Idealism

1. Introduction

Idealism is a family of philosophical positions that, in different ways, make mind, ideas, or forms of cognition central to the nature or knowability of reality. While there is no single doctrine shared by all idealists, the traditions grouped under this label agree that reality cannot be adequately understood as a purely mind-independent, inert material domain.

Historians of philosophy typically distinguish several major strands:

• Subjective (or immaterialist) idealism, associated especially with George Berkeley, maintains that only minds and their ideas truly exist, and that what are called “material objects” are collections of perceptions coordinated in a lawful way.
• Transcendental idealism, most influentially formulated by Immanuel Kant, argues that space, time, and the basic categories of thought are a priori forms that structure all possible experience. We can know objects only as they appear under these forms, not as they may be “in themselves.”
• Absolute and objective idealism, developed by German thinkers such as Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel and later by British and American philosophers, construes reality as an internally related, rational or spiritual whole—often called Spirit (Geist) or the Absolute—in which finite minds and nature are moments.

Across these varieties, idealists typically link metaphysical claims to views about knowledge, value, and freedom. Many hold that the conditions that make experience and science possible also constrain what counts as real; others claim that the ultimate ground of being is a form of self-conscious spirit or reason. Idealism has thereby provided influential accounts of logic, ethics, religion, art, and political institutions.

Critics have frequently opposed idealism to materialism or realism, arguing that it either denies the existence of a mind-independent world or illegitimately infers features of reality from features of thought. Idealists, in turn, have contended that their positions better explain objectivity, normativity, and the unity of experience.

The following sections trace the development of idealist doctrines from their historical precursors through early modern and German Idealism to later revivals and contemporary debates, while examining their central metaphysical, epistemological, ethical, and political claims and the principal criticisms they have faced.

2. Etymology of the Name "Idealism"

The term “idealism” derives from Latin idea (from Greek ἰδέα, idéa, “form,” “appearance,” or “look”) combined with the abstract-noun suffix “-ism”, indicating a doctrinal stance that privileges ideas or the mental. The label emerged gradually and was initially used in varying and sometimes conflicting ways.

In early modern philosophy, writers often contrasted “idealists” with “materialists” or “realists,” sometimes using “idealism” to mark any view emphasizing representations or ideas in the mind. The Greek-rooted neologism “ἰδεαλισμός” (idealismós) is largely a scholarly back-formation, standardized much later in philosophical historiography.

The German term Idealismus became central in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, especially in connection with Kant and the so‑called German Idealists. Kant himself distinguished between:

• “Transcendentaler Idealismus” (transcendental idealism) – his own doctrine about our mode of cognition; and
• “Empirischer Realismus” – the claim that objects of experience are real within the framework of appearances.

He also rejected what he called “empirischer Idealismus” (e.g., skepticism about the external world) and distanced his view from Berkeleyan immaterialism, which he labeled “dogmatischer Idealismus.”

Later, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel embraced or reinterpreted the term Idealismus to describe systems in which reality is fundamentally spiritual, rational, or grounded in the activity of the “I” or of Geist. In the 19th century, “German Idealism” became a retrospective label for these movements.

In English-language philosophy, “idealism” was popularized in the 19th century, especially through British Idealism. It came to denote not only German-style absolute idealism but also broader positions holding that ultimate reality is mental or that the structure of reality is inseparable from the structure of thought.

Modern usage remains polysemous. In philosophical taxonomy, “idealism” may refer narrowly to classical metaphysical systems (Berkeley, Hegel, Bradley) or more broadly to any view that gives mind, reason, or experiential form a constitutive role in what can count as real or knowable.

3. Historical Origins and Early Precursors

Although the systematic doctrines called “idealism” are largely early modern and post‑Kantian, many historians identify ancient and medieval precursors that anticipate key themes.

Platonic and Neoplatonic Sources

The most commonly cited precursor is Plato, whose theory of Forms posits immaterial, intelligible entities as the most real and as standards for knowledge and value. While modern idealists often reject a separate realm of Forms, they take from Plato the idea that reality is fundamentally intelligible and that the sensible world depends on non‑material structures.

Later Neoplatonism (e.g., Plotinus) developed a hierarchical ontology culminating in “the One” or Intellect, from which the sensible world emanates. This spiritualized metaphysics, emphasizing the primacy of the intelligible over the material, influenced Christian, Islamic, and Jewish thought and is frequently treated as an important background to modern idealism.

Christian Platonism and Augustinian Thought

In late antique and medieval Christian theology, especially in Augustine, reality is conceived as grounded in the divine mind, with created things exemplifying ideas in God. Augustine’s emphasis on inner experience and divine illumination as a source of certainty has often been seen as an early form of “inwardness” compatible with later idealist concerns about subjectivity and self-knowledge.

