Pub Date : 2020-08-27DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0005
Frederick C. Beiser
This chapter is a survey of Strauß’s early lectures in Tübingen. It first considers the context of Strauß’s lectures and their success with the audience. It then examines the question of why Strauß, after such initial success, abandoned his career as a lecturer. There follows a brief summary of the three lecture series: the 1832 lectures on logic and metaphysics, which were primarily an exposition of Hegel’s Wissenschaft der Logik; the 1832–3 lectures on the history of philosophy since Kant, which give us Strauß’s own views about the history of philosophy, though they are still heavily influenced by Hegel; and the 1833 lectures on the history of moral philosophy.
{"title":"Tübingen Lectures","authors":"Frederick C. Beiser","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0005","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter is a survey of Strauß’s early lectures in Tübingen. It first considers the context of Strauß’s lectures and their success with the audience. It then examines the question of why Strauß, after such initial success, abandoned his career as a lecturer. There follows a brief summary of the three lecture series: the 1832 lectures on logic and metaphysics, which were primarily an exposition of Hegel’s Wissenschaft der Logik; the 1832–3 lectures on the history of philosophy since Kant, which give us Strauß’s own views about the history of philosophy, though they are still heavily influenced by Hegel; and the 1833 lectures on the history of moral philosophy.","PeriodicalId":282224,"journal":{"name":"David Friedrich Strauß, Father of Unbelief","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125839736","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-27DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0004
Frederick C. Beiser
Chapter 3 is a study of Strauß’s early intellectual context. It examines his early faith, his educational institutions (the Blaubeuren school and Tübinger Stift), his early devotion to mysticism and romanticism, his conversion to Hegel’s philosophy, his stint as an apprentice pastor in the village of Klein-Ingersheim, and his trip to Berlin to learn the master’s philosophy directly from its source. The chapter also discusses the influence of Kant, Schelling, Schleiermacher, and Boehme on the young Strauß, and attempts to reconstruct the major philosophical problem facing Strauß: the conflict between reason and faith in the early nineteenth century.
{"title":"Context and Background","authors":"Frederick C. Beiser","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0004","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 3 is a study of Strauß’s early intellectual context. It examines his early faith, his educational institutions (the Blaubeuren school and Tübinger Stift), his early devotion to mysticism and romanticism, his conversion to Hegel’s philosophy, his stint as an apprentice pastor in the village of Klein-Ingersheim, and his trip to Berlin to learn the master’s philosophy directly from its source. The chapter also discusses the influence of Kant, Schelling, Schleiermacher, and Boehme on the young Strauß, and attempts to reconstruct the major philosophical problem facing Strauß: the conflict between reason and faith in the early nineteenth century.","PeriodicalId":282224,"journal":{"name":"David Friedrich Strauß, Father of Unbelief","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115551269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-27DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0017
Frederick C. Beiser
This chapter examines the criticisms of three prominent Strauß critics: Nietzsche, Treitschke, and Schweitzer. Nietzsche’s criticism is disarmed by showing how it applies entirely to the later Strauß; though he does not admit it, Nietzsche was inspired by the early Strauß. Treitschke’s critique of Strauß fails because it accuses Strauß of problems that he foresaw and already replied to. Although Schweitzer was very sympathetic to Strauβ and truly appreciated his achievement, his criticisms of Strauβ—that his critique is too negative—do not carry much weight because they do not consider the problems anyone would face in coming to more positive conclusions.
{"title":"Three Critics","authors":"Frederick C. Beiser","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0017","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the criticisms of three prominent Strauß critics: Nietzsche, Treitschke, and Schweitzer. Nietzsche’s criticism is disarmed by showing how it applies entirely to the later Strauß; though he does not admit it, Nietzsche was inspired by the early Strauß. Treitschke’s critique of Strauß fails because it accuses Strauß of problems that he foresaw and already replied to. Although Schweitzer was very sympathetic to Strauβ and truly appreciated his achievement, his criticisms of Strauβ—that his critique is too negative—do not carry much weight because they do not consider the problems anyone would face in coming to more positive conclusions.","PeriodicalId":282224,"journal":{"name":"David Friedrich Strauß, Father of Unbelief","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126159568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-27DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0010
Frederick C. Beiser
Chapter 9 examines the fallout from the reaction against Das Leben Jesu on Strauß’s life and writing. It first considers Strauß’s personal crisis from the spring of 1837 to 1838 when he fell into a deep depression because of his social isolation, which was the result of his reputation as a heretic. It then treats Strauß’s attempt to restore his reputation by revising some of his critical conclusions about the gospel of John in the third edition of Das Leben Jesu. It is argued that Strauß did not really retract his earlier conclusions but only slightly qualified them. This chapter also examines Strauß’s Zwei friedliche Blätter, where he attempted to modify his concept of Jesus so that he would be acceptable to a more orthodox Christian public. Though he was no longer divine in status, Jesus was now regarded as a genius.
{"title":"Crisis and Compromise","authors":"Frederick C. Beiser","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198859857.003.0010","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 9 examines the fallout from the reaction against Das Leben Jesu on Strauß’s life and writing. It first considers Strauß’s personal crisis from the spring of 1837 to 1838 when he fell into a deep depression because of his social isolation, which was the result of his reputation as a heretic. It then treats Strauß’s attempt to restore his reputation by revising some of his critical conclusions about the gospel of John in the third edition of Das Leben Jesu. It is argued that Strauß did not really retract his earlier conclusions but only slightly qualified them. This chapter also examines Strauß’s Zwei friedliche Blätter, where he attempted to modify his concept of Jesus so that he would be acceptable to a more orthodox Christian public. Though he was no longer divine in status, Jesus was now regarded as a genius.","PeriodicalId":282224,"journal":{"name":"David Friedrich Strauß, Father of Unbelief","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122206568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：