There is no other principle of explanation for the world
than divine freedom.
F.W.J. Schelling.
All things excellent are as difficult as they are rare.
Spinoza (Ethics,
v 42).
The alpha and omega of all philosophy is freedom.
From
a Letter from Schelling to Hegel, February 4, 1795.
Abstract
Martin Heidegger through his
reading of F.W.J. Schelling’s treatise on
human freedom comes to a critique of metaphysics. Heidegger starts with an analysis of systems in general, then
pantheism, fatalism, human freedom, a metaphysics of evil, metaphysics in
general, and finally the metahistorical ontological position of Being as
Will. Basically, Schelling’s radical thinking on human freedom and evil
annihilates the metaphysical foundation of Idealism and hopefully metaphysics
in general. It is only after the end of metaphysics, according to Heidegger can
we began a dialogue with Being and God or the gods. This work on Schelling is
perhaps the most sustain discussion of traditional theological issues in
Heidegger’s writing.
Introduction
The speculative thinking of
German Idealism seems far removed from our time. This paper looks at Heidegger’s
reading of one of the deeper thinkers of German Idealism, namely, F.W.J.
Schelling (1775-1854). Schelling was a
young bright star of Idealism, he was highly published, but his friend
G.W.F.Hegel (1770-1831) soon replaced
him in the sun light.
Martin Heidegger (1889-1976)
publications show him as the most published philosopher and thinker of the
twentieth century. Heidegger’s thinking has sparked many people to write about
him. He is the most written about
twentieth century philosopher. This
has been called the Heidegger industry.
Heidegger’s early theological connections are extensive. He entered as a novitiate of the Society of
Jesus at Titis near Feldkirch in Austria in 1909, at the age of 19. He began studying for the priesthood at the
Albert-Ludwig University in Freiburg.
In 1911 abandons the theological seminary, changes to mathematics and
philosophy. Heidegger in 1913 says “the undersigned intends to dedicate himself to the
study of Christian philosophy” and the next
year 1914 he says, “career in the service of researching and teaching
Christian-Scholastic philosophy” (The Young
Heidegger, p. 54). He also speaks
of doing a study of the “problem of a theoretical-scientific treatment of
Catholic theology” (ibid. p. 55).
Now at the end of the
millennium, it is time to review what has happen in the twentieth century in
thinking and theology. Heidegger’s first major publication was Being and Time in
1927 and it is his most famous work.
His collected work (Gesamtausgabe) has grown to ninety volumes and is still growing. Most of these are lectures he gave to
specific groups or are extensive lecture notes that were first-read to students
at the University of Freiburg or Marburg.
Heidegger’s most documented lecture course on Schelling dates
from 1936 with some notes from the summer semester 1941 at the University of
Freiburg. This paper is based on the
English translation of the book entitled: Schelling’s treatise on the essence of human freedom, by Martin Heidegger.
Clearly Heidegger’s is an ontologist.
The question of the meaning of Being is his fundamental question in Being
and Time and remained his primary matter for thought. Through his work on ontology, philosophy,
and metaphysics, he has especially
influenced the theology of his friend Rudolf Bultmann among others.
Who was Schelling?
F.W.J. Schelling (1775-1854)
was a roommate with G.W.F. Hegel (1770-1831)
and the famous classical poet,
F. Holderlin (1770-1843) at the
Tubingen Stift. His first major
publication Ideen zur Philosophie der Natur (1797) was published at the
age of twenty-two. He was appointed
to a chair of Philosophy at Jena University, 1798 (age of twenty-three). In 1803 he moved to a chair at Wurzburg
University until 1806. During this
time he wrote his treatise on human freedom in 1809 (age of thirty-six). This was to be his last major work
published during his life time even though he wrote volumes. These were not to be published. Back to1806, he meets the theologian Franz von Baader (1765-1841) and was
reading Jakob Bohme (1575-1624). Other influences on Schelling at this time
were Christoph Oetinger, Paracelsus, Emanuel Swedenborg, Johann Bengel, Saint
Martin, Johannes Tauler, Meister Eckhart, and Nicolaus of Cusanus. In 1841 he was called to Berlin University
to try to overturn Hegel’s influence after Hegel’s death in 1831. In Schelling’s Berlin lectures was a group of students who perhaps
became more famous than Schelling himself, namely, S. Kierkegaard, J. Burckhardt, F. Engels, L. Feuerbach, and M.