Medieval thinkers such as Anselm and some scholastics developed ontological arguments and theories of divine ideas that prioritize the intelligible and the normative over brute material facts, though they typically combined this with robust doctrines of creation and incarnation rather than a denial of matter.

Rationalism and Early Modern Antecedents

Early modern rationalists like Leibniz and Malebranche are frequently cited as direct precursors:

• Leibniz’s monadology interprets substances as centers of perception and appetite, not as extended material things, foreshadowing later panpsychist and idealist tendencies.
• Malebranche’s doctrine that we “see all things in God” makes our cognitive access to the world dependent on divine ideas.

These thinkers do not typically call themselves “idealists,” but later idealists and commentators have read their metaphysics as moving away from substance-based materialism toward a mind- or idea-centered conception of reality.

Non‑Western Parallels (as Precursors, Not Sources)

Some scholars have also noted affinities between Western idealism and traditions such as Advaita Vedānta in Indian philosophy or certain strands of Buddhist Yogācāra, which posit a fundamental consciousness or stress the mind-dependence of phenomena. However, direct historical influence on early modern European idealists is debated, and these parallels are generally treated as comparative rather than genealogical.

4. Early Modern Idealism and Immaterialism

Early modern philosophy introduced explicit doctrines that later came to be classified as idealism, especially in the form of immaterialism.

Berkeley’s Subjective Idealism

The central early modern figure is George Berkeley (1685–1753). In works such as A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge and Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous, he advances immaterialism, the thesis that material substance does not exist. For Berkeley:

• Only spirits (active minds) and their ideas (passive objects of perception) exist.
• “Material objects” are bundles of ideas—collections of sensory perceptions unified by being perceived.
• The apparent stability and intersubjectivity of the world are explained by God’s continuous perception of all things.

He encapsulates his view with the formula esse est percipi (“to be is to be perceived”), emphasizing that the being of sensible things consists in their being perceived by some mind.

Proponents interpret Berkeley as offering both a metaphysical thesis—denial of material substance—and an epistemological critique of abstract matter, arguing that we never encounter matter apart from perceptions and hence have no basis for positing it.

Other Early Modern Idealist Tendencies

While Berkeley is the paradigmatic early modern idealist, other thinkers articulated idealistic elements:

• Malebranche (1638–1715) claimed that we “see all things in God,” suggesting that our ideas represent objects by participating in divine ideas.
• Leibniz (1646–1716) characterized basic substances as monads, each a non‑extended, perceiving entity, with the material world emerging from their coordinated perceptions.
• Some Cambridge Platonists combined Christian theism with a robust reality of ideas and emphasized the dependence of the material on divine reason.

However, many of these authors did not themselves adopt the label “idealist,” and their systems retain robust notions of created nature, matter, or external reality, albeit reinterpreted through a mentalistic or spiritual lens.

Responses and Early Critiques

Berkeley’s immaterialism prompted significant criticism, especially from common‑sense realists such as Thomas Reid, who argued that denying the existence of matter contradicts ordinary belief and undermines trust in perception. Others contended that Berkeley’s reliance on God’s perceptions simply relocated, rather than solved, metaphysical questions about the world’s existence.

These debates laid important groundwork for Kant, who sought to chart a path between dogmatic idealism (as he understood Berkeley) and materialism or naive realism, thereby inaugurating transcendental idealism.

5. Kant and Transcendental Idealism

Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) developed transcendental idealism as part of his “critical” project, primarily in the Critique of Pure Reason (1781/1787). His position is central to later understandings of idealism.

The Transcendental Turn

Kant’s method is “transcendental”: he asks what conditions of possibility must obtain for experience and scientific knowledge to be possible. Rather than inferring properties of things from introspection alone, he analyzes the structures of cognition—sensibility, understanding, and reason.

He argues that space and time are not properties of things-in-themselves but a priori forms of intuition through which we necessarily perceive anything:

"

“Space is not an empirical concept… it must therefore be originally intuition.”
— Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, A23/B38

Similarly, the understanding applies a priori categories (such as causality, substance, and unity) to the manifold of intuition, thereby constituting objects of possible experience.

Phenomena and Things-in-Themselves

Kant’s central thesis of transcendental idealism holds that:

• We can have knowledge only of phenomena—objects as they appear under the forms of intuition and categories.
• Things-in-themselves (Dinge an sich), although posited as the ground of appearances, are unknowable in their intrinsic nature.

He combines this with “empirical realism”, maintaining that within the bounds of experience, objects are as real as science describes them.

