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
 

Master/Slave etc

Expand Messages
  • John Bardis
    It seems there are some posts about the Phenomenology? The particularly interesting thing about the Self-consciousness chapter is that its structure is very
    Message 1 of 22 , Apr 26, 2016
      It seems there are some posts about the Phenomenology?
       
      The particularly interesting thing about the Self-consciousness chapter is that its structure is very clear.
       
      So there is the untitled first section on life. Then there is the whole business about the master/slave. Then there is the stoic/sceptic/unhappy consciousness. So, to begin with, it is broken out in five parts.
       
      But the master/slave thing can be further broken out into the desire for recognition/the fight to the death/the work of the slave. I don't think anyone imagines that the desire for recognition might lead to a fight to the death. And who would imagine that the fight to the death would result in the work of the slave transforming the world?
       
      And the unhappy consciousness is in three parts.
       
      So the structure is:
       
      Life
      desire for recognition
      fight to the death
      work of the slave
      stoic
      sceptic
      unhappy consciousness 1
      unhappy consciousness 2
      unhappy consciousness 3.
       
      One could show that the Consciousness section has this same structure. And the Observing Reason corresponds, at a higher level, to the Consciousness section, and with the same structure.
       
      So then we get to parts 2 and 3 of the Reason chapter, followed by the Spirit chapter.
      This, again, has the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter.
       
      Life corresponds to Pleasure and Necessity.
      Desire for recognition corresponds to the Law of the Heart
      fight to the death corresponds to Virtue and the Way of the World
      work of the slave to the Spiritual Animal Kingdom
      stoic to the Maker of Laws
      Sceptic to the judge of laws
      Unhappy consciousness 1 to Ethical Life
      Unhappy Consciousness 2 to Culture
      Unhappy Consciousness 3 to Morality.
       
      Then there is the same correspondence with Natural Religion corresponding to the Consciousness section and Observing Reason and The Religion of Art corresponding, again, to the Self-consciousness chapter. This concludes, for instance, with the triad Epic, Drama, Comedy which correspond to Unhappy Consciousness 1, 2, and 3.
       
      So then we have the final duality (after Consciousness/Self-consciousness and Observing Reason/ Reason parts 2 and 3 and Spirit). This is the duality of Revealed Religion/Absolute Knowing. Does that work?
       
      At any rate, what the Introduction says is that, once things start, they always follow the same structure--over and over again--always.
       
      Wouldn't it be nice, though, if we were really interested in the elusive structure of the Phenomenology--or how the SL works--rather than all this completely brain-dean, completely ignorant "atheism"? And I really do have to put the word "atheism" in quotation marks--because it is sooo stupid that it can't really be taken seriously. If only these "atheists" had any real interest in Hegel.
       
      John
       
       
       
      John
    • vascojoao2003
      John, You have not shown the intrinsic necessity of a single one of your connections. You ve just stated them. There is therefore no structure in your
      Message 2 of 22 , Apr 26, 2016
        John,

        You have not shown the intrinsic necessity of a single one of your connections. You've just stated them. There is therefore no structure in your structure. One could propose that a further development of your method of presentation would the to say which pages correspond to which pages.

        João. 


        ---In hegel@yahoogroups.com, <jgbardis@

        It seems there are some posts about the Phenomenology?
         
        The particularly interesting thing about the Self-consciousness chapter is that its structure is very clear.
         
        So there is the untitled first section on life. Then there is the whole business about the master/slave. Then there is the stoic/sceptic/unhappy consciousness. So, to begin with, it is broken out in five parts.
         
        But the master/slave thing can be further broken out into the desire for recognition/the fight to the death/the work of the slave. I don't think anyone imagines that the desire for recognition might lead to a fight to the death. And who would imagine that the fight to the death would result in the work of the slave transforming the world?
         
        And the unhappy consciousness is in three parts.
         
        So the structure is:
         
        Life
        desire for recognition
        fight to the death
        work of the slave
        stoic
        sceptic
        unhappy consciousness 1
        unhappy consciousness 2
        unhappy consciousness 3.
         
        One could show that the Consciousness section has this same structure. And the Observing Reason corresponds, at a higher level, to the Consciousness section, and with the same structure.
         
        So then we get to parts 2 and 3 of the Reason chapter, followed by the Spirit chapter.
        This, again, has the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter.
         
        Life corresponds to Pleasure and Necessity.
        Desire for recognition corresponds to the Law of the Heart
        fight to the death corresponds to Virtue and the Way of the World
        work of the slave to the Spiritual Animal Kingdom
        stoic to the Maker of Laws
        Sceptic to the judge of laws
        Unhappy consciousness 1 to Ethical Life
        Unhappy Consciousness 2 to Culture
        Unhappy Consciousness 3 to Morality.
         
        Then there is the same correspondence with Natural Religion corresponding to the Consciousness section and Observing Reason and The Religion of Art corresponding, again, to the Self-consciousness chapter. This concludes, for instance, with the triad Epic, Drama, Comedy which correspond to Unhappy Consciousness 1, 2, and 3.
         
