Introduction to the

Lectures on the
History of Philosophy
G. W. F. H.EGEL

TRANSLATED BY

T. M. KNOX
AND

A. V. MILLER

CLARENDON PRESS OXFORD

1985

108

b ltroductioll to the Lectures

011

the History oj Philosophy

order in which they emerge is sett led by necessit y. Th is will be

and
in more detail in the exposition of the
hIstor y of ph Ilosophy. Each factor in the whole comprises the
t?taltty of .the [dea in a one-sided form; because of its oneIt
itself aJ?d
refuting its own finality,
unlles with wha t It lacked, I.e. lis opposite number and so
becomes deeper and richer. Th is is the dialect ic
specific
ca tegorIes. But tlu.s move ment docs not end in nothin g; the
superseded categories have themselves an affirmati ve character
It is in this sense that we have to treat the history of philosophy:
. T hus the. hlst?ry of pllllosophY .ls itself science. Philosophy
III .Its non -historIcal. development IS the same as the history of
phIlosoph y. In a phIlosophy we have to begin with the simplest
and proceed to more concrete o nes. The same is
the case. wIth philosophy's history . In bo th we have a necessary
pI ogress and thIS IS the same m both. What IS interesting in
the hIstory of phIlosophy IS therefore sel f-determining thought
III a stnctly sCientIfic progress.
The history of
is a mirror of philosophy, except
tha t 11 IS phIlosophy s complete development in time , in the
realm of
and .ex ternality. This development is
grounded mdeed m the logIcal. Idea and its development, ye t
we. cannot conduct the exposItion of our subject in its logical
strIctness throughout. But we must at least hint a t that
The second point in the Introduction is the relation of
sophy to the rest of the manifestation s of the spirit and the
hIstory of pllliosophy to the history of ot her subjects .

[147] D. Relation of the History of Philosophy

to the rest of the Manifestations of the Spirit
. We know th at the history of philosophy is not o n its own
but has a connection with history ge ne rall y, with the history of
affa irs as we ll as of religion , e lC. , and it is natural for us to recall
the chief features of political history, the characte r of the age,

a nd the whole situation of a people wherein a philosophy has

ari se n . But, this apart , thi s conn ect ion is inne r, essential ,
necessary, not me rel y extern al or sim uhaneous. (Simultaneity
is no relation .)

Therefore there are two things to notice: (i) the strictl y

historical as pect of this connection a nd (ii) the connection of
the subject, i.e. the connect ion of philosophy it self with religion
and the othe r intellec tual activit ies related to it . These two things
arc to be considered more fully in order to distin guish more
precisely the conception, the specific cha rac ter , of philosophy.
1 . The Historical Position of Philosoph y
The first point which mu st be noticed is lhe general relation of
the ph ilosophy of a given period to th e rest of the characteristics
of that period.
(0') It is usually said that political matters , religion, mythology, etc., are to be noticed in the history of philosophy
because they ha ve had a great influence [1481 on the philosophy
of the time and vice versa. But if you are satisfied with categories like 'great influence', 'effect o n one another', etc., all you
have to do is to point to an external connection , i.e. you start
by regarding both as on their own, independent of one another.
But here we must consider this relation from a differe nt aspec t
altogether: the esse ntial category is unity, the inner connection
of all these different manifestations. H ere we must keep hold of
the fact that it is only one spirit , one principle, which is stamped
o n the political si tuation and manifested in religion, art, moral
and social life, trade , and industry , so tha t all these different
form s are but bra nches of o ne main trunk . Thi s is the chief

110

Introduction

/0

tilt: Lec/ufeJ on II/{:

