An unorthodox view of 19th century German idealism

Immanuel Kant is a giant in the history of philosophy. He is remembered as the leading exponent of deontological ethics; as the inventor of a sort of transcendental idealism that breaks both with Plato's objective and Berkeley's subjective idealism; and a proponent of keeping Christianity within the realm of reason (a determination that really ticked off poor Kierkegaard, among others.)

G.W.F. Hegel is another giant. He is remembered for sticking yet another modifier in front of "idealism." No objective, subjective, or transcendental -- it is Absolute Idealism that was his brand.

The line from Kant to Hegel is contested terrain. The figures in between, especially Fichte and Schelling, are generally treated as exactly that, as in between figures, as transitions. Historians of 19th century German idealism debate how those intermediaries brought Kantianism to the point of becoming Hegelianism.

Markus Gabriel has a different view. In his 2013 book, TRANSCENDENTAL ONTOLOGY, Gabriel argued that Kant was a "formative" figure, who must be remembered for the door he opened. So far, so good, Hegel's admirers will say. But Gabriel also argues that Fichte and Schelling are almost miraculously profound -- they did what could be done for post-Kantian idealism -- they represent not some transition to its best but indeed Its Best. Hegel is no longer paramount, he is a figure of decline, a sign that this particular golden age is over.

A nice comeuppance for Hegel.

That, by the way, is a photo of Gabriel.