Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Hegel on the Master - Slave Relationship

Expand Messages
  • Mary
    Jim, How goes your reading of Hegel?. Since the election rhetoric is over, I m rereading the Phenomenology. However, this time I m striving for a more naive
    Message 1 of 14 , Nov 15, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Jim,

      How goes your reading of Hegel?. Since the election rhetoric is over, I'm rereading the Phenomenology. However, this time I'm striving for a more 'naive' reading, one not tinted by either theistic or atheistic coloring, a more objective reading if such is possible. I'm to the point where commentaries and secondary sources have become a hindrance. Spirit is no longer a frightening word :)

      Mary

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
      >
      > Mary,
      >
      > Yes, it's a nice change for me too to be discussing philosophy again.
      >
      > I have now read most of "The Phenomenology of Spirit" and I have sampled a few of the secondary commentaries on Hegel.
      >
      > I'd like to tackle "The Science of Logic" at some stage, but my progress is slow as I try to take in Hegel's ideas which can be quite strange to me.
      >
      > Hopefully I'll write more soon.
      >
      > Jim
      >
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Jim,
      > >
      > > Positivity and telos are part of one interpretation of Hegel and usually part of the more theological reading. As you can see, I'm not with that 'school.' My understanding is that Geist isn't a collection of minds but Idea/Truth/Knowledge not only unfolding but also the process itself. The specific direction of the unfolding can't be predetermined. The primary things I've taken away from my preliminary readings are negation, and dialectical and speculative reason. I'm especially fond of the beginning of the Science of Logic. I've learned much more about Hegel from the secondary sources and critical reading I prefer :) Nice to chat with someone about philosophy again!
      > >
      > > Mary
      > >
      >
    • Jim
      Hello Mary, Thank you for enquiring how my Hegel reading is going. I have to admit it has taken a back seat in the last couple of months as I have been reading
      Message 2 of 14 , Nov 18, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello Mary,

        Thank you for enquiring how my Hegel reading is going.

        I have to admit it has taken a back seat in the last couple of months as I have been reading other things for reading and discussion groups I attend here in Nottingham, England.

        I hope to get back to Hegel before too long as I wish to complete The Phenomenology – I am about three-quarters through it. I am also half way through Charles Taylor's book on Hegel which I am thoroughly enjoying reading.

        As you suggest it is possible to read Hegel in different ways – with either theistic or atheistic presuppositions. However I try to read without bringing in my own biases if this is possible. I suppose this involves a `naive reading', similar to what you are doing at the moment.

        I think with a philosopher as difficult as Hegel, reading some of the secondary literature is essential, but I try to balance my reading of the secondary literature so I can compare opposing interpretations.

        Jim



        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
        >
        > Jim,
        >
        > How goes your reading of Hegel?. Since the election rhetoric is over, I'm rereading the Phenomenology. However, this time I'm striving for a more 'naive' reading, one not tinted by either theistic or atheistic coloring, a more objective reading if such is possible. I'm to the point where commentaries and secondary sources have become a hindrance. Spirit is no longer a frightening word :)
        >
        > Mary
        >
      • Mary
        I read Hegel early in the morning when my mind is rested but only for an hour, then return to any challenging sections the following morning. After reading
        Message 3 of 14 , Nov 18, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          I read Hegel early in the morning when my mind is rested but only for an hour, then return to any challenging sections the following morning. After reading about the universal object and universal subject vs. the impossibility of a universal experience, in the Sense Certainty section today, I sat dazed with my hands over my face and pondered the assumptions of common thought. I enjoy his rigorous exposition of philosophy as a logic and a science.

          Mary

          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hello Mary,
          >
          > Thank you for enquiring how my Hegel reading is going.
          >
          > I have to admit it has taken a back seat in the last couple of months as I have been reading other things for reading and discussion groups I attend here in Nottingham, England.
          >
          > I hope to get back to Hegel before too long as I wish to complete The Phenomenology – I am about three-quarters through it. I am also half way through Charles Taylor's book on Hegel which I am thoroughly enjoying reading.
          >
          > As you suggest it is possible to read Hegel in different ways – with either theistic or atheistic presuppositions. However I try to read without bringing in my own biases if this is possible. I suppose this involves a `naive reading', similar to what you are doing at the moment.
          >
          > I think with a philosopher as difficult as Hegel, reading some of the secondary literature is essential, but I try to balance my reading of the secondary literature so I can compare opposing interpretations.
          >
          > Jim
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Jim,
          > >
          > > How goes your reading of Hegel?. Since the election rhetoric is over, I'm rereading the Phenomenology. However, this time I'm striving for a more 'naive' reading, one not tinted by either theistic or atheistic coloring, a more objective reading if such is possible. I'm to the point where commentaries and secondary sources have become a hindrance. Spirit is no longer a frightening word :)
          > >
          > > Mary
          > >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.