through the emotional and instinctive parts of our
nature. It is the presence of the moral law or
categorical imperative within us that points to a
spiritual world beyond the phenomenal causal order
and assures us of our freedom, immortality, and God.
It is because we possess this deeper source of truth
in practical reason that freedom and an ideal kingdom
in which purpose reigns are vouchsafed to us, and
that we can free ourselves from the mechanism of the
natural order. It is moral truth that both sets
us free and demonstrates our freedom, and that makes
harmony possible between the mechanical theory of
science and the teleological conception of philosophy.
The scientific understanding would plunge us into
determinism and agnosticism; from these, faith in
the moral law alone can deliver us. In this sense
Kant destroyed knowledge to make room for a rational
faith in a supersensible world, to save the independence
and dignity of the human self and the spiritual values
of his people. In claiming a place for the autonomous
personality in what appeared to be a mechanical
universe, Kant gave voice to some of the deeper yearnings
of the age. The German Enlightenment, the new
humanism, mysticism, pietism, and the faith-philosophy
were all interested in the human soul, and unwilling
to sacrifice it to the demands of a rationalistic science
or metaphysics. In seeking to rescue it, the
great criticist, piloted by the moral law, steered
his course between the rocks of rationalism, sentimentalism,
and scepticism. It was his solution of the controversy
between the head and the heart that influenced Fichte,
Schelling, and Schleiermacher. They differed
from Kant and among themselves in many respects, but
they all glorified the spirit, Geist, as the
living, active element of reality, and they all rejected
the intellect as the source of ultimate truth.
They followed him in his anti-intellectualism, but
they did not avoid, as he did, the attractive doctrine
of an inner intuition; according to them we can somehow
grasp the supersensible in an inner experience which
Fichte called intellectual, Schelling artistic, Schleiermacher
religious. The bankruptcy of the intelligence
was overcome in their systems by the discovery of
a faculty that revealed to them the living, dynamic
nature of the universe. They were all more or
less influenced by the romantic currents of the times,
seeking with Herder and Jacobi an approach to the
heart of things other than through the categories
of logic. Like Lessing and Goethe, they were also
attracted to the pantheistic teaching of Spinoza,
though rejecting its rigid determinism so far as it
might affect the human will. They likewise accepted
the idea of development which the leaders of German
literature, Lessing, Herder, and Goethe, had already
opposed to the unhistorical Aufklaerung, and
which came to play such a prominent part in the great
system of Hegel.