Table Of ContentInternational Archives of the History of Ideas 216
Archives internationales d'histoire des idées
Gregorio Piaia
Giovanni Santinello Editors
Models of
the History of
Philosophy
Vol. III: The Second Enlightenment and
the Kantian Age
Archives internationales d’histoire des idées
International Archives of the History of Ideas
Volume 216
BoardofDirectors:
Director:
SarahHutton,UniversityofAberystwyth,Aberystwyth,UK
FoundingEditors:
PaulDibon(cid:2) andRichardH.Popkin(cid:2)
AssociateDirector:
J.C.Laursen,UniversityofCalifornia,Riverside,USA
GuidoGiglioni,WarburgInstitute,London,UK
EditorialBoard:
K. Vermeir, Paris; J.R. Maia Neto, Belo Horizonte; M.J.B. Allen, Los Angeles;
J.-R. Armogathe, Paris; S. Clucas, London; P. Harrison, Oxford; J. Henry,
Edinburgh; M. Mulsow, Erfurt; G. Paganini, Vercelli; J. Popkin, Lexington;
J. Robertson, Cambridge; G.A.J. Rogers, Keele; J.F. Sebastian, Bilbao;
A.Thomson,Paris;Th.Verbeek,Utrecht
Moreinformationaboutthisseriesathttp://www.springer.com/series/5640
Gregorio Piaia • Giovanni Santinello
Editors
Models of the History
of Philosophy
Vol. III: The Second Enlightenment
and the Kantian Age
in association with
Francesca D’Alberto and Iva Manova
123
Editors
GregorioPiaia GiovanniSantinello.deceased/
UniversitàdiPadova
DipartimentodiFilosofia,Sociologia,
PedagogiaePsicologiaapplicata
Padova,Italy
TranslatedbyHilarySiddons
ThetranslationofthisworkhasbeenfundedbySEPS
SEGRETARIATOEUROPEOPERLEPUBBLICAZIONISCIENTIFICHE
ViaVald’Aposa7-40123Bologna-Italy
[email protected]
andbytheItalianMinistryofEducation,UniversitiesandResearch(MIUR-PRIN2009),
theUniversityofPadua(ProgettodiAteneo2010),andtheUniversityofVerona
ISSN0066-6610 ISSN2215-0307 (electronic)
InternationalArchivesoftheHistoryofIdeasArchivesinternationalesd’histoiredesidées
ISBN978-94-017-9965-2 ISBN978-94-017-9966-9 (eBook)
DOI10.1007/978-94-017-9966-9
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:93016502
SpringerDordrechtHeidelbergNewYorkLondon
TranslationfromtheItalianlanguageedition:GiovanniSantinello(cur.),StoriadelleStoriegenerali
dellafilosofia,vol.III,to.I-II,llsecondollluminismoel’etàKantiana©-1988EditriceAntenoreS.r.I.,
Roma-PadovaandStoriadelleStoriegeneralidellafilosofia,vol.IV.I,L’etàhegeliana,cap.I,pp.1-182
©1995EditriceAntenoreS.r.l.,Roma-Padova.Allrightsreserved
©SpringerScience+BusinessMediaDordrecht2015
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpartof
thematerialisconcerned,specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,reuseofillustrations,recitation,
broadcasting,reproductiononmicrofilmsorinanyotherphysicalway,andtransmissionorinformation
storageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilarmethodology
nowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,servicemarks,etc.inthispublication
doesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfromtherelevant
protectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
Thepublisher,theauthorsandtheeditorsaresafetoassumethattheadviceandinformationinthisbook
arebelievedtobetrueandaccurateatthedateofpublication.Neitherthepublishernortheauthorsor
theeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinorforany
errorsoromissionsthatmayhavebeenmade.
