Excerpt, para 26:

Conversely, the individual has the right to demand that science provide him at least with the ladder to reach this standpoint. The individual’s right is based on his absolute self-sufficiency, which he knows he possesses in every shape of his knowing, for in every shape, whether recognized by science or not, and no matter what the content might be, the individual is at the same time the absolute form, or, he has immediate self-certainty; and, if one were to prefer this expression, he thereby has an unconditioned being — Hegel/Pinkard

Response:

The individual in his conscious awareness is not aware of his awareness but of what is given immediately in awareness. His absolute self-sufficiency, his being unconditioned, his immediate self-certainty of being, requires for its self-sufficiency self-knowledge. He must be both knower and known. — Fooloso4

Discussion:
That makes sense to me.
In that the claim is that it is philosophy alone which is supposed to lead to increased understanding of self via others.
If this is the case, then it should provide the means, the ladder - the structure of reason - to facilitate this process. The path to knowledge or science.
The starting point is the individual, the subject who is aware of his limitations and is curious to know more about the awesome world out there. As you point out:

Both Plato and Aristotle say that philosophy begins in wonder (‘thaumazein’) (Theaetetus 155c-d; Metaphysics 982b). There can be no wonder without a sense of the otherness of what engenders wonder. It is what lies beyond or outside of what can be understood or taken within consciousness, what remains a mystery. — Fooloso4

The image of the ladder reminds me of the Wittgenstein thread you participated in.
In that case, wasn't the ladder kicked away ? Do you think that it might be a different kind of ladder ?
I can't remember the details.

Anyway, as always, Fooloso4, thanks for the in--depth analysis, requiring time and effort.
Most helpful.

I had a teacher who once asked me how I could separate using tools made by others from one's I forged myself. I used to think the question was about authenticity versus imitation. An Hegelian point of view says to me that the new is both.

If I use something made before for my purposes, that is a new "determination." If I organize elements in a way that gets other people to start talking in a new way, that too, is a kind of new "determination."

The "Concept" beyond the boundaries of an individual are developed by both kinds of change. It introduces a Z axis where previously there was only X and Y. — Valentinus

Interesting story. If I understand correctly, then I agree.
The tools you forged yourself could be a direct copy, an imitation of the original product - X.

However, I think there would be differences even if same materials were used. Humans are not robots who churn out identikits.
If handmade then differences in skills, experience and ability would result in something unique to you; even if not original. That reproduction would be new but not significantly different - Y.

If you then use some imagination ( ? a movement of spirit - inspiration ) to create or invent a new product by tweaking the old and adding a new element, then - Z.
You are a design genius.

Same with concepts.
I am not sure what you mean by 'beyond the boundaries of the individual'.
As individuals, don't we in the main have an inherent drive - an inner necessity- to progress either to benefit self or with others.
Are you talking about the consciousness which moves us to a heightened awareness of the possible ?

Is it science in Hegel's sense of the term, that is, knowledge of the whole?
— Fooloso4

I don't know. I doubt it is exactly Hegel's approach. Goethe wasn't such a brilliant, mad philosopher.
It would be interesting to see how they compare. — Amity

Exchange of letters between Hegel and Goethe. Did Hegel appropriate Goethe's idea ?
https://ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/works/on-hegel.htm
No 43 Goethe, Hegel and Marx
( 19 page downloadable pdf )

Your statement has been articulated in many ways. Hegel, himself, said many things that compared his "culture" in a better light than others. — Valentinus

Yes. Such criticism ( and more ) is supported by others more articulate than whot I am.
For example, 'In the Spirt of Hegel' by Robert Solomon.
https://www.scribd.com/document/321486406/SOLOMON-Robert-In-the-Spirit-of-Hegel-pdf

Also, Bertrand Russell offers a critical analysis of Hegel in his 'History of Western Philosophy'.
https://archive.org/details/RUSSELLHEGEL1946

This is counterbalanced by John Cottingham's 'Western Philosophy - an Anthology'.
And so it goes.

But, as a matter of intellectual inheritance, his work paved the way for you to express your objection. — Valentinus

'Intellectual inheritance' - sounds good but what does it mean ?
If it is about the history of philosophy then I agree Hegel played his part.
However, it is a strong claim to make that his work paved the way for me to express my objection.
This is not about intellectual inheritance but intellectual or cognitive development.
I don't need to read a 'Who's Who' in Western Philosophy to reach an understanding of individual progress to self-realisation or wellbeingness, holistically.

Irony abounds. — Valentinus

Yes it does. Sarcasm too. Especially when there are difficulties in communicating ideas from one brain to another in writing. And through the lens of bias.