Bakunin. Schelling has become more
famous in the twentieth century through his influence on Paul Tillich
(1886-1965) and his theology. Tillich
two most famous books on Schelling are: 1) The construction of the history
of religion in Schelling's positive philosophy: its presuppositions and
principles (originally, his thesis from 1910) and, (2) Mysticism and guilt‑consciousness
in Schelling's philosophical development (originally, his thesis from
1912).
At this moment we need to
mention Bertrand Russell’s, A history of Western Philosophy. In the section on I. Kant (1724-1804), after
discussing Fichte, (1762-1814) he ends with the following remark, “His immediate successor Schelling (1775-1854) as more
amiable, but not less subjective. He
was closely associated with the German romantics; philosophically, though
famous in his day, he is not important.”
(p.718). B. Russell is known for
writing a great many works during his life time. Perhaps he needed to do a little more reading, research, and
thinking before writing. Also, A
history of Western Philosophy was written under contract, so perhaps he was
more interested in money than philosophy.
Who said that the Sophist had a bad name in Greece?
Heidegger’s encounter with Schelling
Heidegger has a fresh way of
reading, thinking, and philosophizing with other philosophers and poets. He is not just interested in what they
said, but what they wanted to say but could not say, where they get stuck, and
Heidegger tries to get them unstuck.
This is where Heidegger wants to have a dialogue. Heidegger is very much alive to the
hermeneutical text. Part of the methodology
he used in Being and Time was hermeneutics and he is responsible for
rekindling this methodology in the twentieth century. In the methodological section of Being and Time, he says,
“Phenomenology of human existence (Da-sein) is
hermeneutics in the original signification of that word . . . “
Heidegger’s reading of Schelling is not as controversial as his
interpretation of Kant.
For the motto of this
interpretation of Schelling, Heidegger approvingly quotes Schelling himself,
To be exact, Heidegger’s reading of Schelling is a radical
interpretation. This reading has more
to do with Heidegger becoming clear on his Metahistory of metaphysics, than
that of understanding Schelling’s own
project. If you want to understand
Schelling, then read Schelling. On the
other hand, if you want to understand Heidegger’s interpretation of the history of ontology - then read Heidegger.
Heidegger starts his analysis
with saying that, “Schelling’s
treatise on freedom is one of those very rare works . . . “ (Treatise p.4).
From a different point of view, G.W.F. Hegel remarked about this work, “Schelling had made known a single treatise on
Freedom. It is of a deep speculative
nature, but it stands alone. In
philosophy a single piece cannot be developed” (Hegel’s History of Philosophy, p.13). This tells us more about Hegel’s position than his understanding of what Schelling is
trying to do with his work on freedom.
(A short historical digression.
By this time, the two great friends, Schelling and Hegel had already had
a falling out and only had a chance meeting later in life at a bath spa, Karlsbad, September 1829. After Hegel died, his son Immanuel heard
Schelling lecturing in Munich and was invited to his house and seemed impressed
with Schelling’s and his daughters as well.)
Now to return to Heidegger’s work.
According to Heidegger, Schelling is very important for our
understanding of this period. For
example, he says A . . . for Schelling is the truly creative and boldest
thinker of this whole age of German philosophy. He is that to such an extent that he drives German Idealism
from within right past its own fundamental position (Treatise p. 4).” Our task is
to see if Schelling can really get us by Idealism and metaphysics. Has metaphysics finally come to end after
Idealism?
