Notes on Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy

"Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy" by Frederick Engels, published in 1886 serves as a comprehensive and a connected account regarding Marx and his personal relation to Hegel and Feuerbach.

Hegel

In both 18th century France and 19th century Germany, a philosophical revolution led to a political collapse, what Engels points out is the stark difference between the two. In Germany, the Hegelian system was raised to the rank of a royal Prussian philosophy of the state, and now the question remained, was there a revolution hiding behind these professors, appointed by the state? Engels puts forth a claim that no philosophical proposition has been more misinterpreted by governments than Hegel's famous statement, "all that is real is rational; all that is rational is real", which Frederick William III and his subjects used as a justification for censorship and the despotism that followed, according to them, for Hegel the attribute of reality only belongs to that which at the same time is necessary.

In the course of its development reality proves to be necessity.

Therefore this line of reasoning was used to justify evil, since it continues to exist, the character of the government is explained by the character of the subject.

According to Hegel, reality is not an attribute predictable of any given state of affairs, social or political. In 1789, the French monarchy was robbed of it's necessity, it became irrational and rendered unreal, so it had to be destroyed by the Great Revolution. The monarchy was real and the revolution was unreal, in the course of development, all that was real becomes unreal, it loses its necessity and its rationality. And comes a new reality, which is peaceful if the old goes to it's death without a struggle, or forcibly if it resists this necessity.

All that is real becomes irrational, therefore the Hegelian proposition turns into its opposite through Hegelian dialectics itself. All that is real is irrational by it's destination. The proposition then resolves into another proposition, all the exists deserves to perish.

A perfect state only exists in the imagination and all the historical systems that came before are a transitory stage in the endless path of development of human society. Each stage was necessary and therefore justified for it's time. And when a new higher stage which comes, solidifies the absolute revolutionary character of Hegelian philosophy.

The "end of things" that is brought upon by Hegel is not something by dogma but something that exists as a necessity in his own system. However, at the same thing the dogmatic content of the Hegelian system declared to be absolute truth is also in contradiction to his dialectics, which ends dogmatism.

Working out the absolute idea also comes with the practical demands. Engels points out the absurdity of how revolutionary Hegelian philosophy is and still concluding that a constitutional monarchy is the absolute idea realized. Frederick William promised a constitution which was never properly implemented. Hegel tries to demonstrate a necessity of the nobility with abstract dialectical reasoning.

The inner necessities of the system are, therefore, of themselves sufficient to explain why a thoroughly revolutionary method of thinking produced an extremely tame political conclusion.

Hegel's conclusions are a result of his own system, if his philosophy were complete, history becomes complete, and if that is the case, existing systems must also embody the absolute reason.

As a matter of fact, the specific form of this conclusion springs from this, that Hegel was a German, and like his contemporary Goethe had a bit of the philistine’s queue dangling behind. Each of them was an Olympian Zeus in his own sphere, yet neither of them ever quite freed himself from German philistinism.

Here he insults Hegel for being a bourgeoisie academic who is financially dependent on the very state who censors his writings. Completely detached from the working class.

Now despite all his errors, the revolutionary character of Hegelian thought cannot be discarded.

With Hegel philosophy comes to an end.

Young Hegelians of the time fought with positive religion by practical necessity. Hegelians of the time split into the Right, who defended Christianity and the Prussian state while the Young Hegelians used dialectics to critique the state and the church.

Young Hegelians was, by the practical necessities of its fight against positive religion, driven back to Anglo-French materialism.

The key point Engels brings up is that the anti religion position as a Hegelian would resolve the question of "if Christianity was a historical development, it is not eternal, and if religion is a human creation, what created human?" into the "Spirit", the Young Hegelians instead turned towards Ango-French materialism of Hobbes and Francis Bacon to the idea that Matter exists independently of thought. This created an inner contradiction with their own school of thought, they used Hegelian's dialectic but now they rejected Hegelian metaphysics.

This contradiction was resolved only when Feuerbach's Essence of Christianity was published, in this work he puts materialism back in the focus and that nature exists independent to philosophy. Engels calls this work liberating and comments that they all became Feuerbachians, Marx also was enthusiastic about.

The two short comings of the book, written in a style suitable for the general public, which was refreshing compared to years of abstract Hegelian theory. The other was the deification love. It was these two shortcomings which was a starting point for true socialism in Germany.