Synthetic A Priori Knowledge

Transcendental idealism is designed to explain the possibility of synthetic a priori judgments, such as those of mathematics and Newtonian physics. Because the mind contributes the basic forms and categories, the structures described by these sciences apply necessarily to all possible experience.

Kant’s Relation to Other Idealisms

Kant distinguishes his view from both:

• Berkeleyan idealism, which he interprets as collapsing external objects into mental ideas; and
• Skeptical idealism (e.g., Descartes’s evil demon scenario), which doubts the existence of an external world.

He insists that his idealism is transcendental (about the way we must represent objects) rather than empirical (about what exists), and that it secures rather than undermines the reality of experience.

Later interpreters disagree on whether Kant is best read as an ontological idealist (about the fundamental nature of reality) or as a “two‑aspect” theorist who merely distinguishes two standpoints—appearance and thing‑in‑itself—on one and the same world. These interpretive controversies shaped the development of German Idealism, as Kant’s successors sought either to radicalize or to overcome the dualism of appearances and things‑in‑themselves.

6. German Idealism: Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel

German Idealism designates a series of systems that developed from Kant’s critical philosophy, roughly between 1790 and 1830, and sought to resolve what were perceived as tensions in transcendental idealism, especially the dualism of phenomena and things-in-themselves.

Fichte: The Primacy of the I

Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762–1814) reformulates Kant’s project as a “Wissenschaftslehre” (doctrine of science) that begins with the self‑positing I. For Fichte:

• The I (Ego) posits both itself and the not‑I (world) as limits to its activity.
• Reality is conceived fundamentally as the activity of the I, with the external world understood as a necessary structure within self-consciousness.

Fichte emphasizes practical reason and moral striving: the I’s encounter with resistance in the not‑I is interpreted as the arena for ethical self‑realization. Critics sometimes characterize his stance as subjective idealism, though Fichte insists that the I is not an individual person but a transcendental subject.

Schelling: Objective Idealism and Nature

Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling (1775–1854) develops several phases of philosophy, often termed objective idealism or philosophy of identity. Responding to what he sees as an overemphasis on subjectivity in Fichte, Schelling argues that:

• Nature must itself be understood as “visible spirit,” exhibiting rational structures and dynamic forces.
• Mind and nature are two expressions of a deeper identity or absolute.

In his Naturphilosophie, Schelling interprets natural phenomena as stages in the self‑development of the Absolute, blurring the distinction between the mental and the physical. Later, he turns toward a more theistic and existential interpretation of the Absolute, stressing freedom and contingency.

Hegel: Absolute Idealism and Geist

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831) elaborates the most influential and ambitious form of absolute idealism. In works such as the Phenomenology of Spirit and Science of Logic, he argues that:

• Reality is fundamentally rational and structured by conceptual determinations.
• The development of Geist (Spirit) unfolds historically through stages of consciousness, social institutions, and thought, culminating in Absolute Knowing.

Hegel’s famed dialectical method presents concepts as developing through internal tensions and contradictions toward more comprehensive unities. He rejects Kant’s unknowable thing‑in‑itself, holding instead that the Absolute becomes fully actual and intelligible through its self‑manifestation in nature, history, art, religion, and philosophy.

German Idealism strongly influenced 19th‑century metaphysics, theology, and political theory, and it provided both a model and a target for later movements such as Marxism, existentialism, Neo‑Kantianism, and analytic philosophy.

7. Core Doctrines and Metaphysical Views

Idealism encompasses various systems, but certain metaphysical themes recur across its major forms.

Mind-Dependence and the Nature of Reality

Many idealists claim that reality is in some sense mind‑dependent or idea‑like:

• Subjective idealism (e.g., Berkeley) holds that only minds and their ideas exist; physical objects are either collections of perceptions or regularities in experience grounded in a divine mind.
• Absolute idealism (e.g., Hegel, Bradley) maintains that all finite things are moments of an all‑encompassing spiritual or rational whole—often called the Absolute or Spirit—that is self‑developing and self‑knowing.
• Objective idealism (e.g., Schelling, some neo‑Hegelians) construes ideas, categories, or rational structures as real and as immanent in both nature and mind.

Not all idealists deny a world independent of individual human minds; many instead argue that such a world is grounded in, or only intelligible through, universal structures of thought or a supra‑individual mind.

The Relation of Subject and Object

A distinctive metaphysical claim of many idealists is that subject and object are internally related. Rather than seeing the knower and the known as wholly independent substances, idealists often hold that:

• Objects are constituted as such through the forms of cognition or spirit.
• The subject, in becoming self‑conscious, necessarily relates to an objective world and to other subjects.

