... oops ... the cited text is not from Harris but from GWFH himself ... that's to say: Hegel demonstrates a certain position of the spirit ... see:


http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/ph/phprefac.htm

3. Present position of the spirit
7. (...)

8. With this demand there goes the strenuous effort, almost perfervidly zealous in its activity, to rescue mankind from being sunken in what is sensuous, vulgar, and of fleeting importance, and to raise men’s eyes to the stars; as if men had quite forgotten the divine, and were on the verge of finding satisfaction, like worms, in mud and water. Time was when man had a heaven, decked and fitted out with endless wealth of thoughts and pictures. The significance of all that is, lay in the thread of light by which it was attached to heaven; instead of dwelling in the present as it is here and now, the eye glanced away over the present to the Divine, away, so to say, to a present that lies beyond. The mind’s gaze had to be directed under compulsion to what is earthly, and kept fixed there; and it has needed a long time to introduce that clearness, which only celestial realities had, into the crassness and confusion shrouding the sense of things earthly, and to make attention to the immediate present as such, which was called Experience, of interest and of value. Now we have apparently the need for the opposite of all this; man’s mind and interest are so deeply rooted in the earthly that we require a like power to have them raised above that level. His spirit shows such poverty of nature that it seems to long for the mere pitiful feeling of the divine in the abstract, and to get refreshment from that, like a wanderer in the desert craving for the merest mouthful of water. By the little which can thus satisfy the needs of the human spirit we can measure the extent of its loss.

JH:
... this comment by Hegel - and it seems to be a comment by Hegel - ... - goes too heavily into a material direction; and thus into the direction of a pure *material* classical empiricism, where 'in the last instance' even causality is a pure *psychological* phenomenon *of analogy* ... I therefore would have to reclaim to read Hegel more formally against that, that's to say: more philosophically ... the 'comment' (...) refers far to much to a negative material discourse on sensuality ... to nihilism, nothingness of the sensual, clercalism not at least ... for me it seems clear that - towards this discourse - there's formal discourse on sensuality possible an necessary ... and may be so, that each material undergoing, that each negative, sinnenfeindliche - sense-fiendly - undergoing in the materia, is determined by a formal condition of possibilty: ... sensuality as such ...

----- Original Message -----
From: wmdepot
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 4:29 PM
Subject: [hegel] Re: PhdG Preface #8


Recent Activity
a.. 1New Members
b.. 2New Files
Visit Your Group
Give Back
Yahoo! for Good

Get inspired

by a good cause.

Y! Toolbar
Get it Free!

easy 1-click access

to your groups.

Yahoo! Groups
Start a group

in 3 easy steps.

Connect with others.
.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]