order to see clearly what we are about。 Moreover； in the third place； we must first take a general
survey before we descend to particulars； else the whole is not seen for the mere details…the wood
is not seen for the trees； nor Philosophy for mere philosophies。 We require to have a general idea
of the nature and aim of the whole in order to know what to look for。 Just as we first desire to
obtain a general idea of a country； which we should no longer see in going into detail； so we desire
to see the relation which single philosophies bear to the whole； for in reality； the high value of the
detail lies in its relation to the whole。 This is nowhere more the case than with Philosophy； and also
with its history。 In the case of a history； indeed； the establishment of the Universal seems to be less
needful than in that of one of the sciences proper。 For history seems at first to be a succession of
chance events； in which each fact stands isolated by itself； which has Time alone as a
connecting…link。 But even in political history we are not satisfied with this。 We see； or at least
divine in it； that essential connection in which the individual events have their place and relation to
an end or aim； and in this way obtain significance。 For the significant in history is such only through
its relation to and connection with a Universal。 To perceive this Universal is thus to apprehend the
significance。
There are； therefore； the following points with which I wish to deal in this introduction。
The first of these will be to investigate the character of the history of Philosophy； its significance； its
nature； and its aim； from which will follow inferences as to its treatment。 In particular； we shall get
an insight into the relation of the history of Philosophy to the science of Philosophy； and this will be
the most interesting point of all。 That is to say； this history represents； not merely the external；
accidental； events contained within it； but it shows how the content； or that which appears to
belong to mere history； really belongs to the science of Philosophy。 The history of Philosophy is
itself scientific； and thus essentially becomes the science of Philosophy。
In the second place； the Notion of Philosophy must be more adequately determined； and from it
must be deduced what should be excluded from the history of Philosophy out of the infinite
material and the manifold aspects of the intellectual culture of the nations。 Religion； certainly； and
the thoughts contained in and regarding it； particularly when these are in the form of mythology；
are； on account of their matter； and the sciences with their ideas on the state； duties and laws； on
account of their form； so near Philosophy that the history of the science of Philosophy threatens to
become quite indefinite in extent。 It might be supposed that the history of Philosophy should take
account of all these ideas。 Has not everything been called Philosophy and philosophising？ On the
one hand； the close connection has to be further considered in which Philosophy stands with its
allied subjects； religion； art； the other sciences； and likewise with political history。 On the other
hand； when the province of Philosophy has been correctly defined； we reach； with the
determination of what Philosophy is and what pertains to it； the starting…point of its history； which
must be distinguished from the commencements of religious ideas and mere thoughtful conjectures。
From the idea of the subject which is contained in these first two points of view； it is necessary to
pass on to the consideration of the third point； to the general review of this history and to the
division of its progress into natural periods…such an arrangement to exhibit it as an organic；
progressive whole； as a rational connection through which this history attains the dignity of a
science。 And I will not occupy further space with reflections on the use of the history of
Philosophy； and other methods of treating it。 The use is evident。 But； in conclusion； I wish to
consider the sources of the history of Philosophy； for this is customary。
Introduction
A。 The Notion of the History of Philosophy。
THE thought which may first occur to us in the history of Philosophy； is that the subject itself
contains an inner contradiction。 For Philosophy aims at understanding what is unchangeable；
eternal； in and for itself： its end is Truth。 But history tells us of that which has at one time existed； at
another time has vanished； having been expelled by something else。 Truth is eternal； it does not fall
within the sphere of the transient； and has no history。 But if it has a history； and as this history is
only the representation of a succession of past forms of knowledge； the truth is not to be found in
it； for the truth cannot be what has passed away。
It might be said that all this argument would affect not only the other sciences； but in like decree
the Christian religion； and it might be found inconsistent that a history of this religion and of the
other sciences should exist； but it would be superfluous further to examine this argument； for it is
immediately contradicted by the very fact that there are such histories。 But in order to get a better
understanding of this apparent contradiction； we must distinguish between the outward history of a
religion or a science and the history of the subject itself。 And then we must take into account that
the history of Philosophy because of the special nature of its subject…matter； is different from other
histories。 It is at once evident that the contradiction in question could not refer to the outward
history； but merely to the inward； or that of the content itself。 There is a history of the spread of
Christianity and of the lives of those who have avowed it； and its existence has formed itself into
that of a Church。 This in itself constitutes an external existence such that being brought into contact
with temporal affairs of the most diverse kind； its lot is a varied one； and it essentially possesses a
history。 And of the Christian doctrine it is true that it； too； has its history； but it necessarily soon
reached its full development and attained to its appointed powers。 And this old creed has been an
acknowledged influence to every age； and will still be acknowledged unchanged as the Truth； even
though this acknowledgment were become no more than a pretence； and the words an empty
form。 But the history of this doctrine in its wider sense includes two elements： first the various
additions to and deviations from the truth formerly established； and secondly the combating of
these errors； the purification of the principles that remain from such additions； and a consequent
return to their first simplicity。
The other sciences； including Philosophy； have also an external history like Religion。 Philosophy
has a history of its origin； diffusion； maturity； decay； revival； a history of its teachers； promoters；
and of its opponents…often too； of an outward relation to religion and occasionally to the State。
This side of its history likewise gives occasion to interesting questions。 Amongst other such； it is
asked why Philosophy； the doctrine of absolute Truth； seems to have revealed itself on the whole
to a small number of individuals； to special nations； and how it has limited itself to particular
periods of time。 Similarly with respect to Christianity； to the Truth in a much more universal form
than the philosophical； a difficulty has been encountered in respect to the question whether there is
a contradiction in the fact that this religion should have appeared so late in time； and that it should
have remained so long and should still remain limited to special races of men。 But these and other
similar questions are too much a matter of detail to depend merely on the general conflict referred
to； and when we have further touched upon the peculiar character of philosophic knowledge； we
may go more specially into the aspects which relate to the external existence and external history
of Philosophy。
But as regards the comparison between the history of Religion and that of Philosophy as to inner
content； there is not in the latter as there is in Religion a fixed and fundamental truth which； as
unchangeable； is apart from history。 The content of Christianity； which is Truth； has； however；
remained unaltered as such； and has therefore little history or as good as none。 （2） Hence in
Religion； on account of its very nature as Christianity； the conflict referred to disappears。 The
errors and additions constitute no difficulty。 They are transitory and altogether historical in
character。
The other sciences； indeed； have also according to their content a History； a part of which relates
to alterations； and the renunciation of tenets which were formerly current。 But a great； perhaps the
greater； part of the history relates to what has proved permanent； so that what was new； was not
an alteration on earlier acquisitions； but an addition to them。 These sciences progress through a
process of juxtaposition。 It is true that in Botany； Mineralogy； and so on； much is dependent on
what was previously known； but by far th