The "long path" reference in Hegel's text is an acknowledgment that experience is not a simple thing given to anybody. — Valentinus

What kind of experience are you referring to ?

I brought up Kierkegaard since he emphasized the centrality of the Single Individual. In the passage I quoted by Hegel, I wonder if the statement can be be seen as a shared point of departure, a moment of agreement before struggling with each other. — Valentinus

Thanks for explanation and point to ponder on our path. It's good to linger a while.

So, in addition to the specific arguments made in regards to what must exist, there has been introduced a psychological register where some models fit better than others. The "long path" reference in Hegel's text is an acknowledgment that experience is not a simple thing given to anybody. — Valentinus

The idea of the 'path', I think was first introduced in para 12. I look back at the discussion about the prize at the end of a 'winding path' being won through struggle and effort. The prize of the 'beginning of a new spirit' being the final outcome. It seems clearer now. As is 'this path to science is itself already science'.

I think it perfectly understandable that it is life's journey itself, with all its experiences, that can help move us. In different ways at different times. There is no single appropriate fit or model.
I don't know where the image of the spiral staircase to the Absolute is referenced. Anyone ?
I don't think it helpful. Again, it smacks of religiosity. A glorious path ascending to Perfection.

This idea of reaching, or grasping at, a perfect ideal might be fine for a few philosophers.
It might be the case that philosophy is an essential part of the whole but it isn't everything.
Our knowledge/understanding of the human condition is gained via many sources.
Not so much a ghost but a host of many coloured disciplines.
It is this almost religious sense of the importance of Western, European or German philosophy in our historical development or culture that I take exception to. So very narrow...and it is not available to all, even if it were so desired.

But perhaps I have it all wrong...

If I remember correctly and understood it correctly (it has been a very long time since I last read Hegel) it begins with the eternal negating itself and giving rise to time. In its embryonic stage it contains all that it will come to be, but must work itself out over time, eventually there is the development of consciousness and finally self-consciousness and knowledge of itself as the whole. — Fooloso4

Eh ? :chin:
Huh ? :confused:
OK... :nerd:

Is it science in Hegel's sense of the term, that is, knowledge of the whole? — Fooloso4

I don't know. I doubt it is exactly Hegel's approach. Goethe wasn't such a brilliant, mad philosopher.

It would be interesting to see how they compare.

A few bits and bobs:

The method of science that Goethe practiced was in certain respects diametrically opposed to the objective science described above. Goethe believed that the outer physical world and the inner world of our senses were mirror images of each other, the inside view and the outside view of the same reality.  Therefore, paying attention to the outer world leads to necessary inner responses in us that tell us directly about qualities of what we are observing. The science that Goethe advocated was also one of deep observation. The difference that Goethe brought was that the scientist, while observing the outside world, would pay attention to their own inner responses which would reveal essential elements of what was being observed. It was in a sense a science of subjectivity, or what you might see as a mystical approach to science. — Jeff Carreira

https://philosophyisnotaluxury.com/2013/06/14/goethes-method-of-doing-science/

His literary works certainly addressed contemporary philosophical concerns: Iphigenie auf Tauris (Iphigenia in Tauris) (1779–86) seems a prophetic dramatization of the ethical and religious autonomy Kant was to proclaim from 1785; in his novel Die Wahlverwandtschaften (The Elective Affinities) (1809) a mysterious natural or supernatural world of chemistry, magnetism or Fate, such as ‘Naturphilosophie’ envisaged, seems to underlie and perhaps determine a human story of spiritual adultery; in Faust, particularly Part Two, the tale of a pact or wager with the Devil seems to develop into a survey of world cultural history, which has been held to have overtones of Schelling, Hegel or even Marx. But whatever their conceptual materials, Goethe’s literary works require literary rather than philosophical analysis. There are, however, certain discrete concepts prominent in his scientific work, or in the expressions of his ‘wisdom’ – maxims, essays, autobiographies, letters and conversations – with which Goethe’s name is particularly associated and which are capable of being separately discussed. Notable among these are: Nature and metamorphosis (Bildung), polarity and ‘intensification’ (Steigerung), the ‘primal phenomena’ (Urphänomene), ‘the daemonic’ (das Dämonische) and renunciation (Entsag — Nicholas Boyle

[my bolds]
https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/biographical/goethe-johann-wolfgang-von-1749-1832/v-1


Goethe's Faust and Hegel's Phenomenology: A Comparison

In two different media, poetic drama and philosophic prose, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832) and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) explored the same subject: man's perilous journey to discover his consciousness along a course of doubt and despair. — Ingrid Poole - abstract

http://journal.telospress.com/content/1968/1/34.abstract

On Goethe's vision, a science of wholeness:

