How did Schelling’s objective idealism differ from Fichte’s view?

Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling’s objective idealism diverged significantly from the subjective idealism of Johann Gottlieb Fichte, primarily in their treatment of nature.

Fichte’s philosophy centered on the ego as the absolute subject, positing that all being is created by the ego. In this view, nature is merely an object subordinated to humanity, serving as a backdrop for the ego’s activity. Critics often perceived Fichte’s approach as an abstract, voluntaristic resolution that failed to provide a substantive account of the external world.12

Schelling, initially a follower of Fichte, eventually rejected this subject-centered framework. He argued that Fichte failed to take adequate notice of nature. Instead, Schelling developed a philosophy of nature that viewed nature as an active, independent entity evolving toward spirit. His objective idealism posits that nature is "visible intelligence" and intelligence is "invisible nature," suggesting that the natural world possesses an ideal or spiritual reality that exists independently of any individual subject. While Fichte started from the ego, Schelling sought to bridge the gap between subject and object by recognizing nature as a fundamental, autonomous component of reality.234