- Dec 24, 2018
As I noted, I take your deception to be a self-deception.
- Alan
From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2018 8:26 AM
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [hegel] metaphysicsWell, the truth is I thought I was paying you a kind of compliment, or showing magnanimity at least, in inviting you to read/have a look at my book. So that's "what makes me think" etc. "worth your bother".. As you would say, that is amusing, your response, though no, it is regrettable, from my viewpoint of "consistent evasion of the truth", I mean. Newman says the true hypocrite doesn't know he is one (he truly evades the truth).
I surely do live in quite a lot of self-deception. Resisting the known truth, by the way, is the traditional identification of the sin against the Spirit which alone is not forgiveable. But I have always resisted that interpretation, since who is there who does not resist the known truth, at some point or other for some time or other at least? Actually, I have serious doubts about the final viability of the concept of sin as often presented. See my "Beyond the Sin Paradigm": yes, do see it.
Ideas of convincing you did not really come into it: that is a kind of skew perspective if used generally among scholars. Again, which of us has demonstrated what is not finally demonstrable:
and here you mention arguments again: see my other post to follow:
Stephen Theron.
From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of 'Alan Ponikvar' ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 21 December 2018 18:45
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [hegel] metaphysicsYou have a talent for evasion. Put enough time between past and present and one can say almost anything. I presented a quote laden sustained exposition of Hegel’s true infinite. At the time you made excuses for not commenting. Now with enough time past you feel comfortable convincing yourself that our differences come down to my not having thought much about the true infinite. And no, I cannot forgive you for what has been your consistent evasion of the truth. It is not so much that you are wrong. It is that you live an ongoing self-deception.
Now, I see that you want to convince me that you have written something worthy of my attention. Given years of posts demonstrating your profound lack of understanding of Hegel what makes you think I would think it worth my bother to read your new book?
There is one simple motive for not considering what you say. I have strong almost daily evidence that you not only do not understand Hegel, but maybe more importantly you have demonstrated that you are unable to make an argument. And let’s be clear. You have written several books on Hegel. You have made no impression on other Hegel scholars. I am not the only one who will ignore your latest book.
- Alan
From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2018 6:19 AM
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [hegel] metaphysicsAlan,
I have never asked you to repeat anything. I don't think Hegel has a different account of infinity from anyone else - it is a clear concept and very simple. He simply, I would at least suggest, or perhaps complicatedly, brings out all or as much as he can of what this conceptual datum entails. He calls this that is a bringing out "the science of logic".
I was probably not too impressed by the sustained reading you mention, as in general I don't think you have thought much about the true infinite (forgive me if I am wrong). You want to get somewhere, on this list at least (I have otherwise learned to appreciate your spiritual/philosophical coomitment), and that's finite.
I have given quite a lot of time to your messages here in fact, though most of my available time has been given, most recently, to getting ready my Contemplating Hegel's Logic - "Mind as forma formarum". This is the longest of my eight Hegel books. Yesterday I completed the final editing for the publishers, or at least I hope final. There you would find my answers to your objections or at least an account of what I find to be Hegel's answers. I would be pleased if you read it carefully, getting used to my approach and method of presentation, and am sure I would thrive and prosper upon your criticism, hostile or not. It does often look here as if you advance excuses or let's say motives rather for not considering what I say, especially when addressed directly to you. Perhaps this may be an exception - it helps to keep the list alive, you know.
Stephen Theron
From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of 'Alan Ponikvar' ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 20 December 2018 19:55
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [hegel] metaphysicsMy assertions simply recollect the scores of posts in which I explained all this.
Since nothing sticks with you, you are always asking me to repeat my arguments...
Earlier this year I gave a sustained detailed reading of the account of the true infinite in the Logic.
You begged off, saying you did not have time … time for what?
I suspect you never have time to actually seriously engage in discussion about arguably Hegel’s key concept.
This is the other reason why I leave you be.