The basis of this new epistemology was the “fundamental conviction that the relation of the human mind to the world was ultimately not dualistic but participatory…. In this view, the essential reality of nature is not separate, self-contained and complete in itself, so that the human mind can examine it ‘objectively’ and register it from without. Rather, nature’s unfolding truth emerges only with the active participation of the human mind. Nature’s reality is not merely phenomenal, nor is it independent and objective; rather, it is something that comes into being through the very act of human cognition. Nature becomes intelligible to itself through the human mind” (Tarnas, 1991).

https://blog.usejournal.com/goethes-science-of-wholeness-55282a462bbe

Para 26

The individual’s right is based on his absolute self-sufficiency, which he knows he possesses in every shape of his knowing, for in every shape, whether recognized by science or not, and no matter what the content might be, the individual is at the same time the absolute form, or, he has immediate self-certainty; and, if one were to prefer this expression, he thereby has an unconditioned being.
— Hegel/Pinkard

If I had the opportunity to cross the river and pour some of my blood into Kierkegaard's bowl in Hades, I would ask him about this passage. — Valentinus

Oh no, not your blood - that is a sacrifice too far !
Perhaps we could all chip in...and pray for a positive outcome.

Why Kierkegaard and not Hegel himself ? ( assuming that wasn't an error )

What position did Kierkegaard take - for or against Hegel. Or a little of both?
Curious about this, and philosophical, historical developments.
Also how sure can we be that what is reported or criticised is the correct version. Bring on the blood.
I think it helpful to look at objections to Hegel as a way to understand him.

Some thoughts here:

According to standard interpretations of 19th-century European philosophy, a stark ’either / or’ divided Hegel and Kierkegaard, and this divide profoundly shaped the subsequent development of Continental philosophy well into the 20th century. While left Hegelians carried on the legacy of Hegel’s rationalism and universalism, existentialists and postmodernists found inspiration, at least in part, in Kierkegaard’s critique of systematic philosophy, rationality, and socially integrated subjectivity. In Kierkegaard’s Relation to Hegel Reconsidered, Jon Stewart provides a detailed historical argument which challenges the standard assumption that Kierkegaard’s position was developed in opposition to Hegel’s philosophy, and as such is antithetical to it. — Matthew Edgar review

https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/kierkegaard-s-relation-to-hegel-reconsidered/
Review of:
Jon Stewart, Kierkegaard's Relation to Hegel Reconsidered, Cambridge University Press, 2003

Isn't it the translation of logos that Goethe's Faust is grappling with, the term translated as wort in German and word in English, as in: "In the beginning was the ..."? — Fooloso4

Yes. That is word for word translation. So, no difficulties there. I guess there was more to it.
Anti-religion ? What comes first...not words. Nor a Bible.

Faust is moved the the spirit. If that is the case then doesn't this point to the insufficiency of words, that words alone are not what provides the movement both for him and in the beginning? I take it as being for this reason that he translates logos as deed or act, something done rather than something said. — Fooloso4

I am no Goethe scholar. I would need to read it again. The pact with the devil spirit I think came after that point. And it wasn't the literary spirit they engaged in. In the words of Elvis:

'A little less conversation, a little more action, please
All this aggravation ain't satisfactioning me
A little more bite and a little less bark
A little less fight and a little more spark...'

I hope the sparkling spirit of @WerMaat is visited upon us, soon.

I think you have a better handle on this than I have, even if you haven't read Goethe.
You are right. It takes more than words alone.

I think Hegel's response might be that Goethe represents it but does not raise it to the level of science — Fooloso4

Goethe does that elsewhere. Possibly even at the same time. One can write poetry even as one studies rocks. He was multi-talented that guy. I mentioned his theories earlier.

Self-engendering spirit. — Fooloso4

Yeah, I got that. I just don't get it. What is there at the beginning...

Man does not engender the concept but thinks it, develops it dialectically, actualizes it. — Fooloso4

Depends what you mean by 'the concept'.
If Man does not engender the concept, then who ?
God ?
Or what ?
Cosmic Consciousness ?

Perhaps what Goethe was getting at is the impotence of mere words. Actions not words are primary. Hegel's use of terms such as 'logos', 'reason', and 'concept' are self-generative, that is, not passive descriptions of something separate and other. — Fooloso4

No, I don't think that's it. Goethe was a poet and thinker. Faust was the character trying to translate the New Testament into German. From what I remember, he was seeking inspiration having dried up in more ways than one. Then came the Spirit...

@WerMaat will probably know more than I do.