        So then we have the final duality (after Consciousness/Self-consciousness and Observing Reason/ Reason parts 2 and 3 and Spirit). This is the duality of Revealed Religion/Absolute Knowing. Does that work?
         
        At any rate, what the Introduction says is that, once things start, they always follow the same structure--over and over again--always.
         
        Wouldn't it be nice, though, if we were really interested in the elusive structure of the Phenomenology--or how the SL works--rather than all this completely brain-dean, completely ignorant "atheism"? And I really do have to put the word "atheism" in quotation marks--because it is sooo stupid that it can't really be taken seriously. If only these "atheists" had any real interest in Hegel.
         
        John
         
         
         
        John
      • Eric v.d. Luft
        John Bardis, I share your interest in this section of PhG. You may be interested in this article I wrote a few years ago: Luft, Eric v.d., From
        Message 3 of 22 , Apr 26, 2016
          John Bardis, I share your interest in this section of PhG. You may be
          interested in this article I wrote a few years ago:

          Luft, Eric v.d., "From Self-Consciousness to Reason in Hegel's
          Phenomenology of Spirit: Aporia Overcome, Aporia Sidestepped, or Organic
          Transition?" International Philosophical Quarterly 53, 3 (September
          2013): 309-324.

          Cheers!

          E.

          Eric v.d. Luft, Ph.D., M.L.S.
          Owner, Gegensatz Press, North Syracuse, New York
          <www.gegensatzpress.com>
        • vascojoao2003
          Eric, John, all I ve read the abstract of your article and it certainly points to a moment where the transition between concepts causes most perplexity. It
          Message 4 of 22 , Apr 26, 2016

            Eric, John, all

            I've read the abstract of your article and it certainly points to a moment where the transition between concepts causes most perplexity. It should be an interesting read.

            The last great article I've read on the Section of Self-Consciousness was Frederick Neuhouser's "Desire, Recognition and the Relation between Bondsman and Lord".

            João.




            ---In hegel@yahoogroups.com, <ericvdluft@

            John Bardis, I share your interest in this section of PhG. You may be
            interested in this article I wrote a few years ago:

            Luft, Eric v.d., "From Self-Consciousness to Reason in Hegel's
            Phenomenology of Spirit: Aporia Overcome, Aporia Sidestepped, or Organic
            Transition?" International Philosophical Quarterly 53, 3 (September
            2013): 309-324.

            Cheers!

            E.

            Eric v.d. Luft, Ph.D., M.L.S.
            Owner, Gegensatz Press, North Syracuse, New York
            <www.gegensatzpress.com>
          • Alan Ponikvar
            Yes, and the cover in paperback is tan with blue letters that follow in a sequence to spell out first the author’s name and then the title. All very
            Message 5 of 22 , Apr 26, 2016

              Yes, and the cover in paperback is tan with blue letters that follow in a sequence to spell out first the author’s name and then the title.

               

              All very interesting indeed.

               

              It is too bad that some on this site insist on thinking not only about what is between the covers but also beyond the table of contents.

               

              What is wrong with these people.

               

              And why is one of the best if not the best account of the Phenomenology about all this “brain-dead” death of god stuff?

               

              Who will save us from all this?

               

              From: hegel@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hegel@yahoogroups.com]
              Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 5:39 PM
              To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [hegel] Master/Slave etc

               

               

              It seems there are some posts about the Phenomenology?

               

              The particularly interesting thing about the Self-consciousness chapter is that its structure is very clear.

               

              So there is the untitled first section on life. Then there is the whole business about the master/slave. Then there is the stoic/sceptic/unhappy consciousness. So, to begin with, it is broken out in five parts.

               

              But the master/slave thing can be further broken out into the desire for recognition/the fight to the death/the work of the slave. I don't think anyone imagines that the desire for recognition might lead to a fight to the death. And who would imagine that the fight to the death would result in the work of the slave transforming the world?

               

              And the unhappy consciousness is in three parts.

               

              So the structure is:

               

              Life

              desire for recognition

              fight to the death

              work of the slave

              stoic

              sceptic

              unhappy consciousness 1

              unhappy consciousness 2

              unhappy consciousness 3.

               

              One could show that the Consciousness section has this same structure. And the Observing Reason corresponds, at a higher level, to the Consciousness section, and with the same structure.

               

              So then we get to parts 2 and 3 of the Reason chapter, followed by the Spirit chapter.

              This, again, has the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter.

               

              Life corresponds to Pleasure and Necessity.

              Desire for recognition corresponds to the Law of the Heart

              fight to the death corresponds to Virtue and the Way of the World

              work of the slave to the Spiritual Animal Kingdom

              stoic to the Maker of Laws

              Sceptic to the judge of laws

              Unhappy consciousness 1 to Ethical Life

              Unhappy Consciousness 2 to Culture

              Unhappy Consciousness 3 to Morality.