- Alan
From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2018 7:06 AM
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [hegel] metaphysicsSo you do not need to go into what I say. That makes it easier for you, and perhaps for me too, I have to say, somewhat pessimistically. My hope though is that my assertions (but surely I am less assertive than you here?) are of interest for some others.
Stephen Theron.
From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of 'Alan Ponikvar' ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 19 December 2018 18:27
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [hegel] metaphysicsNo, you do not argue. You assert.
The infinite as a determinate thought is spurious as Hegel demonstrates in his account of the finite and infinite.
The true infinite are these two taken as vanishing finitudes.
Talk of our relation to god is theological and decidedly has nothing to do with infinite speculative self-thinking as I have shown.
- Alan
From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 6:46 AM
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [hegel] metaphysicsIf the infinite were not itself determinate (if I do not misunderstand this term) it would not be infinite. But of course it is self-determining, although there too not in some way that could be fully grasped by finite and/or discursive thinking in the sense of ratiocination. So, when we say "God is love", that is determinate, not even if we could affirm the opposite at the same time (or rather that love is itself hate, attraction repulsion, good evil, etc.,(not) sticking to the soulless term "is").
This is why the infinite has to be, so to say, hidden, i.e. objectively and not by some wish to be mysterious. It does not lie passive to the mind of some other. That is why it is said in theology that while God can have no real relation to us, we may have, do have it to God, to the Absolute or to what is Absolute (all Hegel's philosophy arises from vivid awareness of this, I would and do argue). For here all relations are rationate or "of reason". Of course adoption of Absolute Idealism entails restatement of this situation. For here all relations are rationate or "of reason" (only, though this term is then no longer appropriate).
I do not think Hegel means by "thinking" e.g. at 159, as one can see, finite ratiocination merely. But is it such finite thinking that is a self-thinking, for him? This is not the sense in which Mind thinks only itself, pretty clearly.
ie with that. It is the sense involved in the claim to truth that thinking as such entails. "In thy light shall we see light". If this seems to you simple then you must be very complicated.
'
Is the I a vanishing finitude? We are advised to forget our fathers' house but would we say to our fathers that they are vanishing finitudes? Well, let the dead bury their dead, it was said, but still ...
Stephen Theron.
f this seems to you simple then you are very complicated.From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of 'Alan Ponikvar' ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 17 December 2018 20:57
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [hegel] metaphysicsWhere metaphysics has the absolute as the topic of its thought, speculation is the absolute as self-thinking.
And since thinking is by definition determinate, self-thinking is a finite thinking that exhibits the form of its self-thinking – not the content – as absolute or infinite.
Otherwise put, finite thinking as a self-thinking has for its content vanishing finitudes. It is this vanishing content of self-thinking that exhibits absolute or infinite form.
There is no content other than the vanishing finitudes.
This is radically deflationary because it eliminates any notion of the metaphysical however conceived as what thought is about.
- Alan
From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2018 6:00 AM
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [hegel] metaphysicsOne might rather say reason thinks the absolute but precisely not as an object and that that is rational.. Meaning by reason not ratio (limited?) but intellectus (necessarily infinite and the infinite: the condition for truth in the mind, the truh or otherwise, for example, of your "reason is limit thinking", given that this can be understood ).
Stephen Theron.
From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of 'Alan Ponikvar' ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 13 December 2018 19:13
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [hegel] metaphysicsHegel rescues reason by showing how reason abides contradiction.
This is nonmetaphysical because reason does not break through its own limits to think the absolute as if it were some metaphysical object.
Instead, reason is limit thinking.
For Hegel, as with Kant, the illusion – metaphysical in nature - is to believe that there is something thinkably absolute beyond the limit.
The speculative truth of the matter is that what is thinkably absolute is reason at its own limits.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>
Attention: Starting December 14, 2019 Yahoo Groups will no longer host user created content on its sites. New content can no longer be uploaded after October 28, 2019. Sending/Receiving email functionality is not going away, you can continue to communicate via any email client with your group members. Learn More