What I can share is one of Goethe's short poems which speaks to his understanding of natural process.
Paraphrased from 'Goethe - poet and thinker' by Wilkinson and Willoughby, pp21-25.

3 brief statements of facts (no metaphors or similes) are followed by an assertion for the future.

Uber allen Gipfeln
Ist Ruh.

In allen Wipfeln
Spurest du
Kaum einen Hauch.

Die Vogelein schweigen im Walde,
Warte nur, balde
Ruhest du auch.

By the very order of the poem, Goethe is embraced in it, the last link in the chain of being.
From the inanimate to the animate, from the mineral, through the vegetable, to the animal kingdom, from the hilltop, to the treetops, to the birds, and so at last to man.

The subjective and objective experience are completely fused.
The appearances of Nature are rendered, but also the organic relations between them; man's mind is shown as the final link in the chain of creation, Nature become conscious of itself, but it also takes its place within nature. It does not stand outside or over against it.

It was Goethe's way of being - the poet; not here offering conscious opinions, intellectual convictions and philosophical beliefs. The latter don't always express the self, they may even disguise.
At the level of his deepest thought, the subjective and objective modes are quite evidently harmonised.' — Wilkinson and Willoughby

And here, the concept of Bildung : ( discussed earlier, para 21 )

The concept of Bildung—a word that means learning and education but also implies a cultivation of the self and of maturity—was central to Goethe’s thought, and he, in turn, made it central to German culture. For Thomas Mann, whose admiration of Goethe took the form of spiritual imitation, Goethe was above all an educator, but one who had first to learn, through experience, the wisdom he taught. Mann wrote that a “vocation towards educating others does not spring from inner harmony, but rather from inner uncertainties, disharmony, difficulty—from the difficulty of knowing one’s own self.” — Adam Kirsch

I take this to mean that the object, that is, spirit becoming an object to itself, is self-engendering, it conceives itself. It is pure concept, reason, logos.

Spirit knowing itself in that way as spirit is science. Science is its actuality, and science is the realm it builds for itself in its own proper element.

Man does not engender the concept but thinks it, develops it dialectically, actualizes it. — Fooloso4

When I think of spirit, beginnings and qualitative leaps, Goethe comes to mind. With his:
In the beginning was the act. Im Anfang war die Tat - Faust.
As opposed to the Word of the Bible.

(He opens a tome [of the New Testament] and begins.)
It says: ‘In the beginning was the Word [Wort].’
Already I am stopped. It seems absurd.
The Word does not deserve the highest prize,I must translate it otherwise
If I am well inspired and not blind.
It says: In the beginning was the Mind [Sinn].
Ponder that first line, wait and see,
Lest you should write too hastily.
Is mind the all-creating source?It ought to say: In the beginning there was Force [Kraft].
Yet something warns me as I grasp the pen,
That my translation must be changed again.
The spirit helps me. Now it is exact.
I write: In the beginning was the Act [Tat]
— Goethe's Faust

His qualitative leap ? Perhaps this:

Ten years of office work, of literary projects left incomplete, finally took their toll. In 1786, in a spirit of adventure characteristic more of a young poet than of a middle-aged civil servant, Goethe abruptly threw aside his work and left Weimar without telling friends and colleagues where he was going. Travelling under an assumed identity, he made his way to Italy, where he spent the next two years studying art and enjoying the country that he described, in one of his most famous poems, as “the land where lemon blossoms blow, / And through dark leaves the golden oranges glow.”

— Adam Kirsch

There is no first principle of philosophy upon which everything else rests and is supported. Both the truth of a proposition and its negation are moments within the movement of the system of knowledge. — Fooloso4

Yes. It is about the testing of ideas or concepts. The dance of the dialectic.

The dialectic of discussion. In a properly conducted debate, an idea is put forward (the Thesis) and is then countered by the opposing view (the Antithesis) which negates it. Finally, through a thorough process of discussion, which explores the issue concerned from all points of view and discloses all the hidden contradictions, we arrive at a conclusion (the Synthesis). We may or may not arrive at agreement but by the very process of discussion, we have deepened our knowledge and understanding and raised the whole discussion onto a different plane.

https://www.marxist.com/science-old/dialecticalmaterialism.html

Contrary to the assumption that the ground or principles of reason must be firm and unchanging, the movement of reason has no fixed ground. A principle is a starting point. The positive movement is via the negative, the negation of what is taken as true. It is not the truth but in the movement, the development, the working out of truth. — Fooloso4

I think this is a good summary. It relates to my last post regarding the subject matter of the text.
Geist - the concept of and its working out in real life.
The spirit of philosophy.