rf Phi/OJo/J/!y

point or view. The spirit is oTle and OIlC only; there is olle spirit
as the substance or an era, a people, an <lgc, hut il is shaped
and manifested in variolls ways; and these different manif('sta"
lions arc the
which have been adduced. Thus we must
not have the idea that politics, constitutions, religions, cle., are
the root or
of philosophy, or that, conversely, philosophv
is the basis of them. All these
have one single characte'r
which lies at their root and rUlls through them all. However
manifold all these different things are, there is no contradiction
between them. Not one of them contains anything different in
kind from their basis, no matter how much they seem to
tradict onC' another. They arC' only shoots from the sallle roo{,
and philosophy is one of {hern.
It is r?resupposed here that all this stands in one necessary
connection so that' only thix philosophy, this religion, can exist
along' with this political constitution I this state of the sciences.
There is only one spirit; its development is a single progressone principle, one Idea, one character expressed in the mosl
varied formations. This is what we call the spirit of an age.
This too is nothing superficial f149J or detennined from
side; knowledge of it must be drawn, not from petty externals,
but from its great formations in the world. Philosophy is one of
these and it is contemporary with a specific religion, political
constit ution, art, morals I science, etc . . . .
[152] Thus the historical shape of a philosophy stands in a
necessary connection with political history. Before there can be
a J).hilosophy at all, a people must have reached a certain stage
of mtellectual development. The necessities of life must have
been supplied [cf. Aristotle: Me!. 982"22 [K.]], the agony of
deSire must have vanished; the purely finite intcrests of mcn
must have been worked off, and their minds must have advanced
so far as to take an interest in universal matters. Philosophy is
free activity (hence the need for philosophy). So it can be
regarded as a luxury because luxury is the satisfaction derived
from things that are not directly necessary, and from this point
of view philosophy is of course dispensable. But all depends on
what you call necessary. f 1531 From the point of view of the
thinking spirit, however, philosophy must be regarded as the
most necessary thing of all .
! 154] T'hus philosophy as such only enters at a specific epoch

J-listorical

POJitiOll

111

ill a whole civilization. BUL it occurs there not as philosophy

simply but as a specific philosophy; and this specific character
of conscious thought also cOllstitutes the basis of everything else
that exists, of' every aspect of the history of the time. The Jaws
of peoples I their mora'!s, their social life, etc., arc most
Illately associated \vith this specific character. It is essential here
to keep hold of the fact that when the spirit has reached a specific
stage, it builds this principle into the entire wealth of'its world,
works it out into the
of its existence, so that
all the other specific characters of that world are dependent
on this fundamental one. 'T'hc philosophy of our time, or any
philosophy necessary within Christendom, coul.d no.! exist in
heathen Rome because all aspects, branches, SltuatlOns, and
relations of a whole civilization arc expressions of one and the
same specific character which philosophy enunciates in terms
of pure thought. Therefore it cannot be said that political
history is tht' cause of philosophy, since a branch is nO{ the
cause of a whole tree; the branch and the tfunk have a common
root, and the root common to philosophy and politics, etc., is
the spirit of the age, i.c. the specific stage in the devclopmc.nt
[15:)] of the spirit at a time which has its proximate
(liS
ground) in the preceding stage but, in general terms, 111 on.e
form of the Idea. To dernonstrate this unity, to expound thiS
whole growth , to comprehend it as proceeding from one root,
the task of the philosophy of world-history, which must be left
aside here. We are only concerned with one branch, with the
pure thought of these aspects , situations, etc., with the
sophical consciousness of each era. But we had at least to pOint
out the connection between the principle of philosophy and the
principle of the rest of history.
[149] ({3) Thus philosophy is one a'im! of the entire j()J"J11<Hion
or manifestation of' the spirit -it is the consciousness of the
spirit and spirit's supreme flowering, since its endeavour is to
know what spirit is. In general terms, the dignity of man is to
know what he is and to know this in the purest way, i.e. to rise
to the thought of what he is. From this the position of philosophy
among the other f()rms of the spirit can be inferred.
(aO:') Philosophy is identical with the spirit of the age in
which it appears; it does not rise above its time but is only a
consciollsness of the substance of its time or the thoughtful