Materialism

The question of philosophy is the relation between thinking and being. The idea that our thoughts were of a distinct soul, which upon death would persist eventually made way for the idea of immortality, in a similar way natural forces were personified into deities which led to the idea of the one exclusive god.

he question: which is primary, spirit or nature — that question, in relation to the church, was sharpened into this: Did God create the world or has the world been in existence eternally?

This question split philosophers into two camps, one end they assert the primacy of spirit and they other the primacy of nature. The idealists and the materialist. But what relation does our surrounding have to the world itself. Are we capable of knowing the real world? Can we create a correct representation? Hegel says it is self affirming, the world is a gradual realizations of the absolute idea which is eternal.

Engels makes a point against the Kantian thing-in-itself, The chemical compounds found in nature was just a thing-in-itself until it was synthesized, then it just became a thing.

The course of evolution of Feuerbach is that of a Hegelian — a never quite orthodox Hegelian, it is true — into a materialist; an evolution which at a definite stage necessitates a complete rupture with the idealist system of his predecessor.

Feuerbach missed out on all the latest discoveries because the chairs of philosophy were possessed by the wrong people :(

Kant's categorical imperative is impotent because it demands the impossible and therefore never attains to any reality.

Feuerbach

According to Feuerbach, religion is the relation between human beings based on the affections, the relation based on the heart, which relation until ow has sought its truth in a fantastic mirror image of reality — in the mediation of one or many gods, the fantastic mirror images of human qualities — but now finds it directly and without any mediation in the love between “I” and “Thou”. Thus, finally, with Feuerbach sex love becomes one of the highest forms, if not the highest form, of the practice of his new religion.

Religion is derived from religare [“to bind”] and meant, originally, a bond.

Sex is religion because uhh religion is a bond between people.

With Hegel, evil is the form in which the motive force of historical development presents itself. This contains the twofold meaning that, on the one hand, each new advance necessarily appears as a sacrilege against things hallowed, as a rebellion against condition, though old and moribund, yet sanctified by custom; and that, on the other hand, it is precisely the wicked passions of man — greed and lust for power — which, since the emergence of class antagonisms, serve as levers of historical development — a fact of which the history of feudalism and of the bourgeoisie, for example, constitutes a single continual proof.

Feuerbach’s morality is cut exactly to the pattern of modern capitalist society

He was obsessed with sex love, everything else was abstraction, none of his theories could be brought into practice.

Marx

Strauss, Bauer, Stirner and Feuerbach were the offshoots of Hegelian philosophy, and among these only Feuerbach mattered for Engels. But then... there was another one... the one which has borne real fruit. KARL MARX.

A separation from Hegelian philosophy, to resolve the real world, free from idealism. Marx and Engels did not reject Hegel, the rejected Hegelian idealism, the Absolute Idea and the primacy of the spirit, but at the same time, Hegel was not put aside, the kept the dialectics and historical development.

The most valuable thing in Hegel was his method. But according to Hegel, Dialectics is the development of the concept, which is strange from the materialist perspective. The Idea becomes something other than itself, into nature, which is unconscious of itself, presented as a necessity, it goes through another development and resolves as a man's consciousness of himself. Hegel implies that philosophy ends with him. According to Hegel the dialectics in nature and idea are different, that it happens in idea first and then in nature. Engels explicitly disagrees with this.

Three great discoveries that enable the knowledge of the interconnection of natural processes:

Development of society proves to be different from development of nature. In nature men are not seen as actors, in the history of society, the actors are men, acting with passion and working towards definite goals. But history is not made by one person, it is made by millions interaction. The ends are intended but the results are not. On the surface historical events seem to be governed by chance, in the surface level all events seem accidental.

Now the classical dialectical thinking comes, it appears random and chaotic but in essence there lies a deeper pattern. The difference with Hegel here is that History is guided by the development of the spirit, while Marx says that history is shaped by material social relations. Both reject that history is random as it may seem but Marx grounds regularities in material conditions.

In Conclusion, Marx keeps Hegel's dialectics but rejects Hegel's idealism, Feuerbach corrected Hegel partially, as theory went from Dialectical Idealism to Materialism with Feuerbach to Dialectical Materialism with Marx. Humans are defined by practical activity. History is not driven by ideas, it is driven by changes in material life. Conscious people create unconscious history, ideals reflect social reality and class struggle becomes central. Philosophy should not only interpret the world but also help transform it.