In as much as there is nothing personal, still, though, you are pressed for some reason or reasons. I think Hegel is going to investigate those reasons via his analysis of history, in a dialectic of history.

That is, there is a scale appropriate to the actions and motivations of individuals, and that scale not-so-much appropriate for understanding movements on a larger scale. — tim wood

I think the matter of scale you describe is important to what Hegel is presenting — Valentinus

As already discussed, the movement of history is central to Hegel's system.
Of course, there are matters of 'scale' within this.
Paraphrasing some previous references and thoughts:

We develop from individual consciousness to self consciousness - seeking knowledge from an individual perspective to the universal. Via the development of the culture.
A kind of global humanism dealing with problems of humanity.

We have intrinsic purpose. We follow both intuition, insights and reason on the path to self-realisation.

The scale concerns relative degrees; measuring both the quantitative gradations and the qualitative leaps.

The subject matter of the text is both the Concept of Geist (Spirit) and its working out in real life.
Theory and Practice.

Philosophical theories are neither true or false. They offer different perspectives on progressive development.
Philosophy is viewed and understood from a historical perspective.
Philosophical concepts made by humans who relate to each other in action and reaction.
The practical role is to formulate ideas which might lead to new ways of thinking about the world and our place in it.

I think for him the game is over, unity has been realized. — Fooloso4

If he is with us in spirit :halo: then he is also in purgatory :groan:
Then again, he could be :rofl:

So project fear was in fact reality?': readers on no-deal Brexit funding
Readers have been reacting to the government’s £2.1bn funding boost for no-deal Brexit preparations

Funny how the old magic money tree * can cough up some dosh if required. But of course there is no chance of money for social provision. Instead we can be proud that we are a society with food banks where Tory MPs can take selfies.

In the distant pre-unicorn days I remember when George Osborne talked about an emergency budget necessitated by Brexit it was lambasted as project fear. But now it’s “planning”. pipini

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/01/so-project-fear-was-in-fact-reality-readers-on-no-deal-brexit-funding


* The magic money tree

"Theresa May has come under fire for telling nurses “there is no magic money tree” to increase their pay as living costs continue to rise.

The Prime Minister was responding to a member of the audience at an election special of BBC Question Time, who asked: “My wage slips from 2009 reflect exactly what I'm earning today. How can that be fair, in the light of the job that we do?“

The moderator, David Dimbleby, asked whether the Prime Minister could “sleep happily”, adding: ”Do you think it is fair that the nurses get just a 1% increase year in, year out, regardless of inflation, so they get poorer, so some of them we're told go to food banks?”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-nurse-magic-money-tree-bbcqt-question-time-pay-rise-eight-years-election-latest-a7770576.html

WW1 was a war of individual people? Jim and Steve and Gunter and Heinrich? Or the immigration/refuge crisis in the world today - a matter of individuals not liking where they are? Or is there some more elemental force at work? — tim wood

OK. Good examples of individuals getting caught up in events outwith their control.
Within which there is still that search - desire - for freedom, progress - where hope might prevail as fear encompasses them. Desire and Fear being basic driving forces in human activity.
Reason appears to fly out the window when political rhetoric is used to stir up communal emotion.
Where there was progress, regress steps in.
So far, so human.

To return to the initial metaphor cleverly employed to draw us in; the natural, organic growth of bud, blossom, fruit. This can only take us so far in understanding.
It is not sufficient. It takes no account of all of the above.It is 'impersonal' in the sense of not having human qualities, emotions or reason. We are more than physical, passive growth. We are active, interacting, to grow spiritually, academically, socially, whateverly - interdisciplinary.

So, this 'impersonal movement' you talked of above - which you appeared to specifically relate to the metaphor - why would you think that this is how Hegel will progress his argument or theory ? Or is it a different kind of 'impersonal movement' you have in mind ?

And what is meant by your question: 'is there some more elemental force at work' ?
What do you mean by 'elemental' ? Your 'clarification' needs clarifying.

Take your pick. From:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/elemental

Elemental biological needs.
Essential constituent of something.
Forming an integral part. Inherent.
Resembling a great force of nature. Violent rains or passion.

A supernatural being. Spirit.
An elementary part or principle.Two different epistemologies:
1. Science > strives to understand the elementals of material existence ( empiricism)
2. Theology > our universality, existence described through faith.

Or perhaps none or all of the above...I look forward to your explication.

-----------

And so we return to Hegel and questions arise as to his meaning.

23:

"The need to represent the absolute as subject has helped itself to such propositions as “God is the eternal,” or “God is the moral order of the world,” or “God is love,” etc." - Hegel.

