Translation of "Die aufklaerung" in English

What do you think the guys from reconnaissance told me?

The Enlightenment is no independent philosophy.

Only on this basis, the Enlightenment becomes upsetting . [8]

However, this position is quite specific for the Inter-Enlightenment.

The Enlightenment becomes upsetting of values only on this basis .

For the Enlightenment has in its classical variety a double face.

And it has precisely for the question "Post-Modern Age"-"Enlightenment" again further consequences.

The Enlightenment is then also no independent ideology, if they always are in ideological debates.

We have won these specificities on the way, where we sought consciously to reconstruct the Enlightenment ideal-typically.

While the great Enlightenment of the eighteenth century was splitting up into several and individually quite important political and intellectual currents (from the liberalism quite up to the diverse currents of the socialism), this came straight in Friedrich Nietzsche's work (but also in that of the Austrian representatives of the same second wave) to an homogeneous and comprehensive conception, that could be identified as Enlightenement, not only in its individual parts, but also in its totality, precisely because it was again summarizing the original intentions of the great Enlightenment indeed in a somewhat modified form.

Just this embedding of the possibility, maybe even the necessity of the Enlightenment in every type of social existence allows to repeat still clearer our question.

Thirdly, the fact also plays, besides, a considerable role that the knowledge hardly knows about the second Enlightenment of Austria-Hungary or abouth the reflected enlightened-civilizational apogee of the second half of the nineteenth century, with which we must confront in this situation always directly with the antiquated arising eighteenth century.

The Frederick's, Josef's or Russian Enlightenments of the czars and czarinas did not generate only sociological, but also intellectual contents, had especially also these contents of their historical place and time.

This exposure of the problematic of the "self-indebtedness" designates further already clearly the determining duality of the "Enlightenment from below" and "Enlightenment from above", where both perspectives of the critical relativizing, plebeian, aristocratical-monarchical process of Enlightenment (the Enlightenment of the monarchs and czarinas) rationalizing the power functions can be hardly brought under the cover of a common definition.

While the Christianity and the Enlightenment have been directly approached, for example in the present European questioning, as working "value centers", we must not forget, that in the envisaged synchronization of these groups of values, also social, national and cultural values have to be considered.

Secondly, the Hungarian "Enlightenment" is a very long process (very generally said, on the one hand due to the early appearances of the nationalism and on the other hand, due to the absence of its own revolution, either in the form of an exportation of the revolution through the army of the French revolutionists or later through Napoleon).

Feuerbach's successfully executed intensification of the different problematics of man and nature appears in this perspective as another, renewed variant of this intensification of the same moments, which took place in the Enlightenment.

While the German "Enlightenment" – schematically outlined – has occurred in the system of small states with a peculiar political establishment.

In this of its fundamental attitudes, that is indeed mainly socially-ontologically founded, the Enlightenment, or rather the enlightened, gets into a peculiar philosophical situation.

For two hundred years, the first philosophical approach in the definition of the "Enlightenment" philosophy require to be seriously considered further to what Kant is saying about them: "The Enlightenment is the liberation of man from his self-indebted immaturity (Unmündigkeit)".

In such circumstances, it is everything else than incomprehensible, that as well the German as the Hungarian "Enlightenment" be heteronomous and embrace many autonomous poles, which are indeed dependent from the various groups, geographical centers and interest orientations.

Precisely in the second third of the eighteenth century (quite harmoniously in the context of the new writing and of the alarming retrospective on the time of the oral tradition), the full problematic of the extinct, historyless, and without any writing peoples and ethnic groups existing in the present arises for the Inter-Enlightenment with the Celts at the top.

That the Enlightenment could become one of the quite few key-concepts of the universal-historical reflection about the character and the visage of the Modern Age, is the consequence of the relevant facts, just in the historical-theoretical perspective, that the classical Enlightenment (as well as its potential successors) could never really be restored, from its classical time up today, as a large and homogeneous current, although its components (in the later language usage: liberalism, socialism, scientism, criticism of religion, in a certain sense even also the nationalism and the conservatism!)

To Korea war (1950-1953) underlined Rhee for the anticommunist clearing-up of the people above all the danger of a renewed 'invasion' by the North Korea niches communists.

For our attempt, to define ideal-typically the Enlightenment and to concretize historically the so conceived Enlightenment, the previously indicated fact appears by the way, that the Enlightenment is no coherent philosophical system, but also no coherent ideology, it is then of a high importance, that this fact builds the pure possibility toward the multiple arbitrariness of the ideal-typizing reconstructions.

That the premices of the "Enlightenment" had bloomed straight in such a group seems to be a sociological curiosity, in fact, this can be solved without any problem by historical explanations.