The Obscure Architectonics of Johann Georg Hamann’s Reverse Transcendentalism
In the labyrinthine corridors of 18th-century German philosophy, one finds a dimly lit chamber of startling originality, in which the enigmatic figure of Johann Georg Hamann (1730–1788) dwells. A thinker overshadowed by his intimate connections with more luminous intellectual titans—Kant, Herder, Goethe—Hamann’s corpus is often approached obliquely, through the reverberations he induced in others. Yet, nestled within his tumultuous, aphoristic prose is a notion of profound metaphysical subversion: namely, the inversion of Kant’s critical project through what I have termed Hamann’s “reverse transcendentalism.” It is this subtle but trenchant conceptual maneuver which I shall endeavor to unearth and elucidate.
Let us premise our inquiry by recalling that Immanuel Kant, a correspondent and sometime-confidante of Hamann, initiated the era of Transcendental Philosophy with his delineation of the categories of understanding and the synthetic a priori. For Kant, reason dictates the conditions under which experience is possible; the phenomena of existence must submit to the legislative faculties of cognition. But Hamann, ensconced in his theologically enraptured skepticism and recalcitrant anti-rationalism, quietly staged a philosophical putsch. He proposed, in murmurous parentheticals and scriptural allusions, a radical inversion: not that the mind imposes form upon the world, but that the world—sacred, living, historically embedded—forms the mind through language.
The apex of this opposition resides in Hamann’s obscure claim that all human cognition is rooted in language, and that this language is not, contra Locke or Kant, a secondary medium or representational tool, but rather: the incarnation of reason itself. To think, for Hamann, is to use language; and to use language is to inherit the sacred, historical, and irrevocably situated acts of interpretation—the Word made flesh.
This yields a reversal of the transcendental a priori: Hamann does not posit an internal structure of thought that shapes experience. Instead, he views every structure of thought as a culturally iterated, historically contingent crystallization of divine discourse. In his “Aesthetica in Nuce,” he hints obliquely at this when he proclaims: “Poetry is the mother tongue of the human race.” That which Kant holds as necessarily universal—the categorical imperative, the forms of intuition—is, for Hamann, a delusion of abstraction, severed from the primeval tongue of history and divinity. Human reason, he contends, is derivative of metaphor and mythos—not its master, but its child.
Such a view is not merely an epistemological eccentricity; it entails a metamorphosis in the very conception of philosophical method. Where Kant erects crystalline systems upon the apodictic ground of reason, Hamann etches riddles, irony, and allusive paradox upon the scroll of divine history. He writes not as an architect but as an augur, deciphering hints of meaning in the sacred runes of ordinary speech. Thus, in place of Kant’s “Copernican Revolution,” whereby the mind becomes the center around which knowledge orbits, Hamann offers a “Theophrastic Regression”—a return to the Logos, the Unspoken Word that speaks us.
Underlying Hamann’s verbal arabesques is a profound suspicion toward abstraction itself. He detects in Enlightenment rationalism a violent gnosticism: an attempt to escape from the materiality of history and the particularity of language. For Hamann, every thought severed from its incarnate context becomes idolatrous. In his letter to Herder dated July 27, 1780, Hamann derides Enlightenment philosophers as “sorcerers of abstraction,” conjuring lifeless phantasms from the living clay of empirical reality.1 Thus do they forget that knowledge must be tasted, not dissected; sung, not computed.
Within this dialectic of language and reason, one finds the subtle gem I propose to foreground: that Hamann prefigures—and preempts—many of the later insights of both hermeneutics and post-structuralist critique. In stark contrast to the Kantian-Manichean alignment of phenomenal appearance and noumenal essence, Hamann views truth as inherently interpretive, woven through with metaphor, parable, and poetic displacement. Indeed, he undermines the very foundation of that dualism by insisting that all understanding is mediated, and that mediation itself bears ontological priority. In a letter to Jacobi, he writes: “You theologians are shamefully responsible for the bad smell that Scripture and inspiration give off in the noses of your enlightened people. You treat the letter as though it were dead—while it is the body of the Spirit!”2
Herein lies the reverse transcendentalism: the “conditions of possibility” not of experience, but of spirit, are not located a priori in the reasoning subject, but in the incarnate, grammatical, storied being of the world. This is no mysticism bereft of intellect—not a pietistic aversion to reason, but a theological reconfiguration of its function. Reason must be baptized in the waters of poesis; its pride must be broken by the humility of metaphor.
To call such a vision “fringe” is to undersell the matter; it is more accurate to say that Hamann’s thought is centrifugally violent—flinging the entire edifice of rationalism into prophetic disarray. His is a philosophy conducted via marginalia and footnotes, not treatises—a “philology of the soul.” In modern terms, Hamann cleaves toward dialogism rather than system, life rather than logic, flesh rather than form.3
We may, perhaps, appreciate the unexpected lineage his ideas have acquired. Gadamer, Barth, and even Derrida echo his themes, though rarely aware of their true progenitor. Hamann’s insistence on linguistic embodiment can be seen as a remote forerunner to Heidegger’s assertion that “language is the house of Being.” But where Heidegger locates Being in an ontological unraveling, Hamann finds it nourished in the scriptural soil of divine Logos. Thus is Hamann not only a premature romantic, nor merely a proto-hermeneuticist—he is the seraphic trickster-philosopher, whispering from the threshold that the world is not to be comprehended, but inhabited.
And it is precisely in the arcane recesses of this position that his significance lies. Hamann warns us: philosophy must recover its memory of speech’s flesh, thought’s incense, and reason’s fallibility. Against the pompous scaffolds of Enlightenment systems, he poses the appealing, if self-effacing, image of the thinker as interpreter—not legislator.
To immerse oneself in Hamann is to hazard madness, mysticism, or worse—the humility of poetry. Yet it is therein, not beyond, that truth dances.
By Martijn Benders – Philosophy Dep. of the Moonmoth Monestarium
language, transcendentalism, reverse metaphysics, theological poetics, German idealism, Hamann, irony
—
1. Hamann, Johann Georg. “Briefwechsel mit Herder.” In Werke in fünf Bänden, edited by Josef Nadler, vol. 4, 245–246. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1960.
2. Hamann, Johann Georg. “Letters to Jacobi,” in Sämtliche Werke, edited by Arthur Henkel. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1967.
3. For an illuminating study of Hamann’s unconventional method, see Betz, John R. After Enlightenment: Hamann as Post-Secular Visionary. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.