It should be noted that
Heidegger does not come to a generalized notion of freedom or evil. These notions are rather used in the service
of his bigger project, that is, of the deconstruction of metaphysics. This is part of our problem in the
understanding and the interpretation of Heidegger’s work on Schelling. Heidegger
takes only a glancing blow at both freedom and evil. His main sights are aimed at the foundations of ontology,
theology, and metaphysics. This
process has been called genealogical deconstruction or archeologies of western
metaphysics. Heidegger says in Being
and Time, “The destructuring of the history of ontology
essentially belongs to the formulation of the question of Being and is possible
solely within such a formulation.”
(E.T., p. 20). So, the purpose of this
project is the same as Being and Time, namely, what is the meaning of
Being. Thus, Heidegger looks at
Schelling in terms of the history of ontology and metaphysics. What is Schelling’s place in the history of metaphysics?
Attack on the concept of Systems
Beginning with Spinoza and
certainly with Kant the concept of the System has been an important “driving force” in
Western thought. Kant says for example,
in Critique of Pure Reason, A13,
“Transcendental philosophy is here the idea of a
science, for which the critique of pure reason is to outline the entire plan
architectonically . . . “ and in A847 “The
original idea of a philosophy of pure reason itself prescribes this division; it
is therefore architectonic, in conformity with its essential ends . . . “ Kant’s concept of system is clearly - architectonic. Kant was a great system thinker, but the
concept and implementation of the system clearly reach its climax in
Hegel. Hegel is perhaps the greatest
system thinker ever.
Hegel says in his Science
of Logic (1812), “Accordingly, logic is to be understood as the system
of pure reason, as the realm of pure thought. It can therefore be said that this content is the exposition of
God as he is in his eternal essence before the creation of nature and a finite
mind.” (p. 50). In
a sense GOD is the SYSTEM or GOD equals the SYSTEM. Note the whole pantheism discussion.
In Hegel’s thinking there is, A. . . first part of the System of Science which contains the Phenomenology
should be followed by a second part containing logic and two concrete sciences,
Philosophy of Nature and Philosophy of Spirit, which complete the System of
Philosophy” (p. 29).
Later on Hegel’s system project was completed as lecture notes under
the title Encyclopaedia of Philosophical Sciences.
Hegel’s entire system is obviously linked to his
theology. In the first part of the Science
of Logic, Hegel has a section entitled “With
What Must the Science Begin?”. At this end of this section Hegel states: “...(and God has the absolutely undisputed right
that the beginning be made with him) . . . “
(p.78). This points to the theological
foundations of Hegel’s system. Heidegger
would have said this points to the onto-theological foundation of not just
Hegel’s system, but the metaphysics of Idealism in
general. Heidegger says, “God is the leading idea of system in general (Treatise
p. 50).” It is hard
to image German Idealism without a theology, an atheist Idealism seems out of
the question for these philosophers.
Heidegger makes the following
amazing remark about Hegel’s entire system
and Schelling destructive criticisms of systems in general. Heidegger says, “The treatise which shatters Hegel’s Logic before it was even published.”( Treatise p.97).
Hegel’s Science of Logic is the fundamental foundation
to his entire system. Once Hegel wrote
his Logic the rest of his life was just working on the fine details of
his system. In a sense, Hegel was
finished thinking and
philosophizing. All of Hegel’s questions had been answered.
In Heidegger’s analysis of Schelling, he says, “Schelling shows first of all how the system is split
open by the reality of evil” (Treatise
p.98). Freedom leads the way for
possibility of evil. Human freedom
radical conceived by Schelling breaks open the system.
How is freedom possible
within a system?
Freedom
What does Heidegger’s analysis of Schelling show us about freedom? Heidegger says, A . . . freedom is freedom for good and
evil. The ‘and’ the
possibility of this ambiguity and everything hidden in it is what is
decisive. That means that the whole
concept of freedom must change.” (Treatise p.