Printedonacid-freepaper
SpringerScience+BusinessMediaB.V.DordrechtispartofSpringerScience+BusinessMedia(www.
springer.com)
Foreword to the English Edition
TheEnglisheditionoftheStoriadellestoriegeneralidellafilosofia(Brescia,Padua
andRome,1979–2004,5volsin7tomes)continueswiththisthirdvolume,which
coverstheagefromDiderotandD’Alembert’sEncyclopédie,symbolparexcellence
of the Enlightenment, to that of Kant and his followers. The Italian edition of the
volume, which was published in 1988, ended with Gottlieb Buhle’s Lehrbuch der
Geschichte der Philosophie and Geschichte der neuern Philosophie. However, the
EnglisheditionalsoincludesthefirstchapterofthesubsequentvolumeIV/1,L’età
hegeliana.Lastoriografiafilosoficanell’areatedesca(1995),inordertoprovidethe
readerwithacompletepictureofthehistoriographicaldevelopmentsofKantianism,
from K.L. Reinhold, G.G. Fülleborn, K.H. Heydenreich, J.Chr.A. Grohmann, and
W.G.Tennemann,uptoJ.F.FriesandReinholdjunior.Wethuspresentafullaccount
of the concept of an a priori history of philosophy, deriving from a psychological
interpretationoftheKantiannotionof‘transcendental’.
Before its translation, the original text was revised and corrected, and the bib-
liographywasthoroughlyupdated.Thepresentationsoftheauthorssystematically
treatedinthisvolumefollowthepatternalreadyadoptedinthepreviousvolumesof
Models:
1.Chapternumber
1.1.Numberoftheauthorwithinthechapter
1.1.1.Biographyoftheauthor
1.1.2.Listofhisworks
1.1.3.Presentationofhisconceptofthehistoryofphilosophy
1.1.4.Analysisofhishistoriographicalwork(s)
1.1.4.1.Presentationofthestructureofthework(s)
1.1.4.2.Periodizationproposedwithinthework(s)
1.1.4.3.Historiographicaltheoriespropoundedinthework(s)
1.1.4.4.Methodologicalchoices
1.1.5.Receptionofthework(s)
1.1.6.Bibliographyontheauthor
v
vi ForewordtotheEnglishEdition
In the last few decades, the critical literature on the period under consideration
has increased considerably, even in the specific field of the historiography of
philosophy; nevertheless, I amconvinced thatthesystematic workof analysis and
contextualization of the general histories of philosophy carried out by Giovanni
Santinello and his team continues to provide an original contribution both to
the history of philosophical historiography and to the intellectual history of the
modernage.
It is impossible to list here the many people who made valuable contributions
towardstheproductionofthisvolume,toallofwhomwegiveourthanks.Iwould,
however, especially like to mention Sarah Hutton, director of the series ‘Archives
internationalesd’histoiredesidées–InternationalArchivesoftheHistoryofIdeas’,
and the Springer commissioning editors, Cristina dos Santos, Anita Rachmat, and
Catherine Davis. Particular thanks are also due to the translators: Carmel Ace
(Chaps. 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11.1 and 11.3, 11.4), Raffaella Roncarati (Chaps. 1, 2, 3,
7,9and11.2),andHilarySiddons,who,havingtranslatedthesecondvolumeofthe
work,hascompletelyrevisedthisedition.Theservicesofthelatterwerefundedby
theItalianMinistryofEducation,UniversitiesandResearch(PRIN2009,directed
by Professor Gregorio Piaia), the University of Padua (‘Progetto di Ateneo’ 2010,
directedbyProfessorGiuseppeMicheli),theUniversityofVerona(ProfessorMario
Longo) and the SEPS (Segretariato Europeo per le Pubblicazioni Scientifiche) of
Bologna,toallofwhomweoweourgratitude.
Padua,Italy GregorioPiaia
15March2015
Preface to the Italian Edition
The‘laterEnlightenment’isunderstoodheretodenoteEuropeanthoughtafterthe
mid-eighteenth century, while the ‘age of Kant’ corresponds to the final decades
of that century and the very beginning of the following one. These terms are
applied to Germany – where a substantial change took place in the historiography
of philosophy, as well as in philosophy itself during this period – but they are
also applicable to the rest of Europe, with Kant as the symbol of a renewal which
disseminatedbeyondGermany,bothdirectlyandindirectly.ThepreviousModelsof
theHistoryofPhilosophydealtwithDeslandesandBrucker,VallettaandCapasso,
andtheearlyEnlightenment,which,inthehistoriographyofphilosophy,correspond
to an initial formulation of the problem which was answered by the concept of a
‘criticalhistory’ofphilosophy.
