{"corpus":"steiner","locus":"GA 18/p01c08/p033","lang":"en","edition":"AP1973","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"text":"Immanuel Hermann Fichte settled his account with Hegelianism poignantly in his essay, *Propositions for the Prolegomena of Theology* (1826), and *Contributions Toward a Characterization of Modern Philosophy* (1829). Then, in numerous works, he tried to prove and elaborate his view that a conscious personal being must be recognized as the basis of all world phenomena. In order to procure an emphatic effect for the opposition to Hegel's conception, which proceeded from pure thought, Immanuel Hermann Fichte joined hands with friends who were of the same opinion. In 1837, together with Weisse, Sengler, K. Ph. Fischer, Chalybäs, Fr. Hoffmann, Ulrici, Wirth and others, he began the publication of the *Journal for Philosophy and Speculative Theology.* It is Fichte's conviction that we have risen to the highest knowledge only if we have understood that “the highest thought that truly solves the world problem is the idea of a primal subject or *absolute personality,* which knows and fathoms itself in its ideal as well as real infinity.”","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"title":"VIII. Reactionary World Conceptions","site_heading":null,"date":null,"location":null,"word_count":164,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/18/p01c08/p033","alignment_confidence":"medium","alignment_reason":"beads:embedding","two_voice_volume":false,"translation_credit":null,"edition_coverage":{"de":["original"],"en":["AP1973"]},"available_versions":[{"lang":"en","edition":"AP1973","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/18/p01c08/p033","paragraph_aligned":true}],"german_anchor":{"de_prefix":"l08","de_passages":[{"locus":"GA 18/l08/p014","url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/18/l08/p014"}],"bead_confidence":"medium","length_check":{"de_words":304,"en_words":523,"ratio":1.72,"partial":false},"correspondence":"established","note":"English passage numbering is edition-relative, so the same number need not name the same paragraph in the German. The German original passage(s) above are the edition-invariant anchor — fetch them (lang='de') to verify wording before quoting across editions."},"witness_completeness":{"ratio":null,"band":"no_original","note":null,"word_count":8603,"original_word_count":null,"may_be_abridged":false},"witness_quality":{"translator":{"status":"unknown","warning":"No translator is recorded for this edition. An unattributed translation cannot be weighed as a witness: you cannot tell which hand made the choices in it. Cite the German for anything load-bearing."},"entity_parity":{"status":"discrepancy","checked_against":["GA 18/l08/p014"],"missing_from_translation":[],"present_only_in_translation":["Fichte"],"bead_confidence":"medium","bead_length_ratio":1.72,"likely_cause":"unresolved","note":"NAME MISMATCH between this English passage and its German counterpart. A name the German carries is absent here (or a name appears here that the German does not carry). Two things cause this and they need telling apart: the translation really drops or reassigns what the original distinguishes, OR the paragraph alignment paired the wrong passages. `bead_confidence` does NOT settle which: this corpus's embedding aligner pairs topically-related paragraphs at full confidence, and a sampled high-confidence mismatch proved to be a wrong pairing. Read the German passages listed and confirm they are counterparts BEFORE drawing any conclusion about the translation."},"note":"quote_safe certifies the bytes of this text. This block is about the translation as a WITNESS: who made it, and whether it carries the same names as the original. See witness_completeness for how much of the original this witness holds."}}