philosophers harshly critiquing other philosophers

Concerning my post last night about philosophers harshly critiquing other philosophers (and here I’m talking about philosophers they basically admire in some way, not just enemies they’re contemptuously dismissing), Michael Austin sends some gems. I’m simply going to quote his email verbatim:

“A good couple of people to add to your list of thinkers who trash their predecessors would be the treatment of Fichte by both Schelling and Novalis. Schelling’s first few books are all about Fichte’s short-comings, with his summation of transcendental idealism (criticizing both Kant and Fichte) being in his On The History of Modern Philosophy. Novalis has several essays against Fichte as well. Both of course studied with him in Jena.

There’s also Kierkegaard’s wonderfully mean letter to his brother, written while attending Schelling’s Berlin lectures:

‘Schelling drivels on quite intolerably! If you want to form some idea what this is like then I ask you to submit yourself to the following experiment as a sort of self-inflicted sadistic punishment. Imagine person R’s meandering philosophy, his entirely aimless, haphazard knowledge, and person Hornsyld’s untiring efforts to display his learning: imagine the two combined and in addition to an impudence hitherto unequalled by any philosopher; and with that picture vividly before your poor mind go to the workroom of a prison and you will have some idea of Schelling’s philosophy. He even lectures longer to prolong the torture. … Consequently, I have nothing to do in Berlin. I am too old to attend lectures and Schelling is too old to give them. So I shall leave Berlin as soon as possible. But if it wasn’t for Schelling, I would never have travelled to Berlin. I must thank him
for that. … I think I should have become utterly insane if I had gone on hearing Schelling.'”