112

introductio1i to the Lectures

011

the History oj Phi/oso/my

of what there is in that time. Neither does an indi Vidual transcend his time; he is a son of it ; it s substance is his
own essence, and he on ly manifests it in a particular form . No
one
escape from the su bstance of his tim e any more than he
can Jump out of his skin . Looked at fundamentally, no philosophy can ove rl eap it s own time.
(i3i3) But philosophy does also stand above its time, i .e .
makes It a n obj ect set over aga in st it self, its content is the same
the conte nt o f the time, but, as know ledge of this content it
IS
a bove it. This, however , is onl y formal, a nd in
ph il osoph y has no other cont e nt but that of the tim e.
(",,) T hi s ve ry knowledge is of course th e actualit y of spiritI am only to the extent that I know myself. [1 50 J SO the diffet:e nce of form IS also a real a nd ac tual difference . "rhus it is
thts knowl edge which produces a new form in the development
?fsplrIl. D.evelopments in this sphere are merely ways of knowmg. By thts self-knowledge the sp irit differentiates itself from
wha t it is; it makes it self an object to itself a nd develops itself
wIlhlll ; thl.s
a new
between wha t it is implicitly
an.d. wha t 11 IS actuall y, and In thiS way a new formati on of the
splnt em erges. Thus philosoph y in it self is already a further
spc.cific ch a racterization of the spirit; it is its inner birthplace
wh Ich appears later as actuality. The concrete character of this
eme rges in the history o f phil osophy it self. Thus we will see
tha t wha t Greek philosoph y had bee n , e nt ered act u alit y in th e
C hnsltan world.
. So this is the second po int, namely that philosophy is primaril y only the thlllklllg of what is substa nti ve in it s own time' it
does not tran scend its time but onl y brings out it s content'in
th ought.
(,,) The third point to notice in conn ect io n with philosoph y
a nd hIstory con ce rn s the da te at wh ich philosoph y emerges in
compariso n wIlh the e merge nce of the other fo rma tions of the
sp irit. Philosophy appears at a specific time, not contemporaneously with the other formati ons.
.. The spirit of an age is the substa nti ve life of tha t age. That
Ide IS thiS Immedi a te., '! VlIl g, and act ual spirit . For example, we
desc.ry the Greek Spirit at the time when Greek life was blossomlllg, was. fresh , forceful, a nd yo un g, befo re a n y corruption
had broken Ill , or we see the R oman spiri t at the time of the

Historical Positim! oj Philosophy

113

Repub lic-and so on. The spirit of the age is thus the way in
which a specific spirit is present as actually living. But philosophy is the thinking of this sp irit , and the thought, however
mu ch it is a priori also, is essentiall y the result of the spirit ,
because the spirit is life , the activity of self-production; its procedure is to produce itsel f as a result, to emerge as a result.
This acti v it y [1511 contains a negation as a n essen ti al factor. If
somethin g is 10 be produced, then it must be produced from
some thin g else, and this som et hin g clse is precisely thereby
negated. Thus thinking is the negation of the n a tural mode of
life. For exa mplc, the child exis ts as a human being but st ill
immediately, directly, in a natural way; then education is the
negation o f this natural way, the discipline imposed by the spirit
on itself in order to rise out of its immediacy. Sim il arly, the
thinking spirit, at the start of its movement , exists in il s natural
sha pe; the n it becomes reflective a nd rises abovc tha t sha pe,
i.e. nega tes it; a nd finally, it realizes itself in comprehend in g
it self.
Thinking en le rs. The consequen ce is th a t the ex istin g world,
the sp irit realized in the mora ls a nd force of life a t that time, is
negated ; thought , spirit's substantive mode of existence, attacks
a nd weakens simple morals, simple religion etc., and this
ushers in a period of corruption . Then the nex t step is that
thought concentrates it self in itself, becom es concrete a nd so
produces for it self an ideal world in opposition to thi s real one .
T hus when philosophy is 10 e merge among a people, the re
must first have bee n a break in the real wo rld . At th a t point
philosophy is the reconciliation of the corruption which had
been begun by thought. This reconcilia tion happens in the ideal
wo rld , in the wo rld of the spirit into which me n ta ke night when
the earthly wo rld satisfies them no lo nger . Philosophy begin s
with the downfall of a real world. When philosophy ent ers,
' paints its grey in grey',lO disseminates its a bstractions, then
the fresh colour of youth and life has already perished. In that
event it is a reconciliation which philosophy produces, but only
in the intellectual world, not in the earthl y one. So too, the
Greeks when they began to think , withdrew from political life;
III See Ihe clus ing passage of Ihe Preface to Hegel's Philusof)}ry
Oxford, 1942. wil h nOles ad loe). IK.]

