Editing Jakob Friedrich Fries (section)

==Biography==
Fries studied [[theology]] at the academy of the [[Moravian Church|Moravian Brethren]] at [[Niesky]] and [[philosophy]] at the Universities of [[University of Leipzig|Leipzig]] and [[University of Jena|Jena]]. After travelling, in 1806 he became [[professor]] of philosophy and elementary [[mathematics]] at the [[University of Heidelberg]].<ref name=EB1911>{{EB1911|wstitle=Fries, Jakob Friedrich |volume=11 |pages=229–230 |inline=1}}</ref>

Though the progress of his [[psychological]] thought compelled him to abandon the [[positive theology]] of the Moravians, he retained an appreciation of its spiritual or symbolic significance. His philosophical position with regard to his contemporaries had already been made clear in his critical work ''Reinhold, Fichte und Schelling'' (1803),<ref>A comparative study of [[Karl Leonhard Reinhold]], [[Johann Gottlieb Fichte]] and [[Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling]].</ref> and in the more systematic treatises ''System der Philosophie als evidente Wissenschaft'' (1804) and ''Wissen, Glaube und Ahnung'' (1805).<ref name=EB1911/>

Fries' most important treatise, the ''Neue oder anthropologische Kritik der Vernunft'' (2nd ed., 1828–1831), was an attempt to give a new foundation of psychological analysis to the [[critical philosophy]] of [[Immanuel Kant]]. In 1811 he published his ''System der Logik'' (ed. 1819 and 1837), and in 1814 ''Julius und Evagoras'', a philosophical [[Romantic novel|romance]].<ref name=EB1911/> He was also anti-semitic, writing public polemics against [[Jews]], and in 1816 wrote ''Ueber<!--[sic]--> die Gefährdung des Wohlstandes und des Charakters der Deutschen durch die Juden'' (''On the Danger Posed by the Jews to German Well-Being and Character''), advocating among other things a distinct sign on the dress of Jews to distinguish them from the general population, and encouraging their emigration from German lands. He blamed the Jews for the ascendant role of money in society and called for Judaism to be "extirpated root and branch" from German society.

In 1816 he was invited to Jena to fill the chair of [[theoretical philosophy]] (including mathematics, [[physics]], and philosophy proper), and entered upon a crusade against the prevailing [[Romanticism]]. In [[politics]] he was a strong [[Liberal (politics)|Liberal]] and [[German unification|Unionist]], and he did much to inspire the organization of the [[Burschenschaft]]. He also published a pamphlet calling for the exclusion of the Jews from public life in Germany. In 1816 he had published his views in a brochure, ''Von deutschem Bund und deutscher Staatsverfassung'', dedicated to "the youth of Germany", and his influence gave a powerful impetus to the agitation which led in 1819 to the issue of the [[Carlsbad Decrees]] by the representatives of the German governments.<ref name=EB1911/>

[[Karl Ludwig Sand|Karl Sand]], the murderer of [[August von Kotzebue]], was one of Fries's pupils; and a letter of his, found on another student, warning Sand against participation in secret societies, was twisted by the suspicious authorities into evidence of Fries' conspiracy. He was condemned by the [[Mainz Commission]]; the [[Charles Augustus, Grand Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach|Grand Duke of Weimar]] was compelled to deprive him of his professorship; and he was forbidden to lecture on philosophy. The grand duke, however, continued to pay him his stipend, and in 1824 he was recalled to Jena as professor of mathematics and physics, receiving permission also to lecture on philosophy in his own rooms to a select number of students. Finally, in 1838, the unrestricted right of lecturing was restored to him.<ref name=EB1911/>

Fries was involved in a dispute with the contemporary German philosopher [[G. W. F. Hegel]]. In the preface to his ''[[Philosophy of Right]]'', Hegel criticised Fries' participation in student events and his role in the ''[[Burschenschaft]]''. In Hegel's view, Fries was dependent upon "immediate perception and contingent imagination";<ref>G. W. F. Hegel, ''Elements of the Philosophy of Right'', Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991, pp. 15–6</ref> his views were emotional rather than rational. Hegel argued that Fries' methodology was not sufficiently scientific and that, therefore, his conclusions were illogical. Fries responded by accusing Hegel of defending the existing order and his own privileged position within it. He argued that "Hegel's metaphysical mushroom has grown not in the gardens of science but on the dunghill of servility."<ref>J. F. Fries, Letter of 6 January 1821 in Gunther Nicolin, ''Hegel in Berichten seiner Zeitgenossen'', Felix Meiner, Hamburg, 1970, p. 221.</ref> For Fries, Hegel's theories merely added up to a defence of the establishment and, specifically, the [[Kingdom of Prussia|Prussian]] authorities.