has gone beyond it indeed。 If this is made our starting point in the history of Philosophy； its whole
significance will consist in finding； out the particular ideas of others； each one of which is different
from the other： these individual points of view are thus foreign to me： my thinking reason is not
free； nor is it present in them： for me they are but extraneous； dead historic matter； or so much
empty content； and to satisfy oneself with empty vanity is mere subjective vanity itself。
To the impartial man； the Truth has always been a heart…stirring word and one of great import。 As
to the assertion that the Truth cannot be known； we shall consider it more closely in the history of
Philosophy itself where it appears。 The only thing to be here remarked is that if this assumption be
allowed； as was the case with Tennemann； it is beyond conception why anyone should still trouble
about Philosophy； since each opinion asserts falsely in its turn that it has found the truth。 This
immediately recalls to me the old belief that Truth consists in knowledge； but that an individual only
knows the Truth in so far as he reflects and not as he walks and stands： and that the Truth cannot
be known in immediate apprehension and perception； whether it be external and sensuous； or
whether it be intellectual perception （for every perception as a perception is sensuous） but only
through the labour of thought。
b。 Proof of the futility of Philosophical Knowledge obtained through the
History of Philosophy itself。
From another point of view another consequence ensues from the above conception of the history
of Philosophy which may at will be looked at as an evil or a benefit。 In view of such manifold
opinions and philosophical systems so numerous； one is perplexed to know which one ought to be
accepted。 In regard to the great matters to which man is attracted and a knowledge of which
Philosophy would bestow； it is evident that the greatest minds have erred； because they have been
contradicted by others。 〃Since； this has been so with minds so great； how then can ego homuncio
attempt to form a judgment？〃 This consequence； which ensues from the diversity in philosophical
systems； is； as may be supposed； the evil in the matter； while at the same time it is a subjective
good。 For this diversity is the usual plea urged by those who； with an air of knowledge； wish to
make a show of interest in Philosophy； to explain the fact that they； with this pretence of good…will；
and； indeed； with added motive； for working at the science； do in fact utterly neglect it。 But this
diversity in philosophical systems is far from being merely an evasive plea。 It has far more weight
as a genuine serious ground of argument against the zeal which Philosophy requires。 It justifies its
neglect and demonstrates conclusively the powerlessness of the endeavour to attain to philosophic
knowledge of the truth。 When it is admitted that Philosophy ought to be a real science； and one
Philosophy must certainly be the true； the question arises as to which Philosophy it is； and when it
can be known。 Each one asserts its genuineness； each even gives different signs and tokens by
which the Truth can be discovered； sober reflective thought must therefore hesitate to give its
judgment。
This； then； is the wider interest which the history of Philosophy is said to afford。 Cicero （De
natura Deorum I。 8 sq。） gives us from this point of view； a most slovenly history of philosophic
thought on God。 He puts it in the mouth of an Epicurean； but he himself knew of nothing more
favourable to say； and it is thus his own view。 The Epicurean says that no certain knowledge has
been arrived at。 The proof that the efforts of philosophy are futile is derived directly from the usual
superficial view taken of its history； the results attendant on that history make it appear to be a
process in which the most various thoughts arise in numerous philosophies； each of which
opposes； contradicts and refutes the other。 This fact； which cannot be denied； seems to contain
the justification； indeed the necessity for applying to Philosophy the words of Christ； 〃Let the dead
bury their dead； arise； and follow Me。〃 The whole of the history of Philosophy becomes a
battlefield covered with the bones of the dead； it is a kingdom not merely formed of dead and
lifeless individuals； but of refuted and spiritually dead systems； since each has killed and buried the
other。 Instead of 〃Follow thou Me；〃 here then it must indeed be said； 〃Follow thine own self 〃…that
is； hold by thine own convictions； remain steadfast to thine own opinion； why adopt another？
It certainly happens that a new philosophy makes its appearance； which maintains the others to be
valueless； and indeed each one in turn comes forth at first with the pretext that by its means all
previous philosophies not only are refuted； but what in them is wanting is supplied； and now at
length the right one is discovered。 But following upon what has gone before； it would rather seem
that other words of Scripture are just as applicable to such a philosophy…the words which the
Apostle Peter spoke to Ananias； 〃Behold the feet of them that shall carry thee out are at the door。〃
Behold the philosophy by which thine own will be refuted and displaced shall not tarry long as it
has not tarried before。
c。 Explanatory remarks on the diversity in Philosophies。
Certainly the fact is sufficiently well established that there are and have been different philosophies。
The Truth is； however； one； and the instinct of reason maintains this irradicable intuition or belief。 It
is said that only one Philosophy can be true； and； because philosophies are different； it is
concluded that all others must be erroneous。 But； in fact； each one in turn gives every assurance；
evidence and proof of being the one and true Philosophy。 This is a common mode of reasoning
and is what seems in truth to be the view of sober thought。 As regards the sober nature of the
word at issue…thought…we can tell from everyday experience that if we fast we feel hunger either at
once or very soon。 But sober thought always has the fortunate power of not resulting in hunger
and desire； but of being and remaining as it is； content。 Hence the thought expressed in such an
utterance reveals the fact that it is dead understanding； for it is only death which fasts and yet rests
satisfied。 But neither physical life nor intellectual remains content with mere abstention； as desire it
presses on through hunger and through thirst towards Truth； towards knowledge itself。 It presses
on to satisfy this desire and does not allow itself to feast and find sufficiency in a reflection such as
this。
As to this reflection； the next thing to be said of it is that however different the philosophies have
been； they had a common bond in that they were Philosophy。 Thus whoever may have studied or
become acquainted with a philosophy； of whatever kind； provided only that it is such； has thereby
become acquainted with Philosophy。 That delusive mode of reasoning which regards diversity
alone； and from doubt of or aversion to the particular form in which a Universal finds its actuality；
will not grasp or even allow this universal nature； I have elsewhere （4） likened to an invalid
recommended by the doctor to eat fruit； and who has cherries； plums or grapes； before him； but
who pedantically refuses to take anything because no part of what is offered him is fruit； some of it
being cherries； and the rest plums or grapes。
But it is really important to have a deeper insight into the bearings of this diversity in the systems of
Philosophy。 Truth and Philosophy known philosophically； make such diversity appear in another
light from that of abstract opposition between Truth and Error。 The explanation of how this comes
about will reveal to us the significance of the whole history of Philosophy。 We must make the fact
conceivable； that the diversity and number of philosophies not only does not prejudice Philosophy
itself； that is to say the possibility of a philosophy； but that such diversity is； and has been；
absolutely necessary to the existence of a science of Philosophy and that it is essential to it。
This makes it easy to us to comprehend the aim of Philosophy； which is in thought and in
conception to grasp the Truth； and not merely to discover that nothing can be known； or that at
least temporal； finite truth； which also is an untruth； can alone be known and not the Truth indeed。
Further we find that in the history of Philosophy we have to deal with Philosophy itself。 The facts
within that history are not adventures and contain no more romance than does the history of the
world。 They are not a mere collection of chance events； of expeditions of wandering knights； each
going about fighting； struggling purposelessly； leaving no results to show for all his efforts。 Nor is it
so that one thing has been thought out here； another there； at will； in the activity of thinking mind
there is real connection； and what there takes place is rational。 It is with this belief in the spirit of
the world that we must proceed to history； and in particular to the history of Philos