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

4397[hegel] Re: Translating the Image?

Expand Messages
  • Bob Wallace
    Jun 24, 2007
      Dear Jürgen Hilbers,

      I've found both of your emails about English translations of the
      Phenomenology very thought-provoking. Particularly the second one, in
      which you write:

      >
      >.... by consequence of that any movement of "Aufhebung" never can
      >let out of sight WHAT has to be brought to "Aufhebung", the/an
      >irreducible level of sense-certainty/sensual witness ... that means
      >the critique of "pure meaning" does not mean that mineness/meaning
      >is despised or could even be despised; meaning/mineness is just
      >un-complete and this uncompleteness of miness/meaning is irreducible
      >uncompleteness (but it can sequentially be completed up to absolute
      >knowledge/wit which is the knowledge/wit of the absolute IN ITS
      >RELATION TO MINENESS) ...
      >
      >meaning/mineness never can be given up because the subject itself is
      >irreducible and the basic feature of subjekt is
      >sense-certainty/senusal witness .... wherein the subject itself is
      >being included ... etc. etc.

      I agree that we need to see how Aufhebung _preserves_ what it
      "cancels"; and this isn't often done. I, for one, would be very
      interested to see a more extended account, from you, of the argument
      of the Phen. as a whole. Or perhaps someone else has published an
      account that you admire?

      I certainly agree with you that Baillie and Miller can both be
      extremely misleading. In studying the Wissenschaft der Logik (which I
      know better than I know the Phen), I've found the German text simply
      indispensable. I think most sophisticated English commentators, such
      as H.L. Harris and Ken Westphal, work entirely with the German. Of
      course, they provide only limited help for the poor Anglophone
      beginning student or non-specialist, who wants to be able to "read
      Hegel for herself." Your suggestions for alternate English
      translations are clever, but (naturally) bring problems of their own;
      mainly, that English speakers are completely unaware of the
      etymological connections between "witness" and "wit," for example.

      Best, Bob Wallace
      --
      Robert M. Wallace
      2503 E. Olive St.
      Shorewood, WI 53211
      USA
    • Show all 13 messages in this topic