Volume III explores the development of this critical history to the point of a
full philosophical awareness of the concept of histoire de l’esprit humain, the
more precise and problematic reflection elaborated by Kant and some of his
followers concerning philosophy in relation to its history, and the fulfilment of
a plan to create a ‘philosophical’ or ‘theoretical history’ in the context of the
ScottishEnlightenment.Thisnewtheoreticalreflectionwouldgiverisetothemost
interesting‘generalhistories’ofphilosophy.Adiscussionofthesewillbringusto
thethresholdoftheperiodofGermanandEuropeanclassicalidealism,whichwill
becoveredinVolumeIV.
Wehavetriednottolosesightoftheconceptualboundariesofthiswork,which
is not concerned with the historiography of philosophy as such, but only with the
‘generalhistories’ofphilosophy.Itisimportanttokeeptheseboundariesinmindas
wegraduallyapproachthenineteenthandthetwentiethcentury,centurieswhichsaw
an increase in the production of monographs on the history of philosophy, and of
manyother‘genres’.Thisincreaseledinitiallytotheestablishmentanddeepening
of the sense of general history in its own right – as opposed to the rich variety of
genres which can be used by the history of philosophy – and subsequently to a
decline in interest with regard to the general framework and a tendency to prefer
monographsandphilologicalresearch.
vii
viii PrefacetotheItalianEdition
Butheretheconceptof‘generalhistory’isnotemployedinamechanicalway,
whichwouldentailmakinganumberofexclusions.TheEnlightenmentinevitably
broughtaboutadevelopmentoftheconceptof‘modern’;indeed,startingfromthe
rebirthofthesciencesandthearts,aseriesofhistoriographicalworksontheperiod
of the Modern Age appeared. Strictly speaking, these works do not fall into the
categoryofgeneralhistory:onpurelyfactualbases,weshouldhaveexcludedworks
likeD’Alembert’sDiscourspréliminaire,Buhle’sGeschichte,andDugaldStewart’s
Dissertation. On the other hand, these formulations of the ‘modern’ are made
preciselyinrelationto,orincontrastwith,aparticularinterpretationofmediaeval
andancientthought,andthusfallwithintherangeofageneralconceptionofhistory.
Forthisreason,whichmaybeconsideredpracticalbutwhichisalsofullyjustified
on a theoretical level, period histories have also been included in our project and
therefore form part of the analysis presented here, especially those which became
periodhistoriesnotbecausetheywereoriginallydesignatedassuch,butbecausefor
theirownreasonstheirauthorsleftthemunfinished.
As in the preceding volumes, each chapter consists of an introduction –
intended to outline the features of the period under discussion and to connect the
‘general histories’ to the philosophical and historiographical activity and cultural
environment of the age – and a series of ‘fact files’ devoted to the authors of
general histories. Also as in the preceding work, there are two exceptions, two
chapters which do not share this common structure because they do not deal with
‘general histories’: the first, on the history of philosophy in the Encyclopédie, and
the tenth, concerning Kant. The inclusion of these two subjects is justified on the
samegrounds asourinclusionofBayle’s DictionnaireandHeumann’s Einleitung
zurhistoriaphilosophicainthepreviousvolume.Theyaredecisiveforatheoretical
understanding notonlyoftheconceptofthehistoryofphilosophy, butalsoofthe
significance of its becoming structured as a general history and manifesting itself
asindicativeofatotality.Thiscanbeseeninthenumerousreflectionscontainedin
the Discours préliminaire, whose weave of theoretical ideas and historiographical
theoriesbecameanecessarypointofreferenceforFrenchauthorsinthesecondhalf
of the eighteenth century. But it can also be seen in the various historiographical
contributions by D’Alembert and above all by Diderot, which were also collected
andpublishedseparatelyunderthesignificanttitleHistoiregénéraledesdogmeset
opinions.