Does Hegel intend for us to draw a connection between “God is love”, “The life of God and divine cognition ... as a game love plays with itself” (19),and the goal of philosophy as moving “nearer to the goal where it can lay aside the title of love of knowing and be actual knowing (5)? — Fooloso4

How do we understand him ?

The notions of culture and education that are going back and forth, I'm agnostic on, but I am pretty sure that in as much as Hegelian motion is in things like the plant and the tree, I think he is going to argue that history/culture is similarly shaped and conditioned by impersonal movement - — tim wood

...you are 'pretty sure that...Hegel is is going to argue that history/culture is shaped by impersonal movement'.
Why would you think that ?
How could it be 'impersonal' ? — Amity

...Or another way, it's all personal, but more accurately considered at the appropriate scale as "impersonal." — tim wood

Please clarify.

...

The notions of culture and education that are going back and forth, I'm agnostic on, but I am pretty sure that in as much as Hegelian motion is in things like the plant and the tree, I think he is going to argue that history/culture is similarly shaped and conditioned by impersonal movement - — tim wood

So, are you saying you don't know about - or recognise - the importance of culture ?
What particular notion of 'culture' do you have difficulty with ?

But you are 'pretty sure that...Hegel is is going to argue that history/culture is shaped by impersonal movement'.

Why would you think that ?
How could it be 'impersonal' ?

gebildet" means nothing but "formed". It has the second meaning of "educated", true, but Hegel's context leaves it open whether the rationality has simply "formed" and developed itself, or whether it was "educated" from an outside source. And the word "cultural" does not show up at all. — WerMaat

Interesting to read of this translation. However, as you say it is ambiguous.
Within a specific passage it could and probably does take on the particular meaning, as suggested.

I feel that Hegel is leaning more towards the self-formed.
— WerMaat

Yes, I think that this is right, but self-formation is a cultural formation. We are shaped by and within our culture. As individuals we are not wholly separate or other. To use the agricultural root from which we get culture, it is the soil in which we grow and are nourished. — Fooloso4

Agreed. Self-formation is related to recognition and relationships.

I don't see a reference to culture, to society or education in its literal sense. — WerMaat

Would it have been necessary to include such a reference. Isn't it fundamental ?
Aren't we dependent on the

prior existence of a material culture, subject to interpretation.. — Andy Blunden

What I am stressing is the importance of culture in the development of the thinking I. — Fooloso4

Yes, I think we all agree on that, don't we ? Perhaps not.

I have been reading an article by Andy Blunden - ' Hegel, Recognition and Intersubjectivity'.
Number 19 - its download title is 'Mediation and Intersubjectivist Interpretations of Hegel', 2007.
From:
https://ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/works/on-hegel.htm

It is a broad, pragmatic interpretation of Hegel's philosophy of Spirit.
Blunden distinguishes this from the narrow pragmatism which ignores the meaning already invested in cultural inheritance.

Thanks for good advice.
I am hoping that the 'Useful Hints and Tips' section is expanded/updated so that there is a permanent place for such.

There are so many excellent functions as per editing symbols - I didn't realise until fairly recently.

The bold, italics, underline, etc - are familiar to most. Some need a clearer explanation.
For example, I didn't appreciate the usefulness of the @ function.
@Baden

Another thing I noticed when I requoted a poster who had included a quote from e.g. Hegel.
This was not transferred over. So, I had to use the quote function again to highlight and name Hegel.
It can be a bit of a palaver, but very useful once you know how !

Ty, amity! — tim wood

:up:
Thank you !

Oh Wow !
Fight back.

Media and Democrats lead response to Trump’s racist Cummings attack

...That prompted the Sun to compare Trump to a dog.

“Slamming Baltimore must have been irresistible in a Pavlovian way,” the paper wrote. “Fox News rang the bell, the president salivated and his thumbs moved across his cellphone into action.” — Martin Pengelly and Edward Helmore

Yes, the development of the individual is through the development of the culture. But also, it is "the few" the philosophers who are responsible for the development of the culture. — Fooloso4

So, we should thank our lucky stars ? For the 'few' - who knew what to do?
And the opposing view ?

with Hegel Heraclitus lives to fight another day. — Fooloso4

:smile:
I am beginning to enjoy Hegel. Worth the effort.
Thanks again.

In paragraph 4 — Fooloso4

Hah. Talk about circling back...
We kinda skipped over that right at the beginning.
(Amidst the confusion of Kaufmann v Pinkard and their different paragraph numbering )

Glad you rectified that and added your understanding. Most helpful.

