決定為他自己修建一座新宅邸而使得事情變得更加糟糕，一筆可能被花在與哈勒大學(xué)和維爾茨堡大學(xué)展開(kāi)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的資金反倒被命令用來(lái)建造公爵宅?。ò凑崭８裉亟y(tǒng)計(jì)這項(xiàng)工程動(dòng)用了400人）?？枴W古斯特每個(gè)星期都在宅邸建造上花費(fèi)4000泰勒，幾乎在大學(xué)身上沒(méi)有花費(fèi)一分錢，這導(dǎo)致教授中最為杰出者著手到其他地方尋找更好的工作。

Hegel would have known about the decline of Jena as he arrived in 1801 to join Schelling, and he thus arrived with some anxiety but with confidence that he was finally at a place that was proper for a person of his station and his ambitions. On January 21, 1801, Hegel arrived and took up residence at Schelling’s place at “Klipsteinishchen Garten.” The only likely picture of him at this time (a silhouette) shows him sporting the very fashionable “Titus” haircut (probably best known as Napoleon’s haircut), a style identified with “modernity” (and sometimes with the Revolution), which he was to keep all his life.'°^ (A silhouette of him during his university period shows that he probably never sported the more traditional, long-haired, braided look of the generation immediately preceding his own; indeed, he seemed to have had an unkempt, rather spiky, “revolutionary” haircut during his university years.)

? ? 黑格爾也許在1801年到達(dá)耶拿投奔謝林時(shí)就已知曉耶拿大學(xué)在走下坡路，因此他到達(dá)的時(shí)候有些焦慮不安但自信終于找到適合于他身份和志向的地方。1801年1月21日，黑格爾到達(dá)耶拿大學(xué)并暫時(shí)住在謝林的“克利普施泰尼希肯花園”。那時(shí)關(guān)于他可能僅有的畫像（一張側(cè)面像）表明他在炫耀當(dāng)時(shí)非常時(shí)髦的“蒂圖斯”發(fā)式（很可能以拿破侖的發(fā)式最為聞名），一種被等同于“現(xiàn)代性”（有時(shí)被等同于法國(guó)大革命）的發(fā)型，這種發(fā)型將被他終身保持。（一張他在大學(xué)階段的側(cè)面像表明他很可能從未炫耀過(guò)這樣的一種神態(tài)，這種神態(tài)完全優(yōu)于他自己這代人的神態(tài)，代表著較為傳統(tǒng)的、較為古典的、扎頭發(fā)的神態(tài)；更確切地說(shuō)，他在大學(xué)歲月里看來(lái)好像具有蓬亂的、相當(dāng)長(zhǎng)而尖的、“革命性的”發(fā)式。）

Having got his bearings, Hegel moved shortly after his arrival to a garden apartment directly beside Schelling’s place and set himself to working to have himself named an “extraordinary” professor at Jena.? For the time being, though, he had to make do with being a Privatdozent - a private, unpaid lecturer - at the university, and, indeed, his hopes of becoming an “extraordinary professor” were to be disappointed until 1805. The position of Privatdozent was not altogether a happy one; not paid any salary by the university, the Privatdozent charged fees for lectures and thus was dependent for all of his income on how many paying students he could coax to hear him profess; had Hegel not had his small inheritance to live on during this period, being a Privatdozent would not even have been an option for him, since no Privatdozent could live on the meager fees gained from lectures. However, even to obtain this hardly elevated status, he had to convince the philosophical faculty (which, it must be remembered, comprised more than what would be included in a twentieth century “philosophy department”) that his degree from Tubingen was a sufficient license for him to be a teacher, and he had to submit a “habilitation” thesis (part of the traditional German university system in which a kind of second dissertation is required in order to obtain the right to give lectures) and defend it.