               

              Then there is the same correspondence with Natural Religion corresponding to the Consciousness section and Observing Reason and The Religion of Art corresponding, again, to the Self-consciousness chapter. This concludes, for instance, with the triad Epic, Drama, Comedy which correspond to Unhappy Consciousness 1, 2, and 3.

               

              So then we have the final duality (after Consciousness/Self-consciousness and Observing Reason/ Reason parts 2 and 3 and Spirit). This is the duality of Revealed Religion/Absolute Knowing. Does that work?

               

              At any rate, what the Introduction says is that, once things start, they always follow the same structure--over and over again--always.

               

              Wouldn't it be nice, though, if we were really interested in the elusive structure of the Phenomenology--or how the SL works--rather than all this completely brain-dean, completely ignorant "atheism"? And I really do have to put the word "atheism" in quotation marks--because it is sooo stupid that it can't really be taken seriously. If only these "atheists" had any real interest in Hegel.

               

              John

               

               

               

              John

            • C A V
              Hello John, Wouldn t it be nice, though, if we were really interested in the elusive structure of the Phenomenology--or how the SL works--rather than all this
              Message 6 of 22 , Apr 26, 2016
                Hello John,

                "Wouldn't it be nice, though, if we were really interested in the elusive structure of the Phenomenology--or how the SL works--rather than all this completely brain-dean, completely ignorant "atheism"? And I really do have to put the word "atheism" in quotation marks--because it is sooo stupid that it can't really be taken seriously. If only these "atheists" had any real interest in Hegel."

                I like the austerity of your accountant of the Lordship and Bondage section of the Phenomenology. 

                Best,
                -"Chuck"


                On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 6:19 PM, 'Alan Ponikvar' ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                 

                Yes, and the cover in paperback is tan with blue letters that follow in a sequence to spell out first the author’s name and then the title.

                 

                All very interesting indeed.

                 

                It is too bad that some on this site insist on thinking not only about what is between the covers but also beyond the table of contents.

                 

                What is wrong with these people.

                 

                And why is one of the best if not the best account of the Phenomenology about all this “brain-dead” death of god stuff?

                 

                Who will save us from all this?

                 

                From: hegel@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hegel@yahoogroups.com]
                Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 5:39 PM
                To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [hegel] Master/Slave etc

                 

                 

                It seems there are some posts about the Phenomenology?

                 

                The particularly interesting thing about the Self-consciousness chapter is that its structure is very clear.

                 

                So there is the untitled first section on life. Then there is the whole business about the master/slave. Then there is the stoic/sceptic/unhappy consciousness. So, to begin with, it is broken out in five parts.

                 

                But the master/slave thing can be further broken out into the desire for recognition/the fight to the death/the work of the slave. I don't think anyone imagines that the desire for recognition might lead to a fight to the death. And who would imagine that the fight to the death would result in the work of the slave transforming the world?

                 

                And the unhappy consciousness is in three parts.

                 

                So the structure is:

                 

                Life

                desire for recognition

                fight to the death

                work of the slave

                stoic

                sceptic

                unhappy consciousness 1

                unhappy consciousness 2

                unhappy consciousness 3.

                 

                One could show that the Consciousness section has this same structure. And the Observing Reason corresponds, at a higher level, to the Consciousness section, and with the same structure.

                 

                So then we get to parts 2 and 3 of the Reason chapter, followed by the Spirit chapter.

                This, again, has the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter.

                 

                Life corresponds to Pleasure and Necessity.

                Desire for recognition corresponds to the Law of the Heart

                fight to the death corresponds to Virtue and the Way of the World

                work of the slave to the Spiritual Animal Kingdom

                stoic to the Maker of Laws

                Sceptic to the judge of laws

                Unhappy consciousness 1 to Ethical Life

                Unhappy Consciousness 2 to Culture

                Unhappy Consciousness 3 to Morality.

                 

                Then there is the same correspondence with Natural Religion corresponding to the Consciousness section and Observing Reason and The Religion of Art corresponding, again, to the Self-consciousness chapter. This concludes, for instance, with the triad Epic, Drama, Comedy which correspond to Unhappy Consciousness 1, 2, and 3.

                 

                So then we have the final duality (after Consciousness/Self-consciousness and Observing Reason/ Reason parts 2 and 3 and Spirit). This is the duality of Revealed Religion/Absolute Knowing. Does that work?

                 

                At any rate, what the Introduction says is that, once things start, they always follow the same structure--over and over again--always.

                 

                Wouldn't it be nice, though, if we were really interested in the elusive structure of the Phenomenology--or how the SL works--rather than all this completely brain-dean, completely ignorant "atheism"? And I really do have to put the word "atheism" in quotation marks--because it is sooo stupid that it can't really be taken seriously. If only these "atheists" had any real interest in Hegel.

