Half Hour Hegel: The Complete Phenomenology of Spirit (Preface, sec 56-58)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 сен 2024
- Get Hegel's Phenomenology - amzn.to/2hVyru6
The entire series - / the-half-hour-hegel-se...
Support my work here - / sadler
Philosophy tutorials - reasonio.wordp...
intro slide is wrong -- but this indeed paragraphs 56-58]
In this twenty-fifth video in the new series on G.W.F. Hegel's great early work, the Phenomenology of Spirit, I read and comment on the fifty-sixth, fifty-seventh and fifty-eighth paragraphs of the text, from the Preface.
Hegel begins by noting that "logical necessity" is revealed to the investigator in the process of investigating the content. Self-moving contents develop their own logical form -- the form by which they can be grasped in their universality -- and thus to simply impose logical form upon them from the outside guarantees not grasping them as they are.
What is required instead is the "strenuous effort of the notion", that is attention to the developing concrete content carried out in light of attention to similar development in metaphysical notions. It requires the investigating human subject to be willing to learn from the object of investigation.
Hegel also contrasts the conceptual-dialectical mode of philosophical work against several other more common modes of thinking -- appeal to intuition, commonsense and conventional ideas, picture-thinking (Vorstellung), and argumentative thinking (Rasonieren).
In this video series, I will be working through the entire Phenomenology, paragraph by paragraph -- for each one, first reading the paragraph, and then commenting on what Hegel is doing, referencing, discussing, etc. in that paragraph.
This series is designed to provide an innovative digital resource that will assist students, lifelong learners, professionals, and even other philosophers in studying this classic work by Hegel for generations to come. If you'd like to support this project -- and also receive some rewards for your support -- please contribute! - / drgbsadler
I'll be using and referencing the A.V. Miller English-language translation of the Phenomenology, which is available here: amzn.to/1jDUI6w
The introductory music for the video is: Solo Violin - BWV 1004 - Partita for Violin No. 2 - Recorded in Brooklyn June 26, 2011 specifically to be dedicated to the Public Domain
#Hegel #Phenomenology #Philosophy #Idealism #German #Dialectic #Spirit #Absolute #Knowledge #History
No way I would've gotten Section 56 without this (I wasn't anywhere close). Thanks Sadler, VERY VERY helpful as always.
You're very welcome!
I really appreciate all the work you've gone to making these videos!
Thanks! Nice to read
Thanks. It's slowly making sense and it's worth taking the time to understand what is going on in the text.
Glad to read it!
I'm trying to get used to those things that give us the feeling that we don't know what we're doing because when I look around it's fairly obvious that in general, despite miraculous and fantastic accomplishments in many areas, we have absolutely no clue whatsoever.
Oh boy! this was brilliant. Thank you. I realize that picture-thinking will be covered more extensively in the sections on religion, but can you recommend any further reading on Hegel's concept of picture-thinking please?
new installation in the ongoing series
Thanks. Will do!
Gregory B. Sadler
No, my dear fellow thank´ s to you!
There are few things Hegel holds in lower regard than "picture thinking." I snicker every time I hear it, because he mentions it several times in the Phenomenology as a slur.
There's Gefuehl, which he holds even lower than Vorstelling, in general
20:40 MacIntyre, a Hegelian!! Thank God; I was afraid I had to flip a coin between these guys. X-D.
Perhaps it is just me trying to process the religious understandings and philosophies of other epochs. But Hegel's idea of allowing our fixed "picture thinking" to give way to the life of the notion seems reminiscent (even if a progression) from the idea of spiritual surrender and letting go of the ego.. Also the restraint needed to enter into the dialectic and resist the pull of an unrestricted intuition was similarly reminiscent of the up-shot of the moral necessities and spiritual disciplines such as 'the golden rule'.