? ? 由于有了壓力，黑格爾到達(dá)耶拿后不久就搬到緊挨謝林住處的花園公寓，并開(kāi)始起勁地為使他本人將被提名為耶拿“特聘”教授而工作?！暗?，有段時(shí)間，他不得不放下身段擔(dān)任大學(xué)Privatdozent（私人的無(wú)俸講師），而實(shí)際上他希望成為“特聘教授”，這樣的希望必將使他失望直到1805年為止。無(wú)俸講師職位根本就不是一件美差事；由于大學(xué)不發(fā)給薪水，無(wú)俸講師只能收取學(xué)生聽(tīng)課費(fèi)，因而他所有的收入全都依賴于他能夠吸引多少付費(fèi)學(xué)生前來(lái)聽(tīng)課；假如黑格爾沒(méi)有小筆遺產(chǎn)維持這個(gè)階段生活，做無(wú)俸講師甚至很可能就不會(huì)成了他的選擇，因?yàn)樗袩o(wú)俸講師都不可能靠講課獲得的微薄費(fèi)用生活。然而，甚至就連為弄到這個(gè)難以提升的職位，他還不得不使哲學(xué)系確信（必須記住那時(shí)哲學(xué)系涵蓋的內(nèi)容超過(guò)20世紀(jì)“哲學(xué)系”通常所包含的內(nèi)容）他從圖賓根神學(xué)院獲得的學(xué)位足以作為他做大學(xué)教師的通行證，同時(shí)他必須提交一篇“任職資格”論文（根據(jù)傳統(tǒng)德國(guó)大學(xué)制度部分內(nèi)容，要求受聘者提交一種輔助性論文以獲得授課權(quán)利）并就論文進(jìn)行答辯。

He therefore immediately set about preparing a short Latin thesis.? the materials for which he had apparently brought with him from Frankfurt.'”’ There was a bit of a mix-up between Hegel and some members of the faculty about how and whether he was entitled to defend a thesis, but the matter was finally decided in his favor, and on his birthday, August 27, 1801, Hegel defended a short habilitation called, “On the Orbit of the Planets.”'”" Hegel’s defense took the form of his defending some theses, with some official “supporters” of his view' and some official “opponents” to his view present. Hegel’s “opponents” were Schelling himself — not much of an “opponent,” since Hegel was defending some more or less Schellingian theses - and another Swabian, Immanuel Niethammer. On his own side as a “supporter” he had Schelling’s brother, Karl. Needless to say, Hegel passed his defense. With that, Hegel’s life in Jena more or less officially began.

? ? 他因此立刻著手準(zhǔn)備一篇簡(jiǎn)短的拉丁文論文，論文所用材料顯然是他之前從法蘭克福帶過(guò)來(lái)的?！皩?duì)于黑格爾應(yīng)該怎樣進(jìn)行論文答辯和是否有資格進(jìn)行論文答辯問(wèn)題他與哲學(xué)系某些成員之間有些爭(zhēng)議，但這件事的最終決定對(duì)他有利，在他生日1801年8月27日這天，他就題為“論行星運(yùn)行軌道”這篇短小的任職資格論文進(jìn)行答辯?！焙诟駹柕拇疝q采用他為某些論題進(jìn)行答辯的形式，到場(chǎng)的有他觀點(diǎn)的某些官方“支持者”和他觀點(diǎn)的某些官方“反對(duì)者”。黑格爾的“反對(duì)者”是謝林本人——沒(méi)有提出許多“反駁”，因?yàn)楹诟駹柣蚨嗷蛏僭跒橹x林哲學(xué)某些論題進(jìn)行辯護(hù)——和另一個(gè)斯瓦比亞人伊曼努爾·尼特哈默爾。作為“支持者”站在黑格爾自己這方的有謝林的兄弟卡爾。不用說(shuō)，黑格爾通過(guò)了他的答辯。由于這樣，黑格爾的耶拿生活或多或少正式開(kāi)始了。