In absolute idealism, this mutual dependence is radicalized: the ultimate reality is a self‑relating whole in which distinctions between subject and object are moments in a larger unity.

Logic, Structure, and Holism

Idealist metaphysics often exhibits a strong holistic and structural orientation:

• For Hegelian panlogism, what is real is ultimately conceptual; the categories of logic are also structures of being.
• Many idealists link truth and reality to systematic coherence within a rational totality, rather than to simple one‑to‑one correspondence with isolated facts.

This encourages a tendency toward system‑building, in which metaphysics, logic, nature, mind, and society are integrated into a single comprehensive scheme.

Variations and Internal Disputes

Idealists disagree over:

• Whether mind‑dependence is epistemic (about what can be known) or ontological (about what exists).
• Whether the fundamental mind is personal (e.g., God, a society of persons) or impersonal (e.g., an Absolute or rational structure).
• How to understand nature—as mere appearance, as a manifestation of spirit, or as a co‑fundamental aspect of reality.

These internal debates shape the distinctions among transcendental, subjective, absolute, objective, and personal idealisms.

8. Epistemological Commitments of Idealism

Idealist traditions are unified as much by epistemological commitments as by metaphysical theses. Central is the claim that knowledge is not a mere passive mirroring of an independent world, but involves active structures of mind.

Mind-Dependence of Objectivity

Most idealists reject naive or direct realism in which objects are said simply to impress themselves upon the mind. Instead, they emphasize:

• The role of concepts, categories, or forms of intuition in organizing sensory input (as in Kant’s account of the understanding).
• The idea that what counts as an object is inseparable from the ways in which it can be experienced, described, and thought.

For transcendental idealists, this leads to the view that we can know objects only as they appear under human cognitive conditions. For absolute idealists, genuine knowledge approximates the standpoint of the whole, integrating partial perspectives into a coherent system.

Synthetic A Priori and Conditions of Knowledge

Kantian and post‑Kantian idealists typically affirm the existence of a priori knowledge that is not purely analytic. They argue that:

• Certain fundamental principles (e.g., causal order, mathematical structure) are necessary conditions of any possible experience.
• These principles are “constitutive”: they do not merely describe how we happen to think but help determine what can count as an experienced world.

Idealists extend this analysis beyond perception to domains such as ethics, law, and science, interpreting their norms as grounded in the rationality of thought or spirit.

Self-Consciousness and Intersubjectivity

Many idealists stress the epistemic importance of self-consciousness:

• To know, a subject must be capable of reflecting on its own cognitive acts, not just being affected by stimuli.
• In Fichte and Hegel, self-consciousness is essentially intersubjective; recognition by others is a condition for fully objective knowledge.

This leads to strong claims about the interplay between individual minds and shared conceptual schemes, sometimes anticipating later concerns about language, community, and social practices as conditions for objectivity.

Coherence and Systematicity

Idealists often favor coherence theories of truth or related ideas, holding that:

• A belief is justified or true to the extent that it fits into a systematic, self-consistent whole of beliefs or concepts.
• Fragmentary or isolated judgments are incomplete; fuller understanding involves situating them within a broader rational structure.

Critics argue that this can blur the distinction between truth and justification, but idealists typically maintain that systematic coherence is required for genuine knowledge of a complex, internally related reality.

9. Ethical Theories within Idealist Traditions

Idealist metaphysics and epistemology often support distinctive ethical theories, typically emphasizing rational autonomy, duty, and the spiritual dimension of moral life.

Kantian Deontology and Autonomy

Kant’s moral philosophy, though not identical with his transcendental idealism, is closely related:

• Moral obligation is grounded in the categorical imperative, which commands maxims that could be willed as universal laws.
• Persons are ends in themselves, possessing an intrinsic dignity as rational agents capable of self‑legislation.

Transcendental idealism plays a role in making sense of freedom: although we experience ourselves as part of the causal order of appearances, we can think of ourselves “intelligibly” as free agents belonging to a realm of ends.

Fichte and Ethical Idealism

Fichte radicalizes Kantian themes, viewing the I as fundamentally practical and interpreting the world as a sphere for the realization of moral vocation. Ethical life involves:

• Overcoming resistance posed by the not‑I.
• Achieving progressively higher forms of self‑determination and solidarity with others.

Fichte’s approach blends metaphysics and ethics, suggesting that the structure of reality reflects the striving of reason toward moral perfection.

