Problems with Religion and Politics 355ment between the kingdom of nature and the kingdom of grace, or the con¬
cepts of nature and the concepts of morals, constitutes a harmony, and this
harmony can be conceived as possible only because of a first intelligent
cause. "The Critique of Pure Reason may therefore be seen as the genuine
apology for Leibniz, even against his partisans, whose eulogies hardly do
him honor."^96
Kant's attack on Eberhard was effective. It convinced the younger gen¬
eration, if they needed any convincing, that the Leibnizians had nothing
to offer them. Philosophy continued now on a more or less Kantian path.
While the attacks continued, Kant paid less and less attention to them. In
any case, the criticisms no longer concerned just the master, but also his
pupils; and increasingly, his pupils were criticizing the critics. The Aetas
Kantiana had dawned. Hundreds of books and articles for and against Kant
were written, and Kant was the only important philosopher as far as most
Germans were concerned. He had become the king of the Philosophers.
Yet he himself took less and less interest in these squabbles, concentrating
on the completion of the work he had started so long ago.
The Famous Host: "King in Königsberg"
Kant was now one of the greatest names in Königsberg. Everyone who vis¬
ited Königsberg wanted to see him. Some just wanted to visit him; others
went to his lectures as well. One visitor who saw Kant in 1792 wrote:
I was every day with Kant [three days in all], and once I was invited to dinner. He is the
most cheerful and most entertaining old man, the best compagnon, a true bon-vivant in
the most honorable sense. He digests the heaviest foods as well, while his readers get
indigestion over his philosophy. But you can recognize the man of the world and taste
by the fact that I did not hear a word about his philosophy even during the most inti¬
mate hours.^97
The most famous visitor in Königsberg of the period was Johann Gottlieb
Fichte (1762—1814). He stayed in Königsberg from July to October 1791.
His background was similar to Kant's. Having studied theology and juris¬
prudence in Jena, Leipzig, and Wittenberg between 1780 and 1784, he first
became a private tutor. In 1790, he returned to Leipzig and agreed to tu¬
tor a student in Kantian philosophy. Soon after beginning his tutoring, he
wrote that he "had thrown himself entirely into the Kantian philosophy;
first from need — I had to tutor for an hour on the Critique of Pure Reason —
but, after I became acquainted with the Critique of Practical Reason, with true