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
- Jun 24, 2007Dear 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:
>
I agree that we need to see how Aufhebung _preserves_ what it
>.... 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.
"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 - << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>