[p. 451]
|451| such. On the other hand, when determinacies are fixed and their law is carried through consistently across the sides dug up by empiricism, intuition is subjected to them and in general what is usually called theory is formed, then empiricism is right to charge this with one-sidedness, and through the completeness of the determinacies which it asserts, it is in its power to force that theory by instances to a universality which becomes wholly empty. That limitedness of concepts, the fixing of determinacies, the elevation of a seized-upon side of the appearance into universality and the dominion bestowed on it over the others, is what in recent times has called itself no longer theory but philosophy, and, according as it raised itself to emptier abstractions and took possession of purer negations such as freedom, pure will, humanity, etc., metaphysics, and believed itself to have produced philosophical revolutions in natural right as well as especially in the right of the state and in criminal right, when it tugged these sciences to and fro with such essenceless abstractions and positively expressed negations as freedom, equality, pure state, etc., or with determinacies seized upon from common empiricism, which are just as essenceless as those, like coercion, especially psychological coercion with its whole train of opposition of practical reason and sensuous incentives, and whatever else is native to this psychology, and likewise forced such null concepts, as absolute purposes of reason, principles of reason and laws, with more or less consistency through a science. With right empiricism demands that such philosophising must orient itself by experience. It rightly insists on its tenacity against such a scaffolding and artifice of fundamental principles and prefers its empirical inconsistency, which is grounded on an, albeit turbid, intuition of a whole, to the consistency of

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