[p. 450]
|450| empiricism must be justified, not in relation to absolute science as such, but in relation to the consistency of the empirical scientificity of which there has so far been talk. A great and pure intuition can in this way express the truly ethical in the purely architectonic of its presentation, in which the connection of necessity and the dominion of the form do not step forth into the visible – like a building which presents the spirit of its author mutely in the scattered mass, without its image itself, gathered into one, being set up in it as a shape. In such a presentation made with the help of concepts it is only a clumsiness of reason that it does not raise to the ideal form what it comprehends and penetrates and does not become conscious of it as Idea. If intuition only remains true to itself and lets itself not be confused by the understanding, it will, insofar as it cannot do without concepts for its expression, conduct itself clumsily with regard to them, assume perverted shapes in passing through consciousness, and be both incoherent and contradictory for the concept; but the arrangement of the parts and of the determinacies modifying themselves let the inner rational spirit, though invisible, be guessed, and insofar as this its appearance is regarded as product and result, it will agree perfectly with the Idea as product.
For the understanding nothing is easier here than to fall upon this empiricism, to set other grounds against those clumsy ones, to point out the confusion and the contradiction of the concepts, to draw from the isolated propositions consequences which express what is hardest and most unreasonable, and in manifold ways to lay bare the unscientific character of empiricism, in which it has its right done to it, especially if it either has the pretension to be scientific or is polemical against science as

Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.