                 

                John

                 

                 

                 

                John


              • Alan Ponikvar
                There is a common theme expressed by the theologically-minded. “We are right and everyone else is sooo stupid that there is no real need to engage their
                Message 7 of 22 , Apr 26, 2016

                  There is a common theme expressed by the theologically-minded.

                   

                  “We are right and everyone else is sooo stupid that there is no real need to engage their objections to our reading. Polemics will do.”

                   

                  And Chuck, you have found the perfect word to put matters in the best light. Yes, austere it is!

                   

                  -          Alan

                   

                  From: hegel@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hegel@yahoogroups.com]
                  Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 6:34 PM
                  To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [hegel] Master/Slave etc

                   

                   

                  Hello John,

                  "Wouldn't it be nice, though, if we were really interested in the elusive structure of the Phenomenology--or how the SL works--rather than all this completely brain-dean, completely ignorant "atheism"? And I really do have to put the word "atheism" in quotation marks--because it is sooo stupid that it can't really be taken seriously. If only these "atheists" had any real interest in Hegel."

                  I like the austerity of your accountant of the Lordship and Bondage section of the Phenomenology. 

                  Best,
                  -"Chuck"

                   

                   

                  On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 6:19 PM, 'Alan Ponikvar' ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                   

                  Yes, and the cover in paperback is tan with blue letters that follow in a sequence to spell out first the author’s name and then the title.

                   

                  All very interesting indeed.

                   

                  It is too bad that some on this site insist on thinking not only about what is between the covers but also beyond the table of contents.

                   

                  What is wrong with these people.

                   

                  And why is one of the best if not the best account of the Phenomenology about all this “brain-dead” death of god stuff?

                   

                  Who will save us from all this?

                   

                  From: hegel@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hegel@yahoogroups.com]
                  Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 5:39 PM
                  To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [hegel] Master/Slave etc

                   

                   

                  It seems there are some posts about the Phenomenology?

                   

                  The particularly interesting thing about the Self-consciousness chapter is that its structure is very clear.

                   

                  So there is the untitled first section on life. Then there is the whole business about the master/slave. Then there is the stoic/sceptic/unhappy consciousness. So, to begin with, it is broken out in five parts.

                   

                  But the master/slave thing can be further broken out into the desire for recognition/the fight to the death/the work of the slave. I don't think anyone imagines that the desire for recognition might lead to a fight to the death. And who would imagine that the fight to the death would result in the work of the slave transforming the world?

                   

                  And the unhappy consciousness is in three parts.

                   

                  So the structure is:

                   

                  Life

                  desire for recognition

                  fight to the death

                  work of the slave

                  stoic

                  sceptic

                  unhappy consciousness 1

                  unhappy consciousness 2

                  unhappy consciousness 3.

                   

                  One could show that the Consciousness section has this same structure. And the Observing Reason corresponds, at a higher level, to the Consciousness section, and with the same structure.

                   

                  So then we get to parts 2 and 3 of the Reason chapter, followed by the Spirit chapter.

                  This, again, has the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter.

                   

                  Life corresponds to Pleasure and Necessity.

                  Desire for recognition corresponds to the Law of the Heart

                  fight to the death corresponds to Virtue and the Way of the World

                  work of the slave to the Spiritual Animal Kingdom

                  stoic to the Maker of Laws

                  Sceptic to the judge of laws

                  Unhappy consciousness 1 to Ethical Life

                  Unhappy Consciousness 2 to Culture

                  Unhappy Consciousness 3 to Morality.

                   

                  Then there is the same correspondence with Natural Religion corresponding to the Consciousness section and Observing Reason and The Religion of Art corresponding, again, to the Self-consciousness chapter. This concludes, for instance, with the triad Epic, Drama, Comedy which correspond to Unhappy Consciousness 1, 2, and 3.

                   

                  So then we have the final duality (after Consciousness/Self-consciousness and Observing Reason/ Reason parts 2 and 3 and Spirit). This is the duality of Revealed Religion/Absolute Knowing. Does that work?

                   

                  At any rate, what the Introduction says is that, once things start, they always follow the same structure--over and over again--always.

                   

                  Wouldn't it be nice, though, if we were really interested in the elusive structure of the Phenomenology--or how the SL works--rather than all this completely brain-dean, completely ignorant "atheism"? And I really do have to put the word "atheism" in quotation marks--because it is sooo stupid that it can't really be taken seriously. If only these "atheists" had any real interest in Hegel.

                   

                  John

                   

                   

                   

                  John

                   

                • C A V
                  Alan , And Chuck, you have found the perfect word to put matters in the best light. Yes, austere it is! Whether or not * materialism * is true, *the
                  Message 8 of 22 , Apr 26, 2016
                    "Alan",

                    "And Chuck, you have found the perfect word to put matters in the best light. Yes, austere it is!"

                    Whether or not "materialism" is true, the matter, matters.

                    Such is not up to Chuck, it is not up to John, it is up to this. 