TherearesimilarandmoreobviousreasonsforincludingKant.Kantneverwrote
a general history and overtly denied that his ‘critique’ was a judgement on or a
discussionofphilosophicalworkswrittenbyothers.Nevertheless,itiswellknown
thathehadahistoriographicaleducationinamilieuinfluencedbyBrucker’sideas,
whichwasthenundergoingatransformation.Brucker’steachingsandwritingsare
bothfilledwithspecifichistoricalreferencesatallphasesoftheirproduction;andhe
focuseddirectlyontheissueofphilosophyanditshistory.ThisledKanttocriticize
Brucker’seclectictheoryandtohisassertionoftheneedtoshapehistoriographical
questions in rigorously philosophical and theoretical terms. Kant’s criticism led
directlytoromanticandidealistichistoricism.
PrefacetotheItalianEdition ix
InthelaterEnlightenmentandtheageofKant,theproductionofgeneralhistories
of philosophy continued to be shaped by the geographical and cultural areas to
which they belonged. In France, in the wake of a tradition which originated with
Bayle and Deslandes, this production maintained its militant character, mostly
addressing itself not to schools but to broader audiences, fighting the cause of the
Lumières. This was true not only of lay works, but also of religious apologetics.
However, opposing sides were not always represented by the dévots and the
philosophes. At times, as in the case of the Jansenist abbé Pelvert, there were
scholars who felt the need to step outside of their contemporary surroundings and
seek the elements of judgement in history, comparing the errors and misguided
unbeliefs of the ancients with those of the moderns. Pelvert does not condemn
Modernity as such, but only in so far as it contains aberrant ideas. Indeed, while
distrustingphilosophersingeneral,Pelvertcouldnotavoidfindingcorrespondences
supportinghistheologypreciselyalongthelineofmodernthought,fromDescartes
to Arnauld and Malebranche. As it was by Deslandes, the history of philosophy
is regarded as a part or an aspect of a more general histoire de l’esprit humain.
Yet this expression acquired a stronger sense, fed by the concept of progress. An
authentic philosophy of history was emerging, with its concept of the progress of
the human spirit, and this philosophy found a humanistic substitute for the theo-
logicalandAugustinianperspective,whichhadbeenpropagatedbyBossuet.New
historiographicalcategorieswereestablishedtodividethe‘successiveadvancesof
the human spirit’ into periods, as stated in the title of the well-known Tableau by
Turgot.Naturerepeatsitselfinacycleofunchangingrevolutions,whilethehistory
of humanity presents itself as changing from century to century, in a varying and
diverseprogression.InthemidstofthetragedycausedbytheTerror,Condorcetwas
tospeakoftherévolutionsofthehumanspecies,thuspositingthatthecategoryof
revolutionwasasignmarkingthemajorperiodsofhistory,includingthehistoryof
philosophy.Voltairehadalreadyputforwardaninterpretationof‘centuries’interms
of human progress, viewing them as unequal. Not many of them were influential,
butthosethatwereincluded:thefourthcenturybeforeChristfortheGreeks,theage
ofCaesarandOctavianus,themid-fifteenthcenturyinItalyandthecenturyofLouis
XIV. In this way, French historiography of philosophy parted ways with erudition
andacquiredadefinitestructurethatmadeitsworksgeneralandtotalhistories.
The other category which was developed for purposes of periodization, and in
order to understand and compare the various philosophies, was that of ‘system’.
Thisconceptappearedintheworksofnumeroushistoriographers,notablySavérien,
BatteuxandCondillac,andsubsequentlyprevailedinDegérando,partlyasaresult
oftheinfluenceexerted–directlyatthistime–byKantandGermanhistoriography.
Classification and periodization into ‘sects’ or schools was abandoned, to be
replaced by explanations of a conceptual nature: the thorough, erudite treatment
of historical and philosophical details was marginalized and replaced by a histo-
riographyofanincreasinglyspeculativetendency.Hence,inCondillac’sview,itis
fromasystemoftheoreticaltypes,ratherthanfromacontingenthistoricalcollection
ofcases,thatthe‘errors’derivingfromabstractsystems(Descartes,Malebranche,
Leibniz,Spinoza)emerge,alongwiththetruthreachedbythetheoryofsensism.