R ighi (Ir. Knox,

114

Inlmdudl'on to tilt' I_ertures

OJI

the

HistOl)'

(!l Phi/osop/!y

and they began to think when everything in the world outside

was s,t(}rrny and vvretched, i.e. at the time of tile Peloponnesian
war, 1
\vas when the philosophers [152] withdre\v into their
:,>'orld of thought. They became, what the masses called them
l(.ijers,! 1 An,d sc> in all-nost all peoples, philosophy only
when publIc Ide no longer gives satisfaction and ceases to
engross the
interest, when the citizen can no longer
take any part In government.
'.rhis is an,essc!ltial. point which will be proved in the history of
phil,osoph,Y ItscH, With the duwnbll of the states in Ionia, the
IOllian phIlosophy arose, Thespirit v\'as no longer satisfied by fhe
Simil.arly in Rome, philosophy only began with
the fall of the Rcp.ublJc when demagogues took over the govcrn'?1Cl1t and c,vcrythlllg was caught up in dissolut ion and a struggle
fnr
new, And only with the
of the
Empire great, n:agnific,cllt, but inwardly already
dead-chd the older (J"reek philosopllles experience their lofty
and supreme development through the Neo-Platonists or Alexandrians , , .
11: .the rnisi'ortuncs of the Ernpire political, moral, and
had w,eakened, ,and [154] this we encounter again
1I1 .the 1,Hh and 16th centUries when the Germanic life of the
Middle
form, when the spirit of the peoples
longe,r
Its
where it had been found prevlOusly. I:..arher on.. pohtlcs was still in unity with religion, and
the Church domll1ated even when the state fought it. Now,
the breach between the state--civil, rnoral, political
lde-,and
Church
and at this date people began
to
even If at hrst only in the form of learning and
revlvdY1l1?,
philosophies. Not till later did philosophy
have the form of ll1depcndent thinking. ,

P?3]

WOl:

[155J 2. More detailed Consideration of the Relation

between Philosophy and the other Formations
or Manii''5tatiolls of the Spirit
The. second point
the closer and more specific cnnnectlOn between phIlosophy and the other fonnations of the
spirit. We are met by sciences, art, mythology, politics, etc., and
II

Possihly Hegel's

ll'amialion of' iCl1wTtYj,

[K.J

115

and olher Formatiolls (!! the Spitit

their gelleral connection vvith philusophy has been (-'xpourlckd

already. I now intcnd to co'nsidcr the difference betweell philosophy and these formations, because I want to ddlne the con ..
cepi or philosophy, to crnpha.sizc those of its features which arc
important I'or us, and to apply thern to our subject, the history
of philosophy, so that we can cut off and exclude what is irrelevant to it. It is easy to say that in the history of philosophy we
have only to consider philosophy's own progress and leave aside
everything else, religion, etc" included, This is right enough in
general. But I ask: 'What is philosophy?' [156] Lots of things
are put to its account which we must exclude. If I kept to the
name alone, 1 would have 10 introduce lots or things which
have nothing to do with the real nature or concept of philo ..
sophy, By the sarne tokcn, it could bc said in general terms that
we have to leave religion on one side; but, in history, religion
and philos,ophy have often been partners or foes, in both Greek
and Roman times, and their opposition is a very important
feature in the history of philosophy, It is just a pretence for
philosophy to disregard religion. In history they have never left.
one another untouched, and we must not leave them like that
either.
In this connection the first thing we want to consider is the sciences or scientific culture generally, the second is religion and
especially the closer relation between philosophy and religion.
Consideration of this relation must be open, direct, and honest;
I must not give the impression of wanting to leave religion untouched, that I wish to conceal the fact that philosophy has
been opposed to religion. Religion-i.e. the theologians-

pretends to ignore philosophy, but only so that they can avoid

being embarrassed in their capricious ratiocinations.
'I'he other thing to be considered here is the separation frmn
philosophy of some features related to the history of philosophy, i.e. we must establish the differences between philo-

sophy and those branches [of study] which arc related

to

it and

which therefore may be mistaken for it. It is this relationship

above all which may readily lead to perplexity in the handling

of the history of philosophy, because this relationship is very

close. Thus the greatest care must be taken to settle [157] what
philosophy is. We could concern ourselves with possessors of
culture, and more particularly with scientifIc culture generally,