                    This is how I am "one-sided": I try to know subject as substance.      

                    This is a bad habit I got from Robert Brandom.

                    I hope Santa Claus gets him some austerity for Christ-mas.    

                    ...

                    ...Jerry Fodor was right. Breaking out in a rash of italics is a weird form of act. 

                    ...

                    But maybe it doesn't matter. 

                    ...*yawns* 

                    Thanks Alan, I do like words. 

                    ...

                    ...*coughs*

                    Brandom's deontic-scorekeeping model has already been employed in theological studies. The model is better at getting jobs than I am. You can already see though what happens when all you think about is anaphoric chains and say the reference relation is not real. You get to think about whatever you want at the price of having very, very little to say. 

                    I like what Brandom says about the external world too. 

                    But... it is only likable to the extent that it is about the external world. 

                    ...

                    ...*crickets chirping*

                    "Best",
                    -Chuck?
                      

                    On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 6:45 PM, 'Alan Ponikvar' ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                     

                    There is a common theme expressed by the theologically-minded.

                     

                    “We are right and everyone else is sooo stupid that there is no real need to engage their objections to our reading. Polemics will do.”

                     

                    And Chuck, you have found the perfect word to put matters in the best light. Yes, austere it is!

                     

                    -          Alan

                     

                    From: hegel@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hegel@yahoogroups.com]
                    Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 6:34 PM
                    To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [hegel] Master/Slave etc

                     

                     

                    Hello John,

                    "Wouldn't it be nice, though, if we were really interested in the elusive structure of the Phenomenology--or how the SL works--rather than all this completely brain-dean, completely ignorant "atheism"? And I really do have to put the word "atheism" in quotation marks--because it is sooo stupid that it can't really be taken seriously. If only these "atheists" had any real interest in Hegel."

                    I like the austerity of your accountant of the Lordship and Bondage section of the Phenomenology. 

                    Best,
                    -"Chuck"

                     

                     

                    On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 6:19 PM, 'Alan Ponikvar' ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                     

                    Yes, and the cover in paperback is tan with blue letters that follow in a sequence to spell out first the author’s name and then the title.

                     

                    All very interesting indeed.

                     

                    It is too bad that some on this site insist on thinking not only about what is between the covers but also beyond the table of contents.

                     

                    What is wrong with these people.

                     

                    And why is one of the best if not the best account of the Phenomenology about all this “brain-dead” death of god stuff?

                     

                    Who will save us from all this?

                     

                    From: hegel@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hegel@yahoogroups.com]
                    Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 5:39 PM
                    To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [hegel] Master/Slave etc

                     

                     

                    It seems there are some posts about the Phenomenology?

                     

                    The particularly interesting thing about the Self-consciousness chapter is that its structure is very clear.

                     

                    So there is the untitled first section on life. Then there is the whole business about the master/slave. Then there is the stoic/sceptic/unhappy consciousness. So, to begin with, it is broken out in five parts.

                     

                    But the master/slave thing can be further broken out into the desire for recognition/the fight to the death/the work of the slave. I don't think anyone imagines that the desire for recognition might lead to a fight to the death. And who would imagine that the fight to the death would result in the work of the slave transforming the world?

                     

                    And the unhappy consciousness is in three parts.

                     

                    So the structure is:

                     

                    Life

                    desire for recognition

                    fight to the death

                    work of the slave

                    stoic

                    sceptic

                    unhappy consciousness 1

                    unhappy consciousness 2

                    unhappy consciousness 3.

                     

                    One could show that the Consciousness section has this same structure. And the Observing Reason corresponds, at a higher level, to the Consciousness section, and with the same structure.

                     

                    So then we get to parts 2 and 3 of the Reason chapter, followed by the Spirit chapter.

                    This, again, has the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter.

                     

                    Life corresponds to Pleasure and Necessity.

                    Desire for recognition corresponds to the Law of the Heart

                    fight to the death corresponds to Virtue and the Way of the World

                    work of the slave to the Spiritual Animal Kingdom

                    stoic to the Maker of Laws

                    Sceptic to the judge of laws

                    Unhappy consciousness 1 to Ethical Life

                    Unhappy Consciousness 2 to Culture

                    Unhappy Consciousness 3 to Morality.

                     

                    Then there is the same correspondence with Natural Religion corresponding to the Consciousness section and Observing Reason and The Religion of Art corresponding, again, to the Self-consciousness chapter. This concludes, for instance, with the triad Epic, Drama, Comedy which correspond to Unhappy Consciousness 1, 2, and 3.

                     

                    So then we have the final duality (after Consciousness/Self-consciousness and Observing Reason/ Reason parts 2 and 3 and Spirit). This is the duality of Revealed Religion/Absolute Knowing. Does that work?

                     

                    At any rate, what the Introduction says is that, once things start, they always follow the same structure--over and over again--always.