Hegel, Social Institutions, and Sittlichkeit

Hegel integrates ethics into his concept of Sittlichkeit (ethical life):

• Morality is not solely a matter of individual conscience or rules; it is realized in social institutions such as the family, civil society, and the state.
• These institutions are viewed as embodiments of freedom and rational will, enabling individuals to actualize themselves as members of an ethical community.

Hegel’s account influences later idealist ethics that regard law, custom, and social practices as vehicles of moral development rather than mere constraints.

British and Personal Idealism

British Idealists (e.g., T. H. Green, F. H. Bradley, Bernard Bosanquet) and personal idealists in the United States and elsewhere developed ethical views stressing:

• The common good and the interdependence of individual and community.
• Character, self‑realization, and the cultivation of virtue as expressions of a deeper spiritual or rational order.
• Sometimes, a theistic or personalist framework, where finite persons participate in, or relate to, a supreme personal reality.

Debates and Criticisms

Critics have raised questions about:

• Whether idealist ethics risks subordinating the individual to collective entities (e.g., the state or “Spirit”).
• Whether appeals to a rational or spiritual order obscure conflicts of value and moral pluralism.
• How idealist accounts of freedom, rooted in rational self‑legislation or participation in Spirit, relate to empirical constraints and social inequalities.

Idealists respond by emphasizing that their views aim to reconcile individual autonomy and social embeddedness, and to ground ethical norms in a conception of reason that is both personal and communal.

10. Political Philosophy and the Idealist State

Idealist political philosophy explores how freedom, rationality, and ethical life are embodied in political institutions, especially the state.

Kant: Right, Republicanism, and Cosmopolitanism

Kant’s political theory, in works such as the Metaphysics of Morals and Perpetual Peace, is often classified as republican and liberal:

• He grounds political obligation in a universal principle of right: any action is right if it can coexist with the freedom of everyone under a universal law.
• The ideal state is a constitutional republic with separation of powers, representative government, and the rule of law.
• Kant advocates a cosmopolitan federation of states to reduce war and promote perpetual peace.

While not a “state idealist” in the Hegelian sense, Kant treats political institutions as necessary conditions for the external realization of freedom.

Hegel: The Ethical State

Hegel’s Philosophy of Right presents perhaps the most influential idealist account of the state:

• The state is an “ethical organism”, the highest realization of objective freedom.
• Individuals achieve genuine freedom not by withdrawal from institutions but through participation in rational structures (family, civil society, state).
• The state embodies universal will, reconciling particular interests in a higher unity.

Hegel’s theory has been interpreted in divergent ways—ranging from a defense of constitutional monarchy and civil society to a blueprint for a strong, organic state that risks justifying authoritarianism. He emphasizes, however, the importance of rule of law, corporate bodies, and public deliberation.

British Idealism and Social Reform

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, British Idealists (e.g., T. H. Green, Bosanquet) adapted Hegelian ideas to liberal contexts:

• They criticized atomistic individualism and defended a positive concept of freedom—freedom as the capacity to realize one’s rational potential.
• The state’s role includes providing social conditions (education, health, fair economic opportunities) necessary for such self‑realization.
• Their work influenced early welfare liberalism and arguments for expanded state responsibility.

Personal Idealism and Democratic Themes

Some personal idealists and American idealists emphasized:

• The moral and spiritual value of persons and democratic participation.
• The idea that political institutions should foster mutual recognition, dialogue, and community rather than merely enforce order.

Critiques and Contested Legacies

Critics have argued that idealist political theories:

• Risk reifying the state as an entity superior to individuals.
• May provide ideological support for nationalism or statism when the state is treated as a manifestation of Spirit.

Defenders respond that idealist accounts, correctly understood, stress constitutional limits, ethical justification, and the reciprocal relation between individual rights and communal structures.

11. Religious, Aesthetic, and Cultural Dimensions

Idealism has had far‑reaching implications beyond academic metaphysics and epistemology, notably in religion, aesthetics, and broader cultural theory.

Religious Thought and Theism

Many idealists operate within, or in dialogue with, theistic frameworks:

• German Idealists often reinterpret Christian doctrines philosophically. For example, Schleiermacher and some Hegelians view God as coincident with or expressed in Spirit’s self‑development.
• British Idealists frequently espouse a form of immanent theism, where God is identified with, or manifested through, the rational and moral order of the universe.
• Personal idealists insist on a personal God and emphasize interpersonal relations between finite persons and the divine.

Others, however, develop more non‑theistic or pantheistic interpretations, identifying the Absolute with a rational or spiritual structure without a distinct personal deity. Debates concern whether idealism supports orthodox doctrines, revises them, or leads toward a more generalized religious metaphysics.