Funny. Boris morphs into Trump.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/28/dude-i-take-no-pleasure-in-having-been-right-about-boris-johnson-stewart-lee

Hegel expresses the same idea in yet another way, this time making explicit that it is not just something that occurs in the consciousness of the individual:
— Fooloso4

However much the embryo is indeed in itself a person, it is still not a person for itself; the embryo is a person for itself only as a culturally formed and educated rationality which has made itself into what it is in itself. — Hegel

It is not the capacity for rationality but the culturally formed and educated rationality that allows the person to become for herself what she is in herself.

[ On requoting this, I noted the original Hegel quote marks were not transferred. I needed to use the quote function again :roll: ]

Re: para 21:

So, becoming all that you can be depends not only on capacity for reason but being part of a society of others with whom you can relate and depend on for nourishment and enrichment. Combined with reflection it leads the way to an improved understanding of particulars and the universal. Is that about right ?

While the importance of culture was recognized by the Greeks, it was to a large degree atemporal. The importance of history as self-moving and self-development was not a factor. The truth was regarded as unchanging. Today both views are represented and defended. — Fooloso4

I am surprised that the importance of history in or as self-development wasn't recognised by the Greeks.
What did they see as the truth ?
How does this compare with the Romans ?
That will probably come later...

That sort of thing reminds me of:

Thus, not only is the former anticipation that the absolute is subject not the actuality of this concept, but it even makes that actuality impossible, for it posits the concept as a point wholly at rest, whereas the concept is self-movement."
— tim wood — Valentinus

At first glance the quote looks to be the words of tim wood. As suggested before, to avoid any confusion on requotes, it is good to give Hegel his due by either naming him and/or paragraph.
WerMaat agreed with this and changed accordingly.

I know that clicking on the link returns you to the post where you can see it relates to para 23.
However not everyone clicks, it is simply read as is, especially in requotes. As can be seen when I quoted you just now.

Unfortunately, Tim continues the practice of posting Hegel paragraphs without using the quote function.
Why ?

[ I only recently mastered the art of the quote function from external sources (different from internal quoting other posters) due to similar concerns.
In my case, I didn't wish to take credit for words not my own.]

The first question should not be whether he believed in God but what he means by God. — Fooloso4

Indeed.

Like talking about man when he is but an embryo, we should wait to see how things develop. — Fooloso4

Perhaps. However, the Preface is by its very nature limited.
For a more expansive, possibly clearer view, we would need to read the chapter on Religion.
A foray into Rockmore...

Chapter 7
"Religion"

One of the great, enduring mysteries of Hegel scholarship is the role of religion in his mature theory, including the Phenomenology. More than a century and a half ago, the breakup of the Hegelian school after his death into different factions already turned on different approaches to this mystery. In simplest terms, the orthodox, or Hegelian middle, desired to maintain what was perceived as his synthesis of religion and philosophy, the Hegelian right wished to subordinate philosophy to religion, and the Hegelian left wanted to eliminate the religious component entirely.

The idea that Hegel is a basically religious thinker is very strong, for instance, in British Hegelianism, which routinely relates all phenomena to the self-development of religious spirit that is equated to the Christian God, thereby further expanding the traditional right-wing reading of Hegel. — Tom Rockmore

https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft7d5nb4r8;brand=ucpress

I asked about the reversibility of terms because the logic that seems to be operating here does not seem to be focused on corresponding necessity to event in the way other ideas of causality are often discussed. — Valentinus

OK. It would be helpful if you could expand on this objection.
If this is about the Master/Slave dialectic, then there are many views and interpretations.
If it is about the particular Rockmore quote I linked to, then he probably had more to say on the subject.
For me, this is only an awakening which will hopefully lead to a deeper understanding, given time and application. Clearly you have read more and have developed opinions which you are sharing. Thanks.

So, to return to your objection. It requires more detail from you. What is it that concerns you ?
Where is the weakness ?
How does it affect the overall drive of the argument, the acceptance of Hegel's theory - or its importance in the progress of philosophy ?

I need to read more about this. To this end, I place the following links:
( any other help would be appreciated)

http://culturalstudiesnow.blogspot.com/2017/03/hegel-on-master-slave-dialectic-summary.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master–slave_dialectic

http://www.cambridgeblog.org/2014/05/hegel-on-the-master-slave-relation/

I think you are entirely right. It would be helpful to circle back. After all, the circle is the best and most powerful image of the self-movement of spirit. Since it is so easy to get lost in the details and opacity of Hegel's writing, before moving forward I want to collect a few things together that he has said. — Fooloso4

Well, we are roughly a quarter of the way up the mountain. And sidetracks have been explored.
Good to have a picnic break to survey the scenery. I will digest later.
Summaries are always useful, thanks.