97). So, it is not good or
evil. Instead, Heidegger is doing
ontology and his analysis has more to do with the possibility of evil, that is,
not what evil means, but that evil exists and has an ontological status. Is there really evil in the world? Does evil exist for us?
According to Schelling, “Until the discovery of Idealism the genuine concept of
freedom was lacking in all recent systems, in Leibniz’s just as in Spinoza’s.” Schelling
thinking in relation to Spinoza (1632-16770
has always been close, but he also makes reference to Leibniz
(1646-1716) concept of freedom.
Schelling often quotes G. W. Leibniz’s Theodicy
(1710), which has two major sections: section I, “Preliminary Dissertation on the Conformity of Faith with Reason.” Section two
in three parts, entitled, “Essays on the
Justice of God and the Freedom of Man in the Origin of Evil.” (p.31, E.T., 1-417 paragraphs). Note the concepts of freedom of man and
evil are similarly in name to Schelling’s
treatise, however, they are used in a much different way in Leibniz.
Toward the end of his
analysis, Heidegger asks the question, “But
then why is the treatise on the system a treatise on freedom? Because evil truly existent in human
freedom and as human freedom.
The most extreme discord in beings is truly existent in the freedom of
man (Treatise p.177).” This leads to the next section on evil.
Evil
I. Kant in October 1794 received
a strongly worded letter from his King. This was right after Kant published his last major work entitled:
Religion within the limits of reason alone (1793). The King was not happy with Kant and said:
“If you continue to resist, you may certainly expect unpleasant
consequences to yourself” (p.xxxiv).
Although he got into hot water over the publication, the major theme
of the work is evil and human nature. For
example, there are four books and the first is entitled: Book One. Concerning
the indwelling of the evil principal with good, or, on the radical evil in
human nature. Although these topics seem somewhat the same
as Schelling, Kant has a much different direction. Heidegger does not make any connection with
Kant in his analysis of Schelling. Although
Schelling grew up reading Kant and Fichte, he seems to pay more attention
to Leibniz in this work.
What does evil mean for
Heidegger? In his analysis of
Schelling, he says, “Evil - that is the key word for the main
treatise. The question of the nature of
human freedom becomes the question of the possibility and reality of evil.” And AEvil itself determines the new beginning in
metaphysics. The question of the
possibility and reality of evil brings about a transformation of the question
of Being.” (Treatise p. 97). How is that possible?
What is the speculative relationship between the question of Being
(Sein) and evil?
During Heidegger’s analysis of Schelling, he makes a sweeping statement “Previous systems, especially Idealism, are incapable
of founding a true system acknowledging the reality of evil. The next time the reflection is
affirmative: the determining of the ground of the system, the essence of Being
in general, must be more primordially conceived in order for evil to be
comprehensible in its own being and thus introduced into the system, thus
making a system of freedom possible (Treatise p.98).” This amazing
statement by Heidegger does not seem to lead anywhere. So far, Heidegger’s other writing does not follow up on this
statement. Heidegger has certainly
made attempts to more primordially conceive the essence, meaning, truth of
Being, but the introduction of evil into the system and making a Heideggerian
system of freedom has not happened.
What is Heidegger’s concept of freedom? So far in published writings this is not a major concept for
Heidegger, but his use here is more generally to attack Idealism and
metaphysics.
Ontology
In part of Heidegger’s analysis of Being he also quotes Schelling, here is
the whole passage, Heidegger says, “Being is understood
as egoity, as freedom. Freedom is
will. Thus, Being is originally willing.
“The Will is
primal being.” (Treatise p. 99).” The famous quote from Schelling is “The Will
is primal being.” This plays into
Heidegger’s interpretation of Schelling’s ontology.
For Heidegger, Schelling is
at the beginning of the 19th century shapes Being’s Metahistory with Being as Will, which begun with
Kant.