The thesis gave rise to one of the oldest Hegel legends, that in his habilitation thesis he had a priori deduced the impossibility of there being anything between the planets Jupiter and Mars, only for it to turn out that an Italian astronomer at virtually the same time had empirically discovered the existence of some asteroids in exactly the area where Hegel had supposedly declared that it was a priori impossible for them to be. As with many legends about Hegel, this one is untrue. The basis of the legend lies in Hegel’s discussion at the end of the thesis about various disputes concerning the mathematical descriptions of the distances of the planets from each other. He began the discussion by making the quasi-Schellingian remark, “There remains a bit to be added about the ratios of the distances of the planets, which to be sure appears only to belong to experience. But the ratios cannot form a measure and a number of nature which are alien to reason: Experience and the knowledge of natural laws bases itself on nothing other than that we believe that nature is formed out of reason, and that we are convinced of the identity of all natural laws.” He then added that different researchers approach that “identity” differently: After giving mathematical expression to a natural law and then finding that not all observations fit the equation, some come to doubt the veracity of the preceding experiments and try to smooth things out, whereas some are convinced that if the equation says something is there, then it simply must be there, and since “the distances of the planets from each other suggests a ratio of a mathematical series, according to which for the fifth member of the series there exists no planet in nature, it comes to be suspected that between Mars and Jupiter a certain planet must really exist, which - indeed, unknown to us - makes its way in space, and is zealously sought in research. Because this series is arithmetical and does not even follow a numerical series that the numbers produce out of themselves, i.e., out of potencies, they have no significance whatsoever for philosophy.” He then discussed various Pythagorean speculations about the force of such numerical series, about how they were taken up by Plato in his Timeciiis as the arithmetical series in terms of which the demiurge had constructed the universe, and he noted, “if in case this series yields the true order of nature, then it is clear that between the fourth and the fifth place there is a large space and no planet will be missing there.” He never endorsed the idea that Plato’s numerological series offered anything like the true description; but he did not explicitly say it was wrong, and thus the legend began. The context makes it clear, though, that in the circumstances surrounding a hastily written thesis, he was only throwing this out as one possibility and not one he seriously entertained.'”’

? ? 這篇論文產(chǎn)生了最早的黑格爾名人軼事中的一種：在他任職資格論文中，他先天地推演了木星與火星之間不可能存在任何東西，僅僅因?yàn)榻Y(jié)果一位意大利天文學(xué)家實(shí)際上在同一時(shí)期借助經(jīng)驗(yàn)發(fā)現(xiàn)了恰恰在這個(gè)區(qū)域存在一些小行星，盡管黑格爾早就帶著假定口吻宣稱在先天意義上這些小行星是不可能存在的。正如其他很多有關(guān)黑格爾名人軼事的情況一樣，這件名人軼事是不真實(shí)的。這件名人軼事的基礎(chǔ)在于黑格爾在這篇論文結(jié)尾處探討了關(guān)于用數(shù)學(xué)描述行星彼此之間距離的各種不同的爭(zhēng)論。他借助作出標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的謝林式評(píng)論著手進(jìn)行他的探討，“對(duì)于行星間距離的比率仍然需要加上一點(diǎn)東西，這個(gè)問(wèn)題無(wú)疑僅僅屬于經(jīng)驗(yàn)范疇。但是這個(gè)比率不可能構(gòu)成自然的尺度和數(shù)目，因?yàn)檫@個(gè)比率是有悖于理性的：經(jīng)驗(yàn)與對(duì)自然法則的認(rèn)識(shí)本身僅僅奠基于我們相信自然因理性而被構(gòu)成和我們確信所有自然法則的同一性。”他接著補(bǔ)充說(shuō)不同的研究者采用不同的方法對(duì)待這樣的“同一性”：在賦予自然法則以數(shù)學(xué)表達(dá)和繼而發(fā)現(xiàn)有些觀察不符合某個(gè)等式后，一些人逐漸懷疑先前試驗(yàn)的真實(shí)性且試圖消除某些東西，盡管一些人確信如果某個(gè)等式表明某種東西在那里那么它就絕對(duì)必須在那里；因?yàn)椤靶行潜舜酥g的距離使人想到數(shù)學(xué)級(jí)數(shù)的比率，依據(jù)這個(gè)比率，對(duì)于這個(gè)數(shù)學(xué)級(jí)數(shù)第五項(xiàng)，自然中不存在任何行星，所以火星與木星之間必然確實(shí)存在著某顆行星這一判斷開(kāi)始遭到懷疑，這樣的判斷——實(shí)際上鮮為人知的判斷——時(shí)下仍然大行其道，仍然被人狂熱地設(shè)法進(jìn)行探究。因?yàn)檫@個(gè)數(shù)學(xué)級(jí)數(shù)是算術(shù)級(jí)數(shù)且甚至不遵循從它們自身產(chǎn)生例如從潛能產(chǎn)生的數(shù)詞級(jí)數(shù)，所以這個(gè)數(shù)學(xué)級(jí)數(shù)無(wú)論對(duì)于什么哲學(xué)都沒(méi)有什么重要意義?！彼^而探討畢達(dá)哥拉斯學(xué)派各種不同的猜測(cè)，它們涉及這樣的數(shù)詞級(jí)數(shù)的影響，涉及它們?cè)趺幢话乩瓐D在《蒂邁歐篇》中用作算術(shù)級(jí)數(shù)，根據(jù)算術(shù)級(jí)數(shù)，造物主構(gòu)建了宇宙，他強(qiáng)調(diào)指出，“如果萬(wàn)一數(shù)詞級(jí)數(shù)生出自然的真秩序，那么在第四與第五位置之間顯然存在著一個(gè)很大的空間且行星不可能不在那里?！彼麖奈促澩@樣的想法，即柏拉圖的數(shù)字命理學(xué)級(jí)數(shù)提供像真實(shí)描述一樣的東西；但他沒(méi)有明確地說(shuō)數(shù)字命理學(xué)級(jí)數(shù)錯(cuò)了，因而這件名人軼事傳開(kāi)了。盡管如此、這里的上下文語(yǔ)境使人清楚地看出，在這圍繞一篇應(yīng)時(shí)草成的論文情況下，他只不過(guò)是拋出這篇有可能自相矛盾的論文而非一篇被他當(dāng)回事的論文。

