456 JOURNAL or THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 25:3 JULY 198 7 The discussion opens with an able account of Kant's transcendental approach to the philosophy of nature, followed by a description of Fichte's reaction to it. There then follow three chapters, concerning respectively: the constitution of external objectivity from the transcendental perspective of the Wissenschaftslehre, the construction on that basis of an objective external world, and the relation of organic nature to a reflective theory of judgment. A fourth chapter discusses the concept of freedom which follows from this idealist angle of vision. The fifth chapter offers a general summary of the entire theory of nature in useful fashion as well as a series of conclusions. Finally, there is an Appendix (Anhang) devoted to the differences in the views of the philosophy of nature of Fichte and his erstwhile student Schelling. The double purpose of this appendix is to show that Fichte was misunderstood on this point by Schelling and, further, to demonstrate that the speculative form of the philosophy of nature elaborated by the latter and followed by Hegel is not tenable. In my opinion, the book is carefully organized, well argued, highly original, and of real importance. This book makes contributions on more than one level, which can be quickly differentiated as follows. To begin with, this is clearly a masterly examination of the Fichtean position and an extension of it by a leading specialist. Second, it reopens an issue, the philosophy of nature, long considered closed, but upon which the post-Fichtean evolution of German idealism in the thought of Schelling and Hegel clearly turns. This later development, which is in large part predicated upon the absence in Fichte's thought of a viable approach to nature, is shown to be incorrect . Lauth here draws together numerous specific indications in Fichte's writings in coherent form. Third, the author goes a long way towards a successful argument for the viability of Fichte's own transcendental approach to the philosophy of nature in opposition to the speculative line followed by Schelling and Hegel. This point is doubly interesting: in itself, in relation to the viability of the transcendental perspective espoused by Kant and Fichte; and because recently a number of important Hegel scholars, including H. S. Harris, J. N. Findlay, and Errol Harris, have suggested that Hegel's philosophy of nature remains one of the most useful sides of his thought. Lauth's skillful argument seems to contradict that opinion by focussing attention on an approach which Hegel explicitly rejected, and which he may have misunderstood. Finally, this work tends to rehabilitate another form of philosophy of science, currently out of fashion, but not necessarily devoid of interest. TOM ROCKMORE Universit~ Laval Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. Hegel: The Letters. Translated by Clark Butler and Christiane Seiler with Commentary by Clark Butler. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984. xv + 74~ pp. $47.5o. This fascinating book contains translations of all the letters from Hegel in the latest Hoffmeister edition, plus a few pieces not strictly epistolary nor written for publication ; some selections from letters to Hegel; and a narrative commentary connecting BOOK REVIEWS 457 the letters to each other and providing a well-rounded picture of Hegel's character, circle, and career. The letters are arranged by subject matter. Although this occasions some arbitrary assignments of letters to one chapter rather than another, it facilitates the narrative commentary. While the commentary is copious, it is not accompanied by sufficient specific explanatory notes, and we receive little help in understanding some specific contents of the letters. A not untypical passage like this remains titillatingly obscure: "But what has fate dealt one of the members, our friend [Karl] Breyer? A bridegroom of the heavenly bride, of the Academy, he lusted for an earthly wife as well, but finds himself restricted merely to the former. What a loss: 8o,ooo florins, not counting the wife!" (136). Perhaps the reader may think such matters beneath notice. But since so much of Hegel's correspondence is made up of this kind of thing--ironical comments, complaints about money, praise or abuse of common acquaintances, political stringpulling and job hunting, and plain gossily...