Freedom is Will, Being is Will, this then leads us in the late 19th
century to Schopenhauer’s central work The World as Will and Representation
and Nietzsche’s major project (starting in 1877), which he
called the “Will to Power,”
and he restarted again and again. For
Heidegger these are last moments in his
Metahistory of Being. Being is -
Being as Will. This is a
Metahistory which Heidegger is hoping will end. This provides him a foundation to escape the entire
onto-theological metaphysics of western thought. (See “The End of Philosophy and the Task of Thinking”). Heidegger
says in his work on Nietzsche the
following about metaphysics, “But then what
does it mean Athe end of metaphysics”? It means the historical
moment in which the essential possibilities of metaphysics are exhausted” (Nietzsche Vol IV, p.148). Heidegger points this out directly in a
later work, he says, ABut Hegel also, as little as Husserl, as little as all
metaphysics, does not ask about Being as Being . . . “ (p.389).
Again, Heidegger wants to step beyond his own shadow, to ask about Being
(Sein) and God outside of traditional metaphysics and ontologies. He is ontologist and he wants to radically
ask the question of the meaning of Being.
Theology
According to Heidegger theology,
philosophy, metaphysics, and ontology are closely linked. This position is not in line with what passes
as Philosophy on most university campus today. Heidegger says, “Philosophy’s questioning is always and in itself both onto-logical
and theological in the very broad sense.
Philosophy is Ontotheology. The
more originally it is both in one, the more truly it is philosophy.
And Schelling’s treatise is thus one of the most profound works of philosophy
because it is in a unique sense ontological and theological at the same
time (Treatise p. 51).”
At a more particular level
Heidegger’s remarks on Christian theologies (circa 1936) appear
in general to be negative. For
example, Heidegger says,
The
assertion often heard of late that modern philosophy is simply a secularization
of Christian Theology is only true very conditionally and also true only in
being restricted to adopting the realms of Being. Rather, the reverse is true that Christian theology is the Christianization
of an extra-Christian philosophy and that only for this reason could this
Christian theology also be made secular again (p51).
Finally, In Heidegger’s analysis of Schelling, he says, “God lets the oppositional will of the ground operate
in order that might be which love unifies and subordinates itself to for the
glorification of the Absolute. The
will of love stands about the will of the ground and this predominance, this
eternal decidedness, the love for itself as the essence of Being in general,
this decidedness is the innermost core of absolute freedom (Treatise p.160).”
(In German: “Gott lasst den gegenstrebigen Willen des Grundes
wirken, damit jenes sei, was die Liebe einige und sich zur Verherrlichung des
Absoluten unterordne. Der Wille der
Liebe steht uber dem Willen des Grundes, und dieses Uberwiegen, die ewige
Entschiedenheit dazu, also die Liebe zu sich selbst als Wesen des Seyns
uberhaupt; diese Entschiedenheit ist der innerste Kern absoluten Freiheit.”(in Schelling:
Ueber das Wesen der menschlichen; AKA Schelling: Vom Wesen der menschlichen
Freiheit (1809). 1936., p. 277).
In this quotation, Heidegger
links God=Love=Absolute Freedom=Eternal Decidedness=Absolute in a very direct
way, they are the Self-Same. How this
becomes an identity is part of the deep speculative thinking that has directed
this kind of inquiry.
End of Metaphysics
Metaphysics has exhausted its possibilities, it has ended.
Heidegger did an interview
with the German magazine Der Spiegel in September 1966. This was only to
be published after his death. Heidegger died in 1976 and the interview
was published a few weeks later. The
interview seems to get at a much more personal tone of the later Heidegger’s think on a great number of topics. You also get a sense that Heidegger is
humble about his influence and what can be done. However, this a theo-logy with no connections to metaphysics or
the Onto-theo-logy nature of metaphysics.