interesting! the issue with the golden rule is that is negates (in my view) the other---"do onto others as YOU (NOT the other) would like have done onto YOURSELF (NOT what they themselves actually prefer). This renders the Golden Rule a double edged sword--because it is a projection of self onto the other--with a negation altogether of "the other's vision for their own life, what works for them." I can say that this golden rule, personally, has devastated me in childhood to a very traumatic level, when I was forced into a toxic abusive church crawling with cruel sick adults--when a so-called "parent" thought it would be best for me to get "indoctrinated." It was hell on earth, this golden rule. As far as Eastern "letting go of the ego", yet another fallible concept. The ego IS the present aware self (Jung), it cannot be escaped, nor should it. It is the pathological society that contaminates, inflates, deflates, degrades, the ego. It is not the ego, but the pathology that needs to be let go. Hegel would then reject both of these concepts--the golden rule and the "letting go of ego." As would Nietzsche.
Regarding the relation between Being and Concept: is one chronologically or logically prior to the other? I see how Concepts _reveal_ Being, but what is Being doing to or for or with Concepts (other than presumably giving them, and keeping them in, existence)?
lol - at the beginning of 56, I had a distinctly non-hegelian epiphany. Which is that I finally understand what it must feel like when a pokemon "hurts itself in confusion".
there is no shame in learning. there is unperceived shame in unaware idiot certainty.( may I see my own blind spots)
thank you
you mean there should be no shame in learning -- in many cases those who are learning do feel and even display a feeling of shame
The comment about alasdair macintyre is interesting, I saw a talk recently given by Robert Pippin who engages with MacIntyre's critique of ethics in After Virtue. He basically says something similar, that MacIntyre embarks on a remarkably Hegelian approach to what he sees to be the "problem" in ethics, but Pippin's ultimate conclusion is that MacIntyre fails to seriously contend with Hegel's own approach to ethical thought which he sees as breaking the dichotomy of "Nietzsche v. Aristotle"
Pippin made the big mistake of thinking that Mac’s position is just in After Virtue I guess. Silly thing to do given that Mac followed that one up with three other books in succession
@@GregoryBSadler Well...I guess it's not super surprising coming from him
I wonder what Hegel would say about our current times, where much of science and even philosophy is IMHO obsessed with Räsonieren, and everyday life (also political life) so imbued with picture-thinking; much of economy seems to run on creating desire and even more problematic, (consumer) identities, through Vorstellungen (images / picture-thinking) and Gefühle (feelings).
At the end of sec. 57, there is a part I don't get: "when the unfamiliar is greeted with applause ...". What does he mean by that? His critique of relying on the familiar I get, but what about the unfamiliar? Ultrarevolutionary speech and action reminds me of the terreur of the French Revolution, but that is just picture-thinking on my part ;) Please Dr. Sadler, help me out.
+zootme Which question are you asking to be helped out with here? You've got a number of reflections strung together
+Gregory B. Sadler sorry for my imprecision. This is the passage I'm puzzled with (end of §57): "when the unfamiliar is greeted with approach, the reaction is of the same kind, and consists in what in another sphere would take the form of ultra-revolutionary speech and action."
+zootme The unfamiliar being greeted with applause is pretty straightforward -- someone brings up some matter that seems to be new, or presented/interpreted in a new way, and the public is primed to rather unthinkingly applaud these new advances.
Ultra-revolutionary speech and action could be the Terror, but it could also be so much other stuff that went on during the French revolution -- closing the religious institutions, attempting to impose a standard French language, addressing everyone as "citizen", etc.
Here's a sort of contemporary example -- think of clickbait articles: "when you read this, your mind will be blown, and everything will be changed." Except that it's not, unless one's mind is pretty shallow. . .
+Gregory B. Sadler Thanks for your elucidation! I think I got it now :)
"My rhizomes; let me show you them."
I think it is funny that the first video in this series has received about 8,500 views and this final video is up to 157. Seems like a lot of viewers got lost. That's Hegel for you huh. I realize this last video just went up 8 days ago of course and the first one went up in february. Still more start than finish right?