He began immediately offering lectures during the winter semester of 1801-02; the public announcements of the lectures show him offering a course on “Logic and Metaphysics” and two courses with Schelling, an “Introduction to the Idea and Limits of True Philosophy” and a “Philosophical Disputorium” in which students were obliged to defend certain theses every week. One student - a Mr. Bernhard Rudolf Abeken, later to be the rector of a Gymnasium in Osnabriick and to remain on friendly terms with Hegel - reported in his memoirs how little talent he had in philosophy and how against his better judgment he joined the class, only to find himself being forced to defend theses such as “History repeats itself ideally in art; the project of a history of art would be therefore to show how the unity in art corresponds to the multiplicity in history” and “Epic and tragedy stand to each other as identity and totality; lyrical poetry stands in the middle and exhibits doubledness {Duplizitcity - all very clearly Schellingian themes of the time."”

? ? 他緊接著開(kāi)始準(zhǔn)備1801年至1802年冬季學(xué)期課程；課程公告顯示他開(kāi)設(shè)一門“邏輯與形而上學(xué)”課，與謝林合開(kāi)“真哲學(xué)觀念與限度引論”和“哲學(xué)爭(zhēng)論”這兩門課，在這三門課上，學(xué)生必須每個(gè)星期都要就某些論題進(jìn)行答辯。一個(gè)學(xué)生——一個(gè)名叫伯恩哈德·魯?shù)婪颉ぐ⒇惪系膶W(xué)生，他后來(lái)做了奧斯納布呂克高級(jí)中學(xué)校長(zhǎng)，一直與黑格爾關(guān)系很好——憑記憶描述他在哲學(xué)上如何缺乏天分，他怎樣靠他良好的判斷力加入這個(gè)班級(jí)，只是發(fā)覺(jué)他自己被迫就諸如以下這樣的論題進(jìn)行答辯：“歷史理想地重現(xiàn)它自身于藝術(shù)中；藝術(shù)史計(jì)劃因此應(yīng)該成為展示藝術(shù)同一性怎樣符合歷史多樣性”和“史詩(shī)與悲劇作為同一性和和整體性相互支撐；抒情詩(shī)處在史詩(shī)和悲劇之間且展示雙重性（Duplicitt）”——所有這些都非常清楚地表明那時(shí)謝林哲學(xué)的主題。