This is a step out. The followed
passages give us a sense of Heidegger’s
thinking on the future of a postmetaphysical theo-logy
“Only a god can save us. The sole possibility that is left for us is to prepare a sort of
readiness, through thinking and poetizing, for the appearance of the god or for
the absence of the god in the time of foundering; for in the face of the god
who is absent, we founder (Der Spiegel’s Interview with Martin Heidegger, p277).”
Heidegger’s last remark in this interview was, “For
us contemporaries the greatness of what is to be thought is too great. Perhaps we might bring ourselves to build a
narrow and not far-reaching footpath as a passageway.” (Der Spiegel’s Interview with Martin Heidegger, p284). So, we need a ‘footpath’ or
some kind of path onward. Heidegger
uses the image of the path a great deal in his writings.
A Heidegger poem dating from
1971 says,
Paths,
Paths of thought, going by themselves,
vanishing.
When they turn again,
what do they show us?
Paths, going by themselves,
formerly open, suddenly closed,
later on. Once pointing out the way,
never attained, destined to renunciation -
slackening the pace
from out of the harmony of trustworthy fate.
And again the need
for a lingering darkness
within the waiting light.
(Philosophy Today,
vol. 21, 1976, p287)
Heidegger feels himself in the
lingering darkness and he is waiting for the light.
The lingering darkness is the
absent of God and God is the light.
And where is the trustworthy
fate?
Open areas of research.
1) Schelling connections to
I. Kant’s - evil and freedom.
2) Schelling’s connections to G. W. Leibniz’s - evil and freedom.
3) How is Schelling connected
with G.W.F. Hegel’s concept of freedom?
4) How did Jacob Bohme
writings influence Schelling?
5) What are Franz Baader
connections with Schelling?
6) How is Heidegger’s postmetaphysical position linked to
Eastern Religion and thought?
7) Heidegger’s position of Being as Will seems to logically connect
Schelling with
Nietzsche. Schopenhauer’s links to Schelling?
By
Daniel Ferrer
Park Library
Central Michigan
University
Mount Pleasant, MI
48859 U.S.A.
E-mail:
Daniel.Ferrer@cmich.edu
History of this paper:
Paper for Religious
Studies Section. Michigan Academy of
Science,
Arts, &letters in February 27, 1998. (Alma, Michigan).
http://www.umich.edu/~michacad/
Bibliography and Notes
Heidegger and Schelling on
the Web.
General Martin Heidegger web
site:
Heidegger and “Only a God Can Save Us” Thomas K. Carr:
http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9508/carr.html
Schelling short biography:
http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/s.htm#sche
Hegel on Schelling, need to
use the left hand frames
for searching under History
of Philosophy:
Schelling on Hegel:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/schelli3.htm
Part of Schelling’s
System of Transcendental Philosophy:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/schellin.htm
Books:
Buren, van John. The Young
Heidegger: Rumor of the Hidden King. Bloomington: Indiana University Press,
1994.
Hegel, G.W.F. Hegel’s Science of Logic. Translated by A.V. Miller. Humanities Press, New York, 1969.
Hegel, G.W.F. Hegel: The
Letters. Translated by Clark Butler and Christiane Seiler. Indiana
University Press, Bloomington, 1984. P.
32.
Footnote: Only a god can
save us: Der Spiegel’s
Interview with Martin Heidegger,
Philosophy Today, Winter 1976. Der
Spiegel’s Interview with Martin Heidegger, p. 277.
In 1936 Heidegger gave a
summer lecture series on Schelling: Vom Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit
(1809). Volume 42 of the Heidegger’s Gesamtausgabe is entitled: Schelling: Ueber
das Wesen der menschlichen; AKA Schelling: Vom Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit
(1809). 1936. This does not include Appendix which appears in the English
translation below.
The English translation is Schelling’s treatise on the essence of human freedom, by Martin Heidegger. Translation by Joan Stambaugh,
published by Ohio University Press, 1985.