That’s all we really know about the man behind the clown mask: It’s a person with no convictions, delivering a political project he does not believe in, with a plan that does not exist. — Ian Dunt

:up: In a nutshell.

:up:
Channel 4 news, interviewers and interviews.The best.
Even the weather forecast :cool:

Edit to add: I note we can subscribe to this.

https://www.channel4.com/news/no-deal-extension-election-boris-johnsons-brexit-plan-politics-where-next-podcast

Listen and subscribe to Politics: Where Next? on Apple Podcasts, Spotifyand other good apps.

As Boris Johnson moves into Number 10, who better to talk to this week than Peter Foster, the Europe Editor of The Daily Telegraph – widely seen as the best plugged in analyst of the Brexit saga on the bloc…

And Francis Elliott – The Times Political Editor – the first to spot a snap election was coming down the tracks back in 2017. What does he think is coming down the tracks now?

There are new episodes of Politics: Where Next? every Friday. — Gary Gibbon

Vote Lib Dem — Michael

Really ? You don't think they would make a devilish pact with the Tories again ?
Ah sorry - this was about being an anti-Brexit Conservative.
You're right.

If you want to feel happy for a fleeting hour or so watch this excellent debate regarding Greek vs. Rome and which culture modernity is more indebted to between Mary Beard and Boris Johnson. Boris ends up looking like an undergrad compared to the magisterial expertise of Mary. — Maw

I do. And I will watch this later. The debate is mentioned here in an excellent article. Heading:

The prime minister has a bust of his Greek hero in No 10. But Johnson is no Pericles

He is more like Alcibiades, the vain playboy with unpredictable loyalties who briefly succeeded the Athenian leader.

In 2015 at Central Hall Westminster, Johnson debated Greece versus Romewith the historian Mary Beard. He presented his beloved Greece as a brilliant, sophisticated, multifaceted cradle of democracy. But as Beard pointed out, political Athens was all romantic bluster. It was Rome that triumphed. Greece might fashion marble but, as Virgil said: “These be your arts, to impose the ways of peace.” Beard won the vote. — Simon Jenkins

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/27/boris-johnson-no-10-pericles-greek-hero

You know, I get the feeling that you have grasped all that pretty well already. — WerMaat

Thank you. Appearance can be deceptive !

(I've not even read all of the articles you've linked.) — WerMaat

Tsk, tsk ! :wink:

I had an epiphany about restaurants a long time ago. You don't go to a restaurant to get what you like, rather you go to a restaurant to (because you) like what you get. That is, they do what they do and you cannot change their menu - and you like it or you don't. — tim wood

Would you go to the Restaurant at the End of the Universe ?

All the jargon, then, applies to something concrete. So far I find that concreteness best laid out in his metaphor of plant-flower-fruit, and acorn seed-tree. The totality of a thing, then, lies not in any moment, but all of its moments considered as a one, a unity. — tim wood

Yes. That is what drew me in. The first mouthwatering bite...and then look what happened...
A great discussion. Thanks to you and all.

The style is typical for the time, but it could be wielded with more elegance and clarity. Take Goethe - his reputation as a master of language is sometimes a bit blown up, but not undeserved. Texts by Goethe are far easier to read — WerMaat

Now this captured my attention. I am very fond of Goethe.
Having read one or two pieces of his literary work, I hadn't thought of Goethe in terms of German Idealism. Wanting to know where his theoretical texts fitted in...I googled.
So, up they pop, here:
1790 - Metamorphosis of plants
1810 - Theory of colours.

1801 - Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_German_idealism

Goethean Science -
Goethean Science defines and values "expansion of knowledge" as: 1) Observing organic transformation in natural phenomena over time (historical progression); and 2) Organic transformation of the inner life of the experimenter.

"Individual phenomena must never be torn out of context. Stay with the phenomena, think within them, accede with your intentionality to their patterns, which will gradually open your thinking to an intuition of their structure.”
— Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

[ Article includes the Kantian Problem]
— Wiki

So, there we have it, Goethe developed a phenomenological approach to natural history or natural philosophy. This gave me an increased understanding and appreciation of historical progress. The changing ideas...

The timeline picks up on the 'Pantheism Controversy' ( see para 17 discussion ).
This a major event in German cultural history (1785 - 1789 )
Goethe is linked to this via his poem 'Prometheus' published in 1789.

So, it seems that Hegel and Goethe were kindred spirits, even dying within a year of each other.
If we wanted to attach a label to their cold, white big toes, then perhaps 'humanist' would fit the bill...as well as any other...