                     

                    Wouldn't it be nice, though, if we were really interested in the elusive structure of the Phenomenology--or how the SL works--rather than all this completely brain-dean, completely ignorant "atheism"? And I really do have to put the word "atheism" in quotation marks--because it is sooo stupid that it can't really be taken seriously. If only these "atheists" had any real interest in Hegel.

                     

                    John

                     

                     

                     

                    John

                     


                  • jgbardis
                    Hello Joao, To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated. The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end
                    Message 9 of 22 , Apr 27, 2016

                      Hello Joao,


                      To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.


                      The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.


                      Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.


                      Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.


                      But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.


                      I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.


                      You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.


                      So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.


                      At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.


                      So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!


                      So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.


                      The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.


                      Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.


                      And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.


                      This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.


                      So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?


                      And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?


                      John



                    • vascojoao2003
                      Hi John, First of all I don t see the merit of this approach. So what?, one can ask given these correspondences you place. So what? I insist. I think you would
                      Message 10 of 22 , Apr 27, 2016


                        Hi John,

                        First of all I don't see the merit of this approach. So what?, one can ask given these correspondences you place. So what? I insist.

                        I think you would make a stronger case if you at least presented one of those correspondences from the inside. You so nothing of the sort. As it stands one it seems too external to the juice of the exposition. If this is what passes for intimate knowledge of the whole exposition then it is possible to fake it. Anyone can learn this, memorize it and show it off. To actually have some command of actual moments of the exposition, let along the whole exposition, that is another story. It can't be faked.

                        Regards,
                        João.


                        ---In hegel@yahoogroups.com, <jgbardis@

                        Hello Joao,


                        To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.


                        The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.


                        Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.


                        Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.


                        But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.


                        I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.


                        You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.


                        So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.


                        At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.


                        So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!


                        So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.


                        The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.


                        Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.


                        And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.


                        This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.


                        So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?


                        And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?


                        John



                      • Alan Ponikvar
                        You have to focus John. Once again, the cover is tan and the lettering is blue. And yes all atheists being so stupid are put off by this blue/tan combination.
                        Message 11 of 22 , Apr 27, 2016
                          You have to focus John.

                          Once again, the cover is tan and the lettering is blue.

                          And yes all atheists being so stupid are put off by this blue/tan combination.

                          But really, could there ever be any hope for those atheists who refuse to read the book simply because the cover is tan and the lettering is blue?

                          - Alan

                          On Apr 27, 2016, at 3:26 PM, jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                           

                          Hello Joao,


                          To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.


                          The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.


                          Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.


                          Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.


                          But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.


                          I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.


                          You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.


                          So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.


                          At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.


                          So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!


                          So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.


                          The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.


                          Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.


                          And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.


                          This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.


                          So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?


                          And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?


                          John



                        • wsindarius
                          I have that book, and those secondary sources, too. But when I encounter them, I break out in blasphemies and sacrileges — that is, I read the texts and say
                          Message 12 of 22 , Apr 27, 2016
                            I have that book, and those secondary sources, too. But when I encounter them, I break out in blasphemies and sacrileges — that is, I read the texts and say what I see.

                            Wil



                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: Alan Ponikvar ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                            To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                            Sent: Wed, Apr 27, 2016 5:40 pm
                            Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc

                             
                            You have to focus John.

                            Once again, the cover is tan and the lettering is blue.

                            And yes all atheists being so stupid are put off by this blue/tan combination.

                            But really, could there ever be any hope for those atheists who refuse to read the book simply because the cover is tan and the lettering is blue?

                            - Alan

                            On Apr 27, 2016, at 3:26 PM, jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                             
                            Hello Joao,

                            To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.

                            The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.

                            Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.

                            Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.

                            But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.

                            I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.

                            You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.

                            So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.

                            At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.

                            So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!

                            So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.

                            The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.

                            Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.

                            And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing onl y to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.

                            This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.

                            So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?

                            And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?

                            John


                          • Alan Ponikvar
                            Yes, but the structure! The structure! Do you see the structure? Do you see all those parts? Or being the atheist that you are might you not be structure-blind
                            Message 13 of 22 , Apr 27, 2016
                              Yes, but the structure! The structure! Do you see the structure? 

                              Do you see all those parts? 

                              Or being the atheist that you are might you not be structure-blind so in seeing what you see you fail to see the divine structure of it all?

                              - Alan

                              On Apr 27, 2016, at 5:44 PM, eupraxis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                               

                              I have that book, and those secondary sources, too. But when I encounter them, I break out in blasphemies and sacrileges — that is, I read the texts and say what I see.

                              Wil




                              -----Original Message-----
                              From: Alan Ponikvar ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                              To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                              Sent: Wed, Apr 27, 2016 5:40 pm
                              Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc

                               
                              You have to focus John.

                              Once again, the cover is tan and the lettering is blue.

                              And yes all atheists being so stupid are put off by this blue/tan combination.

                              But really, could there ever be any hope for those atheists who refuse to read the book simply because the cover is tan and the lettering is blue?