Aesthetic Theory and Art

Idealists often treat art as a privileged medium in which spirit or ideas become sensuously manifest:

• For Schelling, art reveals the identity of nature and spirit, expressing the Absolute in a way that surpasses conceptual philosophy.
• Hegel’s lectures on aesthetics interpret art as a historical stage in the self‑unfolding of Spirit, in which forms such as classical sculpture or romantic poetry embody different levels of self-consciousness.

Art, on these views, is not mere decoration but a mode of revelation and self-understanding, contributing to ethical and religious life by concretizing ideals and shared meanings.

Culture, History, and Geist

Idealists typically view culture and history as arenas in which Spirit realizes itself:

• Language, law, religion, art, and political institutions are seen as “objective spirit”—external forms that embody collective meanings and norms.
• Historical development is often interpreted as a teleological process, though accounts differ on whether this process is open‑ended or culminates in a certain stage of rational self-knowledge.

Such perspectives have profoundly shaped historiography, theology, and cultural criticism, influencing later thinkers who either adopt or contest the notion of a meaningful, rational history.

Ambivalent Cultural Reception

Idealist accounts of religion and culture have been praised for:

• Recognizing the symbolic depth of religious and artistic practices.
• Emphasizing the historical and communal nature of meaning.

They have also been criticized for:

• Reading historical and religious diversity through a single overarching narrative of Spirit.
• Risking Eurocentrism, given that many canonical idealist histories focus heavily on European culture.

These tensions have informed subsequent reinterpretations and critiques in both continental and analytic traditions.

12. Organization, Transmission, and Centers of Learning

Idealism is not a unified institution but a loosely connected intellectual tradition transmitted through universities, texts, and informal networks.

Academic Settings and Scholarly Lineages

From the late 18th century onward, idealist philosophies were closely tied to university teaching:

• Königsberg: Kant’s lectures and publications initiated the critical program and influenced a generation of students and readers.
• Jena and Berlin: Centers for German Idealism, where Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel lectured and where dynamic intellectual circles formed.
• Later, Berlin became a focal point for Hegelianism and its critics.

Transmission often occurred through lecture transcripts, published treatises, and correspondence, as well as through students who carried ideas to other institutions.

International Diffusion

In the 19th century, idealism spread to Britain, North America, and beyond:

• Oxford and Cambridge: Became strongholds of British Idealism, with figures like T. H. Green and F. H. Bradley shaping curricula in ethics, metaphysics, and political philosophy.
• American universities such as Harvard and Princeton hosted early Neo‑Hegelian and personal idealist movements.
• Continental centers, including parts of France and Italy, also engaged with Kantian and Hegelian thought, often in dialogue with emerging Neo‑Kantian and phenomenological currents.

Modes of Transmission

Key modes of dissemination included:

• Systematic treatises (e.g., Kant’s Critiques, Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit and Science of Logic).
• Lectures and seminar culture, where complex systems were expounded and debated.
• Academic journals and learned societies, which facilitated disputes between idealists, realists, positivists, and others.
• Translations and commentaries, especially in the 19th and 20th centuries, which broadened access and shaped interpretations.

Informal and Cultural Transmission

Idealist themes also permeated:

• Literature and the arts, via Romanticism and later movements influenced by conceptions of spirit, symbolism, and historical development.
• Theology and religious institutions, particularly Protestant seminaries and divinity schools engaged with Kant, Schleiermacher, and Hegel.

While there was no central authority or “church of idealism,” overlapping schools, circles, and traditions of commentary sustained a continuous conversation, even through periods of severe criticism and decline.

13. Critiques from Realism, Materialism, and Positivism

Idealism has faced sustained criticism from multiple philosophical standpoints. These critiques target its metaphysical claims, epistemology, and alleged practical implications.

Realist Objections

Realists—both common‑sense and scientific—typically argue that:

• Idealism undermines the independence of the external world, making reality contingent on mind or representation.
• Ordinary and scientific practices presuppose that objects exist whether or not they are perceived; any attempt to deny this is seen as self‑defeating.

Common‑sense realists like Thomas Reid criticized Berkeleyan idealism as contradicting everyday belief and as leading to skepticism. Later analytic realists, such as G. E. Moore, famously argued that idealist doctrines conflict with evident truths (e.g., “Here is one hand”), and that appeals to mind‑dependence confuse epistemic access with ontological status.

Idealists respond by insisting that they do not deny an external world but rather analyze the conditions for its being an object of knowledge, or they posit a more encompassing Absolute or Spirit in which the world’s independence from finite minds is preserved.

Materialist and Physicalist Critiques

Materialists and physicalists object to idealism’s inversion of the usual explanatory order:

• They contend that mind and consciousness are products or emergent aspects of physical processes, not the other way around.
• Contemporary physicalism, informed by neuroscience and cognitive science, often treats idealist metaphysics as incompatible with empirical findings about the brain.