"I realize this last video just went up 8 days ago of course and the first one went up in february" -- that's the most relevant bit
you’re a GOD
No, just a guy who studies and teaches philosophy
I am guessing that this scheme of understanding could be applied (for illustrative purposes) to political discourse. An imposition of external form would be painting everything as Red vs. Blue, which could be done, as we have seen, in a way that is completely consistent, completely comprehensive, and completely pointless.
Logical consistency, if I get the gist correct, is not worth much if it is imposed externally and arbitrarily on a reality whose thing-in-self is called upon to accept it passively, in the same sense with which we could, if we want to, maintain the four elements of water, fire, air, and dirt, if we define reality in terms of the terms, (as if it were 'all on our side') rather than let reality actively 'participate' in its own definition.
As these metaphors of the activity of the external world become harder to avoid and increasingly apt, we may consider whether the notion of substance as subject might not simply work as a metaphor, but maybe it is what is actually happening, though it still eludes me. Hopefully in future chapters...
I'd say that pretty much all that you're saying here is on-point. I don't think, though, that substance as subject is actually just a metaphor for Hegel.
on picture thinking: I find this within a FB collage art group that I joined...very good visual work (eye candy), but much of it lacks notion, concept, socio-psychological-historical rooting as reflected in self/collective consciousness....given the state of the world, the artist, now more than ever (pardon my teleological perspective) , must attempt to fuse the concept, the notion, as rooted in space-time, in the thematic content of the work....or, we just get more eye candy--Candy Crush "art" pretending to more than a cheap video game thrill. the juxtaposition central to this form of art, in this case, becomes a moot point. this is where picture thinking can achieve supremacy or at least equal status as with the notion--in self-conscious socio-historically rooted "notion-fused-art."
I don't want to labour my comparison's of Hegel to yogic or vedic philosophy. But the discussions of the pitfalls of "picture thinking" and "unrestrained intuition" would probably fall into the category of maya (illusion) to which the jiva (individual souls) might be subject.
Also the virtue offered by way of the dialectic notion (self-moving thought) on the other hand might represent the surrender of the jiva (individual soul) to isvara (the controller or lord).
As far as the broad Vedic schools go;
I) adwaita (non-dualistic)
- the oldest Vedic tradition provides scriptural authority for the non-duality of atman (individual soul) and brahman (pure consciousness)
ie. it refers to the common identity of atman and brahman beyond the duality of maya
=> Shankaracharya (shaivites)
Ii) dwaita (dualistic)
- stresses the distinction between God and individual souls
- individual souls are not created by God but depend on him for existence
=> Shri Madhvaharya (vaishnavism)
iii)dwaita-adwaita
- 3 categories of existence cit (conscious), acit (unconscious) & isvara (controller)
=> Nimbarka (vaishnavism)
iv) and a number of others
I am afraid I have already stretched my Vedic knowledge to the limit and I am drawing on Wikipedia. But I am particularly interested to see if and where Hegel fits into or carries on from the Vedic traditions. Absolute Idealism and the difficulties of it's logic have apparently been a concern to many ancient traditions for a very long time.
If anyone has any insights along the way I'd love to hear them.
David Roberts Hegel doesn't draw upon Indian philosophy, no. And, despite some surface-level similarities, I don't think you'll find it helpful for studying Hegel, who is already difficult enough
Gregory B. Sadler Oh well......good to know. An example of "cookie-cutter" or "picture thinking" I guess.
I do have a strong tendency to look for a "rose-coloured" view. I am much happier when I can imagine everyone is somehow actually in furious agreement or at least able to share a consistency and harmony.
Anyway I am on board with Hegel for the long haul. He does seem to be a fundamental thinker in terms of helping one appreciate how things operate and what is realistic.
This is section 54-55. I think you posted the wrong video.
No, it's just got the wrong first slide -- the kind of error that's going to creep in when you're doing all the shooting, slide-production, editing, uploading as a one-man operation
Keep watching past the intro slide and you'll see it's 56-58 -- compare as well to the paragraphs of the text, which you'll want to have a copy of (that's what these videos are using)
I know what you mean.
Why do people skip the for new people very important preface (2.8k views) and go straight to the introduction? xD
All sorts of reason, most likely