A general introduction to the system is given in the tractate Ober den Begriff der Wissenschaftslehre (On the Notion of the Theory of Science), 1794, and the theoretical portion is worked out in the Grundlage der gesammten Wissenschaftslehre (Foundation of the whole Theory of Science, 1794) and Grundriss des Eigenthiimlichen d.
Wissenschaftslehre (Outline of what is peculiar in the Theory of Science, 1794).
In 1801 was also written the Darstellung der Wissenschaftslehre, which was not published till after his death.
In 1804 a set of lectures on the Wissenschaftslehre was given at Berlin, the notes of which were published in the Nachgelassene Werke, vol.
From the year 1806 we have the remarkable Bericht iiber die Wissenschaftslehre (Werke, vol.
Of the Wissenschaftslehre we have, in 1812-1813, four separate treatments contained in the Nachgel.
This may be so, but it can be admitted neither that Fichte's views underwent radical change, nor that the Wissenschaftslehre was ever regarded as in itself complete, nor that Fichte was unconscious of the apparent difference between his earlier and later utterances.
It is demonstrable by various passages in the works and letters that he never looked upon the Wissenschaftslehre as containing the whole system; it is clear from the chronology of his writings that the modifications supposed to be due to other thinkers were from the first implicit in his theory; and if one fairly traces the course of thought in the early writings, one can see how he was inevitably led on to the statement of the later and, at first sight, divergent views.
On only one point, the position assigned in the Wissenschaftslehre to the absolute ego, is there any obscurity; but the relative passages are far from decisive, and from the early work, Neue Darstellung der Wissenchaftslehre, unquestionably to be ins uded in the Jena period, one can see that from the outset the doctrine of the absolute ego was held in a form differing only in statement from the later theory.
We shall here note only three points: - (a) the origin in Kant; (b) the fundamental principle and method of the Wissenschaftslehre; (c) the connexion with the later writings.
The most important works for (a) are the "Review of Aenesidemus," and the Second Introduction to the Wissenschaftslehre; for (b) the great treatises of the Jena period; for (c) the Thatsachen des Bewusstseyns of 1810.
To answer this one must bear in mind what Fichte intended by designating all philosophy Wissenschaftslehre, or theory of science.
But if complete, this Wissenschaftslehre must be able to deduce the whole organism of cognition from certain fundamental axioms, themselves unproved and incapable of proof; only thus can we have a system of reason.
Thus in the Rechtslehre and Sittenlehre, the multiplicity of egos is deduced, and with this deduction the first form of the Wissenschaftslehre appeared to end.
The demonstration of the necessity of these forms is philosophy or Wissenschaftslehre" (Thats.
It will escape no one (I) how the idea and method of the Wissenschaftslehre prepare the way for the later Hegelian dialectic, and (2) how completely the whole philosophy of Schopenhauer is contained in the later writings of Fichte.
Kroeger, portions of the Wissenschaftslehre (Science of Knowledge, Philadelphia, 1868; ed.
Kabitz, Studien zur Entwickelungsgeschichte der Fichte- 'schen Wissenschaftslehre aus der Kantischen Philosophie (1902); E.
The most important of his numerous works are the Wissenschaftslehre, oder Versuch einer neuen Darstellung der Logik, advocating a scientific method in the study of logic (4 vols., Sulzbach, 1837); the Lehrbuch der Religionswissenschaft (4 vols., Sulzbach, 1834), a philosophic representation of all the dogmas of Roman Catholic theology; and Athanasia, oder Gri nde fiir die Unsterblichkeit der Seele (2nd ed., Mainz, 1838).
The Review of Aenesidemus and the tractate On the Notion of Wissenschaftslehre found in his mind most fruitful soil.
Without resigning his official position he lectured for a short time at Stuttgart, and 1 The reviews of current philosophical literature were afterwards collected, and edited under the title "Abhandlungen zur Erlauterung des Idealismus der Wissenschaftslehre" in 'Schelling's Philos.
Fichte now set himself in the Wissenschaftslehre (1794) to make transcendental idealism into a system of metaphysical idealism without Kant's inconsistencies and relics of realism.
Thus the complete metaphysical idealism of Fichte's Wissenschaftslehre formed out of the incomplete metaphysical idealism of Kant's Kritik, is the theor y on its epistemological side that the Ego posits the non-Ego as a thing in itself, and yet as only a thing existing for it as its own noumenon, and on its metaphysical side that in consequence all reality is the Ego and its own determinations, which are objective, or valid for all, as determinations, not of you or of me, but of the consciousness common to all of us, the pure or absolute Ego.
God does not seem to find much place in the Wissenschaftslehre, where mankind is the absolute and nature mankind's product, and where God neither could be an absolute Ego which posits objects in the non-Ego to infinity without ever completing the process, nor could be even known to exist apart from the moral order which is man's destination.
The Kritik and the Wissenschaftslehre belonged to the revolutionary epoch of the " Rights of Man," and produced as great a revolution in thought as the French Revolution did in fact.
Starting from Fichte's " Wissenschaftslehre," Schelling accepted the whole process of mental construction, and the deduction that noumena are knowable products of universal reason, the Absolute Ego.
But history repeats itself; and these same two interpretations of Kant had already been made in the lifetime of Kant by Fichte, in the two Introductions to the " Wissenschaftslehre," which he published in his Philosophical Journal in 1797.
Fichte's " Wissenschaftslehre," he said, is a completely untenable system, and a metaphysics of fruitless apices, in which he disclaimed any participation; his own Kritik he refused to regard as a propaedeutic to be construed by the Fichtian or any other standpoint, declaring that it is to be understood according to the letter; and he went so far as to assert that his own critical philosophy is so satisfactory to the reason, theoretical and practical, as to be incapable of improvement, and for all future ages indispensable for the highest ends of humanity.
His chief works are Entwurf eines Systems der Wissenschaftslehre (Kiel, 1846) and System der spekulativen Ethik (2 vols., 1850).
His Wissenschaftslehre, accordingly, divides itself into (r) Principlehre, or theory of the one principle; (2) Vermittelungslehre, or theory of the means by which this principle realizes itself; and (3) Teleologie.