/lit/ - Literature

>>16308195
Schelling was CUTE

/Schelling/

What's objective subject-object.

What exactly are the objective Subject-Object and subjective Subject-Object, how do they unite to be something higher than subject, what does that mean, and how is this a step from Fichte?

What are his best works translated in English?

Middle Era Schelling was probably the worst.
He showed the first signs when he focused so much in his earlier writing about the necessity of a "natural philosophy" next to the fichtean transcendental philosophy, but it really is jsut one of the most cucked things a philosopher can do when he tries to explain philosophical problems with the current natural scientific methods.
For example he wrote:Über das Verhältnis des Realen und Idealen in der Natur oder Entwicklung der ersten Grundsätze der Naturphilosophie an den Prinzipien der Schwere und des Lichts.

Best is to just skip Schelling for the Identitätssystems part of his life, late Naturphilosophie, and frankly go from 1800 "System of transcendental Idealism" straight to a "different" philosophical system with Philosophie der Offenbarung and Philosophie der Mythologie.

Now now master Fichte, I believe you are going to abstract. Your postulates are slowly not basing off each other. Just go into exciting a grand worldwide awakening through moral and political preaching; leave the sourcing knowledge to me and my dialecticism.

>>14536904
>Fichte out of Schelling's dogmatic identity philosophy
Why is do you call it dogmatic?
personal pessimism torwards their system of transcendental idealism is waranted but dogmatism is exactly what Fichte and Schelling where opposing as staunch anti-spinozists.


>Fichte's 1798 Wissenschaftslehre
For others: Just read the foreword of the PoS and tell me if you can understand what Hegel means by the gravitas of the "A=A", that the self places itself and the non self in contrast (negation; or however it is translated), the moments of the self, or why the negative is still a positive of the subject, or why should the substance be considered a subject instead? Those thoughts stem directly from Fichte's work who saw them as necessary deductions of Kant's philosophy.
You have to catch up Fichte and Schelling while reading Hegel (if even possible) if you want to pretend that you understood the necessary empistemological groundings of Hegel's philosophy.

What's the definitive biography, and what are some good works of his to start? All I know about him is that despite being younger he was Hegel's mentor, and that his philosophy changed as he aged. I don't care about precursors or secondary texts (besides a good biography); I only care about Schelling. What should I read?

Been reading Schelling's Ages of the World [because apparently it was a massive influence on Zizek] and this is basically just Kabbalah, isn't it? All this shit about the primordial necessary godhead negating itself i.e. positing itself as negative - this is just the Kabbalic tzimtzum idea of creation presented in the language of German idealism.

Makes me want to read further into the influences of Jewish or Christian theosophism/hermeticism on German idealism and by extension continental philosophy as a whole. I know about that "Hermetic Hegel" book which got memed a while back, but does /lit/ know anything else good in that vein?

read Clara to surpass /lit/ pseuds

Was he where Europe peaked? He was the most close Western philosophy could get to the Truth.
Also, he cute.