This is a translation from the
German entitled: Schelling Abhandlung uber das Wesen der menschlichen
Freiheit. Published by Max Niemeyer Verlag Tubingen, 1971.
Schelling’s work first came out under the title: Philosophical
Inquiries into the Nature of Human Freedom and Matters Connected Therewith
as part of F.W. Schelling’s Philosophical Writings,
Volume 1, in 1809. F.W.J. Schelling
was thirty-four years old at this time.
See. Ott, H. “Heidegger, Martin Catholic Origins.” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly, V. 69, N.
2, 1995, p 137.
Bibliography -
Schelling and Freedom
Schelling's philosophy
of freedom
By Laughland, John. A thesis, 1999.
Choosing evil : Schelling, Kierkegaard and the legacy of
Kant's conception of freedom
By
Kosch, Michelle. A thesis, 1999.
Spinoza's thinking of
freedom and its reception in subsequent European philosophy.
By
Bernstein, Jeffrey Alan. A thesis, 1998.
The conspiracy of being : F.
W. J. Von Schelling and conscientiousness before philosophy's freedom
By
Wirth, Jason Martin. A thesis, 1994.
The abyss of freedom
By Zizek, Slavoj. ; Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph
von,; 1775‑1854. ; Weltalter.; English. 1997.
The physics of freedom :
the beginnings of Schelling's philosophy of nature
By Koeller, David Wayne. A thesis, 1989.
Heidegger and Schelling
Additional Notes.
Heidegger does not mention
Schelling in Being and Time (1927).
However, in the little essay by Heidegger entitled “My way to Phenomenology,” he mentions on
his walks with his Professor Dr. Carl Braig (circa 1911) A .
. . I first heard of Schelling’s and Hegel’s significance for speculative theology as
distinguished from the dogmatic system of Scholasticism” (p. 73). In
a very early work of Heidegger’s entitled “Review of Ernst Cassirer’s Mythical Thought” (1928), he compares Cassirer’s position to the later Schelling’s work on mythology.
In the last paragraph Heidegger writes, “The critical questions here brought forward cannot detract from the
merit of Cassirer’s work insofar as it is the first attempt since
Schelling to place myth as a systematic problem within the range of philosophy
(p. 45).”
Heidegger earlier lectures from 1929 are concerned with only the
early Schelling’s work, not the Treatise on freedom. See Heidegger’s volume GA 28, Der Deutsche
Idealismus (Fichte, Hegel, Schelling) und die philosophische Problemlage der
Gegenwart. 1929. In 1968, Heidegger gave the first of series of
seminars First Le Thor seminar (Hegel: Differenz des Fichteschen und
Schellingschen Systems), in Provence, August 30 to September 8. The topic of this seminar is Hegel’s work, entitled: The difference between the Fichtean
and Schellingian systems of philosophy.
Also, there are notes from volume GA 49, Die Metaphysik des deutschen Idealismus. Zur erneuten auslegung von Schelling:
Philosophische untersuchungen ueber das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit und die
damit zusammenhaengenden Gegenstaende (1809). 1941.
In Heidegger’s work entitled, “Who
is Nietzsche’s Zarathustra?”,
he says the following about Schelling’s
treatise:
“The
essential coinage of Being comes to language in classic form in several
sentences formulated by Schelling in his Philosophical Investigations into
the Essence of Human Freedom and the Objects Pertaining Thereto (1809).
The
three sentences read:
‘In
the final and highest instance there is no other Being than willing. Willing is primal Being, and to it willing
alone all of the predicates of the same primal Being apply: absence of
conditions; eternity; independence from time; self-affirmation. All philosophy strives solely in order to
find this supreme expression.’
Schelling
assets that the predicates which metaphysical thought since antiquity has
attributed to Being find their ultimate, supreme, and thus consummate
configuration in willing. However, the
will of the willing meant here is not a faculty of the human soul. Here the word willing names the
Being of beings as whole. Such Being
is will”. (E.T., p. 222).