Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: June 27, 2025
I sent it to Professor Broechner and asked his opinion of it. Simultaneously I began to work upon a paper on the Idea of Fate in Greek Tragedy, a response to the Prize question of the year 1862-1863, and on December 31, 1862, had finished the Introduction, which was published for the first time about six years later, under the title The Idea of Tragic Fate.
But to this Broechner very logically replied: "I am not speculating on his death, but on his life, for the longer he lives, the better you will be prepared to be his successor." By the middle of June, 1863, the prize paper was copied out. In September the verdict was announced; the gold medal was awarded to me with a laudatory criticism.
He was pleased to hear of the intimate terms I was on with Broechner, whereas Hauch would have preferred my being associated with Rasmus Nielsen, whom he jestingly designated "a regular brown-bread nature." When the treatise was given back to me, I found it full of apt and instructive marginal notes from Sibbern's hand.
I had for a long time pursued my non-juridic studies as well as I could without the assistance of a teacher. But I had felt the want of one. And when a newly appointed docent at the University, Professor H. Broechner, offered instruction in the study of Philosophy to any who cared to present themselves at his house at certain hours, I had felt strongly tempted to take advantage of his offer.
At the end of 1863 I wrote to my teacher, Professor Broechner, who had promised me a short philosophical summary as a preparation for the University test: "I shall sit under a conjunction of all the most unfavourable circumstances possible, since for more than a month my head has been so full of the events of the day that I have been able neither to read nor think, while the time of the examination itself promises to be still more disquiet.
My day was systematically filled up from early morning till late at night, and there was time for everything, for ancient and modern languages, for law lessons with the coach, for the lectures in philosophy which Professors H. Broechner and R. Nielsen were holding for more advanced students, and for independent reading of a literary, scientific and historic description.
Broechner had an intense contempt for Goldschmidt; intellectually he thought him of no weight, as a man he thought him conceited, and consequently ridiculous. He had not the slightest perception of the literary artist in him. The valuable and unusual qualities of his descriptive talent he overlooked.
I was also not infrequently vexed by a discordant note, as it were, being struck in our intercourse, when Broechner, despite the doubts and objections I brought forward, always took it for granted that I shared his pantheistic opinions, without perceiving that I was still tossed about by doubts, and fumbling after a firm foothold.
Shortly afterwards, in North and South, Goldschmidt, on the occasion of Broechner's candidature for parliament, had written that the well-known atheist, H. Broechner, naturally, as contributor to The Fatherland, was supported by the "Party."
In any case he never referred to the subject again in after years, when we frequently met. Among Broechner's private pupils was a young student. Kristian Moeller, by name, who devoted himself exclusively to philosophy, and of whom Broechner was particularly fond. He had an unusually keen intelligence, inclined to critical and disintegrating research.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking