Talk:German idealism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
Additional information: Related task forces (core areas): Metaphysics

Contents 1 Merge with Absolute Idealism 2 Hegel Sentence 3 Voice of History 4 Plotinus Temporalized 5 Herder 6 This Article Needs Urgent Care 7 Spinozist Conclusion 8 German idealism in a nutshell 9 Ken WIlber?

[edit] Merge with Absolute Idealism

Please discuss the merge discussion on the Talk:Absolute idealism page. -Atfyfe

[edit] Hegel Sentence

Is it a fact that Hegel is now considered to be one of the greatest philosophers in history? It is my opinion that this is not true and should not be stated in this article.

In response to anonymous poster above:

Obviously, depends on who you ask -- there's countless interpretations of Hegel and countless views of his place in the history of philosophy. However, I think that there can be no question that Hegel has profounly influenced the shape of philosophy (for better or worse). Regardless, the sentence in question does not seem appropriate for a encyclopedia article. --MalcolmMcC 06:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Voice of History

In reference to the Kant section, why does "history" seem to "speak" that Marx was not an anti-idealist? Lestrade 17:09, 6 October 2005 (UTC)Lestrade

[edit] Plotinus Temporalized

What does "Plotinus temporalized" mean?

Does my explanation in the article help? --goethean ॐ 22:17, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Herder

I can't find a connection between Herder and idealism. Lestrade 01:26, 7 October 2005 (UTC)Lestrade

[edit] This Article Needs Urgent Care

We need to plan a major reworking of this article. It's a shame that a subject this important is in such a state. Wish I had more time to work on this! In the meantime, any ideas for improvements in organization? --MalcolmMcC 06:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

To say that the article needs urgent care and that it is a shame that it is in such a state is to say nothing. MalcolmMcC, please show us how the article can be improved. If you don't have enough time to provide us with a better article, what is the point of your critical judgments? Let's see MalcolmMcC's article on German Idealism. You can write it a few sentences at a time instead of all at once. We'll wait.Lestrade 15:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)Lestrade

-The article might be improved by giving the appropriate credit and appreciation to Fichte, let alone to the whole category of German Idealism - the final quote insults the entire field. -S UofT

This article can't be improved by having it praise German Idealism. German Idealism was basically a theology without a God. Fichte created (posited) a Berkeleyan divine observer who was the observing subject for all observed objects. We individual subjects are supposed to be parts of that divine observer. That was his Absolute, who was supposed to be directly known through Reason. Fichte's fantasy can be described, but why should it be appreciated?Lestrade 13:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)Lestrade

[edit] Spinozist Conclusion

The Schopenhauer citation is a nice read but imho here misplaced, especially as Schopenhauer's opinion is far from being a consented claim, lest "conclusion" nowadays. Of course there could be a reference to Spinoza when talk comes on influences to german idealism, but here i'd like to cut it out. Greetings, Ca$$e 09:21, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

By all means, remove it. In its place, we might be able to include references regarding the topic in U.S. popular culture, like so many other Wikipedia articles. Are there any rap songs, cartoons, or car-chase movies that mention German Idealism?Lestrade 13:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)Lestrade

[edit] German idealism in a nutshell

German Idealism is not concerned with perfection or the pursuit of the highest, most excellent, most valuable Ideals. That is not the kind of idealism that it references. It is an attempt to retain the attributes of an anthropomorphic God in a time when that divine personage was no longer believable. The German Idealists followed Berkeley in thinking that our only real, direct, immediate experience is of the ideas or mental images of our mind. The knowing subject of these experienced objects is not, however, an individual human observer, for the German Idealists. Instead, it is a universal observing subject, an Over-soul, Cosmic Mind, or Berkeleyan God. This abstract knowing subject became known as the Absolute Spirit or Mind. The world that exists in the mind of this universal observer is, naturally, a world of images, not objects themselves. That is, it is a spiritual or mental world. This results in the declarations of the German Idealists that the world consists solely of mental ideas and is the product of the Absolute Spirit or Mind or Soul. It would promote understanding if the Wikipedia article could communicate this basic thought and avoid extraneous, vague issues. Lestrade 22:30, 23 October 2006 (UTC)Lestrade

[edit] Ken WIlber?

given that this article is about German Idealism, carrying commentary by a modern American is out of place. yes, Wilber has ideas about these philosophers -- and so do nearly all other philosophers. hence the commentary is out of place. i would immediately delete it myself, but that is the kind of wiki-censorship that is not in the spirit of what we do, so i'll wait a few days after this post...

mitch —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.68.189.65 (talk) 05:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)