Critics argue that idealism invokes obscure mental or spiritual substances, or that it cannot adequately explain the causal efficacy of physical processes and the apparent resilience of scientific realism.

Idealists and sympathetic interpreters sometimes reply that:

• Materialism faces its own challenges in accounting for qualitative experience, normativity, and rationality.
• Idealism can be reformulated to engage with scientific results, for example through panpsychist or structuralist variants.

Positivist and Anti‑Metaphysical Critiques

Positivists and logical empiricists challenge idealism’s metaphysical ambitions:

• They question the cognitive meaningfulness of claims about Absolute Spirit, things‑in‑themselves, or world‑constituting categories if such claims cannot be empirically verified or formally analyzed.
• Idealist system‑building is sometimes criticized as speculative, obscure, or reliant on dubious notions of dialectical necessity.

For figures like Carnap, much traditional metaphysics—including idealist variants—was to be replaced by logical analysis of language and formal reconstruction of science.

Idealists, in turn, argue that positivism and related movements themselves presuppose conceptual and normative frameworks (e.g., about logic, meaning, and justification) that call for philosophical articulation and cannot be reduced to empirical data alone.

Ongoing Debates

These critiques contributed to a significant decline in classical idealism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Nonetheless, many core issues—about the relation of mind and world, the status of abstract structures, and the nature of objectivity—have reappeared in modified form in contemporary philosophy, often without explicit idealist labels.

14. Neo-Hegelian and Anglo-American Idealist Revivals

From the mid‑19th to early 20th centuries, there was a significant revival and transformation of idealist themes, particularly in Britain and the United States, often grouped under Neo‑Hegelianism and Anglo‑American Idealism.

British Idealism

In Britain, thinkers such as T. H. Green, F. H. Bradley, Bernard Bosanquet, and J. M. E. McTaggart developed distinctively Anglicized forms of absolute idealism:

• They adopted Hegelian notions of an internally related whole and a critique of atomistic individualism.
• Bradley’s Appearance and Reality argued that ordinary distinctions (substance/attribute, subject/object) involve contradictions and that only the Absolute, understood as a harmonious whole, is ultimately real.
• Green and others applied idealist ideas to ethics and politics, emphasizing the role of the state in enabling self‑realization and social welfare.

British Idealism shaped university curricula and public debate, influencing fields from jurisprudence to educational theory.

American Neo-Hegelianism and Personal Idealism

In the United States, philosophers such as Josiah Royce, Borden Parker Bowne, George H. Howison, and others advanced Hegelian and personal idealist systems:

• Royce developed an Absolute idealism centered on community and interpretation, viewing the Absolute as the totality of possible judgments or an infinite knower.
• Personal idealists (e.g., Bowne, Howison) emphasized the irreducible reality of persons, often within a theistic framework, resisting what they saw as impersonal or monistic trends in Hegelianism.

These movements interacted with religious thought, especially Protestant theology, and shaped early 20th‑century American philosophy before the rise of pragmatism and analytic philosophy.

European Neo-Hegelians and Neo-Kantians

On the European continent, there were diverse Neo‑Hegelian and Neo‑Kantian movements:

• Some German and Italian philosophers revived Hegelian logic and metaphysics, adapting them to modern science and culture.
• Neo‑Kantians (e.g., Windelband, Rickert) often rejected metaphysical idealism while retaining or reinterpreting Kant’s transcendental method, focusing on the conditions of scientific and cultural knowledge.

The relation between Neo‑Kantianism and idealism is debated: some see it as a continuation of critical idealism, others as a move away from metaphysical commitments toward epistemology and methodology.

Decline and Critique

By the early 20th century, logical empiricism, pragmatism, and early analytic philosophy (e.g., Moore, Russell) mounted sustained attacks on Neo‑Hegelian and absolute idealist doctrines, criticizing:

• Their alleged obscurity and speculative method.
• Their treatment of logic and relations.
• Their views on time, individuality, and the status of the external world.

This led to a significant institutional decline of explicit idealist schools, though many of their concerns persisted in other guises.

15. Idealism in Contemporary Analytic and Continental Thought

Although classical idealism lost prominence in the early 20th century, aspects of idealist thinking have re‑emerged or persisted in both analytic and continental traditions, often in transformed or implicit forms.

