124 Kant: A Biographythe other professors in Königsberg.^108 When Bolotov left Königsberg, he
gave Weymann a sheep's pelt to keep him warm.^109
What was Kant up to in attacking Weymann's position? One might per¬
haps say that battle lines were being drawn. Weymann's dissertation was
stating his convictions and defining an agenda. Kant raised doubts about
the consistency and philosophical value of such an agenda. The students,
who at that time were choosing the lectures for the coming semester, also
knew what was at stake in this dispute. On the one side there was a new
lecturer, intent on bringing renewed vigor to the Pietist camp by defending
Crusius's ideas; on the other side there was another fairly young teacher,
trying to revise philosophy by modifying Baumgarten's theories in the di¬
rection of British philosophy. It was another skirmish in the long battle at
the university between those who saw philosophy as the handmaid of a cer¬
tain kind of theology and those who saw it as an autonomous discipline.
Like Kant, Hamann had little respect for Weymann. He gave the fol¬
lowing report:
I only looked into his dissertation, and I lost all desire to read it; I went to the audito¬
rium and I lost all desire even to hear. Stay at home, I said, so that you do not get angry
or make others angry with you. I actually went to the defense of the dissertation. Mag¬
ister Kant was asked to oppose, but he declined; and he printed instead an invitation for
his lectures, which I will keep for you. He also sent me a copy. I do not understand his
reasons, but his bright ideas are blind puppies, which were brought prematurely into
the world by a bitch. If it was worth while to refute him, I would have tried to under¬
stand them. He appeals to the whole in judging the world. For this we need knowledge
that is no longer made of pieces. To argue from the whole to a fragment is like arguing
from the unknown to the known.^110
When Kant did not answer Hamann's letter on the physics textbook for
children, Hamann felt he had been treated just like Weymann. He claimed
that this was "an insult to [him]."^111 He attacked Kant, saying: "You are
proud, to tell you the truth... You may treat Weymann in any way you
wish, as a friend I demand a different treatment. Your silence in regard to
him is more cowardly and despicable than was his stupid critique of your
essay. You treat me the same. I will not let you go unpunished."^112 Earlier
Hamann had predicted that his relation to Kant would in future be either
very distant or very close.'^13 It would be the former for some time to come,
and it was never very close. This is not surprising. What is perhaps sur¬
prising is that Kant and Hamann continued to have any relation at all.
Between Weymann and Kant, on the other hand, there could not be any