                              - Alan

                              On Apr 27, 2016, at 3:26 PM, jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                               
                              Hello Joao,

                              To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.

                              The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.

                              Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.

                              Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.

                              But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.

                              I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.

                              You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.

                              So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.

                              At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.

                              So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!

                              So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.

                              The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.

                              Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.

                              And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing onl y to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.

                              This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.

                              So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?

                              And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?

                              John


                            • Alan Ponikvar
                              You really are a spoil sport, asking for insight, unwilling to see that John being John, he would never stoop to faking it. And do you really think it is so
                              Message 14 of 22 , Apr 27, 2016
                                You really are a spoil sport, asking for insight, unwilling to see that John being John, he would never stoop to faking it. 

                                And do you really think it is so easy to memorize this? The complexity of this structure is truly awesome. Hats off to John!

                                - Alan

                                On Apr 27, 2016, at 5:31 PM, vascojoao2003@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                 



                                Hi John,

                                First of all I don't see the merit of this approach. So what?, one can ask given these correspondences you place. So what? I insist.

                                I think you would make a stronger case if you at least presented one of those correspondences from the inside. You so nothing of the sort. As it stands one it seems too external to the juice of the exposition. If this is what passes for intimate knowledge of the whole exposition then it is possible to fake it. Anyone can learn this, memorize it and show it off. To actually have some command of actual moments of the exposition, let along the whole exposition, that is another story. It can't be faked.

                                Regards,
                                João.


                                ---In hegel@yahoogroups.com, <jgbardis@

                                Hello Joao,


                                To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.


                                The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.


                                Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.


                                Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.


                                But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.


                                I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.


                                You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.


                                So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.


                                At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.


                                So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!


                                So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.


                                The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.


                                Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.


                                And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.


                                This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.


                                So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?


                                And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?


                                John



                              • bill.hord
                                John, it has to do with what we think is the structure. Here s a simplistic example. Suppose a student has written a 5-paragraph persuasive essay. Broadly we
                                Message 15 of 22 , Apr 27, 2016

                                  John, it has to do with what we think is the structure.


                                  Here's a simplistic example. Suppose a student has written a 5-paragraph persuasive essay. Broadly we can say -- even hope, pedagogically -- that this essay has the same structure as every other 5-paragraph persuasive essay. We can go further and say how many sentences should be in each paragraph. One sentence in each paragraph should be a topic sentence. Each paragraph should do something particular. There are ways to specify what kinds of sentences should be included in various ways.


                                  If our student has chosen something to write about, we can even outline the essay part by part. A student with talent can even write a decent essay this way. But it will still be a mechanical process and result that, we will hope, the student leaves behind once she has mastered the inner structure of the topic. Even a change of audience should affect the way she writes her argument.


                                  Now, if Hegel wrote the PhG this way, most of us would be disappointed -- not because we want Hegel to be difficult. (Let's admit that has some attraction.) The real problem would be that Hegel says thinking in a mechanical way is barely thought, and it isn't authentic speculative thought, so he'd be caught in a performative contradiction of a sort.


                                  I think that's why the mechanical outline you offered us doesn't sell very well. We want the inner structure of Hegel's thought, and that has to be presented in a manner that does service to the real Hegel.


                                  My $.02 in 5 paragraphs.


                                  Bill

                                  "Being is spoken of in many ways." (Aristotle)


                                  This email may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or
                                  have received this email in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this email. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this email is strictly prohibited.



                                  From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                  Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 2:26 PM
                                  To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                                  Subject: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc
                                   


                                  Hello Joao,


                                  To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.


                                  The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.


                                  Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.


                                  Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.


                                  But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.


                                  I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.


                                  You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.


                                  So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.


                                  At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.


                                  So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!


                                  So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.


                                  The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.


                                  Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.


                                  And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.


                                  This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.


                                  So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?


                                  And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?


                                  John





                                • wsindarius
                                  Well, there s structure, and then there s structure, too. I see the former. The latter ... not so much. Wil ... From: Alan Ponikvar ponikvaraj@gmail.com
                                  Message 16 of 22 , Apr 27, 2016
                                    Well, there's structure, and then there's structure, too. I see the former. The latter ... not so much.

                                    Wil



                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: Alan Ponikvar ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                    To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                    Sent: Wed, Apr 27, 2016 5:55 pm
                                    Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc

                                     
                                    Yes, but the structure! The structure! Do you see the structure? 

                                    Do you see all those parts? 

                                    Or being the atheist that you are might you not be structure-blind so in seeing what you see you fail to see the divine structure of it all?

                                    - Alan

                                    On Apr 27, 2016, at 5:44 PM, eupraxis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                     
                                    I have that book, and those secondary sources, too. But when I encounter them, I break out in blasphemies and sacrileges — that is, I read the texts and say what I see.

                                    Wil



                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: Alan Ponikvar ponikvaraj@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                    To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                    Sent: Wed, Apr 27, 2016 5:40 pm
                                    Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc

                                     
                                    You have to focus John.