Analytic Philosophy: Mind, Language, and Conceptual Scheme

In analytic philosophy, some developments bear family resemblances to idealist themes:

• Kantian and Neo‑Kantian revivals (e.g., in the work of Wilfrid Sellars, P. F. Strawson, John McDowell) emphasize that experience is always already shaped by conceptual capacities, echoing transcendental arguments about conditions of objectivity.
• Debates about conceptual schemes, framework dependence, and constitutive norms in epistemology and philosophy of science sometimes parallel idealist concerns about the mind’s contribution to objectivity.
• Contemporary metaphysical idealists and panpsychists (e.g., some interpretations of Donald Hoffman, Bernardo Kastrup, or Galen Strawson’s panpsychism) explicitly argue for mind‑or consciousness‑involving accounts of reality, though they are a minority.

These positions are often carefully distinguished from traditional absolute idealism, yet they revisit questions about representation, structure, and the status of the physical.

Continental Philosophy: Phenomenology, Hermeneutics, and Critical Theory

In continental thought, idealist legacies are more explicit:

• Phenomenology (Husserl and successors) inherits and transforms Kantian and Hegelian themes by analyzing the intentional structures of consciousness and the constitution of objects in experience.
• Hermeneutics (e.g., Gadamer) and critical theory (e.g., the Frankfurt School) draw on Hegelian notions of historical mediation and socially embedded rationality.
• Post‑Hegelian thinkers, including some existentialists and post‑structuralists, engage critically with idealism, often rejecting its systematic totalities while preserving its focus on history, subjectivity, and normativity.

Debates continue over whether such currents represent a continuation, critique, or overcoming of idealism.

Contemporary Reassessments

Recent decades have seen a renewed scholarly interest in Kant, Hegel, and other idealists, leading to:

• Historically informed reconstructions that seek to clarify and sometimes rehabilitate idealist arguments.
• Cross‑tradition dialogues—e.g., analytic readings of Hegel’s logic, or comparisons of Kantian transcendental philosophy with cognitive science and formal epistemology.
• New proposals for “structural,” “moderate,” or “epistemic” idealisms, which accept a robust role for science while maintaining that reality, as knowable, is inseparable from conceptual or structural features of thought.

Whether these count as full‑fledged idealisms or as hybrid views remains contested, but they indicate that idealist questions remain active in contemporary philosophy.

16. Comparisons with Other Major Schools of Philosophy

Idealism has been defined partly in contrast to other major philosophical orientations. The following table summarizes some central points of comparison:

Comparisons also involve methodological differences:

• Idealists often employ transcendental arguments or dialectical development to infer structures of reality from structures of thought.
• Positivists and some realists prefer empirical or formal‑logical methods and may regard such inferences as speculative.

Debate persists over whether some contemporary positions—such as structural realism, internal realism, or certain forms of panpsychism—should be classified as partly idealist, as they may attribute a constitutive role to structure, representation, or experience while retaining a commitment to a robust external world.

17. Legacy and Historical Significance

Idealism has exerted a profound and complex influence on the development of modern and contemporary philosophy, as well as on theology, political theory, and the arts.

Impact on Philosophy

• Idealist systems by Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and later thinkers reshaped debates about knowledge, freedom, and reality, setting agendas that continue to inform contemporary work in epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, and philosophy of mind.
• Critiques of idealism by realists, empiricists, positivists, and analytic philosophers played a major role in the formation of 20th‑century philosophy, especially in the Anglophone world, where overcoming “Hegelianism” became a defining project.
• Many later movements—Marxism, phenomenology, existentialism, hermeneutics, critical theory, pragmatism—developed in critical dialogue with idealist predecessors, adopting, transforming, or rejecting elements such as dialectic, historical development, and the primacy of subjectivity.

Influence Beyond Philosophy

Idealist ideas have also shaped:

• Theology, especially Protestant and liberal theology, through reinterpretations of doctrines in terms of spirit, community, and historical revelation.
• Political thought, contributing to theories of the constitutional state, welfare liberalism, and social democracy, as well as provoking worries about statism or nationalism.
• Aesthetics and cultural theory, providing influential accounts of art, symbolism, and historical culture as expressions of objective spirit.

Enduring Questions

Even where explicit allegiance to idealism is rare, many of its core questions remain central:

• How do conceptual structures and forms of experience shape what can be known as real?
• Can normativity, meaning, and consciousness be fully explained in materialist or naturalist terms, or do they require a different kind of grounding?
• What is the relation between individual subjectivity and social or historical wholes?

Idealism’s historical trajectory—from dominance through critique to partial revival—has made it both a source of systematic visions and a foil against which alternative philosophies define themselves. Its legacy persists in ongoing efforts to understand the interplay of mind, world, and value, and in the continuing reassessment of the great idealist systems as resources for contemporary thought.