                                    Once again, the cover is tan and the lettering is blue.

                                    And yes all atheists being so stupid are put off by this blue/tan combination.

                                    But really, could there ever be any hope for those atheists who refuse to read the book simply because the cover is tan and the lettering is blue?

                                    - Alan

                                    On Apr 27, 2016, at 3:26 PM, jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                     
                                    Hello Joao,

                                    To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.

                                    The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.

                                    Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.

                                    Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.

                                    But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.

                                    I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.

                                    You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.

                                    So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.

                                    At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.

                                    So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!

                                    So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.

                                    The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.

                                    Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.

                                    And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing onl y to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.

                                    This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.

                                    So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?

                                    And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?

                                    John


                                  • Paul Trejo
                                    John, . This is very well said. . All best, --Paul . ... On Wed, 4/27/16, jgbardis@aol.com [hegel] wrote: Subject: [hegel] Re:
                                    Message 17 of 22 , Apr 27, 2016
                                      John,
                                      .
                                      This is very well said.
                                      .
                                      All best,
                                      --Paul
                                      .
                                      --------------------------------------------
                                      On Wed, 4/27/16, jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                      Subject: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc
                                      To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                                      Date: Wednesday, April 27, 2016, 2:26 PM

                                      Hello Joao,

                                      To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.

                                      The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.

                                      Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.

                                      Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.

                                      But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.

                                      I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.

                                      You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.

                                      So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Skeptic.

                                      At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.

                                      So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!

                                      So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.

                                      The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.

                                      Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.

                                      And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need ! someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.

                                      This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.

                                      So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?

                                      And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?

                                      John
                                    • stephen theron
                                      I have flagged this.Stephen. To: hegel@yahoogroups.com From: hegel@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:26:02 -0700 Subject: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc
                                      Message 18 of 22 , Apr 29, 2016
                                        I have flagged this.
                                        Stephen.


                                        To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                                        From: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                                        Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:26:02 -0700
                                        Subject: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc

                                         

                                        Hello Joao,


                                        To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.


                                        The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.


                                        Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.


                                        Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.


                                        But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.


                                        I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.


                                        You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.


                                        So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.


                                        At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.


                                        So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!


                                        So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.


                                        The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.


                                        Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.


                                        And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.


                                        This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.


                                        So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?


                                        And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?


                                        John





                                      • John Bardis
                                        Hello Joao, The underlying structure of the Phenomenology is exactly the opposite of intimate knowledge . It is completely external to the content. A
                                        Message 19 of 22 , May 2, 2016
                                          Hello Joao,
                                           
                                          The underlying structure of the Phenomenology is exactly the opposite of "intimate knowledge". It is completely external to the content.
                                           
                                          A knowledge of the underlying structure of the Phenomenology certainly can't just be learned and memorized. No one has, as yet, worked it out. You would have to work it out for your self.
                                           
                                          The best place to start is with the Self-consciousness chapter. Its structure is unambiguous--I believe you will agree?
                                           
                                          The Reason (parts 2 and 3) plus The Ethical Life section from the Spirit chapter also has a fairly unambiguous structure, and one, moreover, that corresponds quite exactly to the Self-consciousness chapter. The only ambiguous thing here is that this moment is over two chapters.
                                           
                                          What you have is the same story but repeated at a higher level.
                                           
                                          As I mentioned the Culture/Morality sections of the Spirit chapter tell this exact same story with the exact same structure. The section on Natural Religion tells this exact same story with this exact same structure. The section on Religion of Art tells this exact same story with this exact same story.
                                           
                                          So, for instance, the fourth moment of the Self-consciousness chapter is the work of the slave. This corresponds, in the Reason chapter, to the spiritual animal kingdom, in the Culture/Morality section, to the Terror, in the Natural Religion section, to the work of the artificer, in the religion of art, to the cultus.
                                           
                                          And in fact the structure of the Phenomenology is nine moments, each of which itself contains nine moments.
                                           
                                          Once you see the structure, corresponding moments can be compared to one another or throw light on one another, as, for instance, one can see the work of the slave culminating in the Terror.
                                           
                                          But a still more advanced question is the simple question of the content. The content has no explicit relation to the form. Why does Hegel use the particular content that he uses?
                                           
                                          At any rate, the study of the Phenomenology ever more deep and intimate. But this doesn't come at the beginning. It comes at the end.
                                           
                                          The Science of Logic, by the way, is similar to this. There is a structure, a triadic structure, that is repeated at ever higher levels. But here the form and the content, ultimately, are the same.
                                           
                                          John
                                           
                                           
                                           
                                           
                                          -----Original Message-----
                                          From: vascojoao2003@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                          To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                          Sent: Wed, Apr 27, 2016 5:49 pm
                                          Subject: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc

                                           


                                          Hi John,

                                          First of all I don't see the merit of this approach. So what?, one can ask given these correspondences you place. So what? I insist.

                                          I think you would make a stronger case if you at least presented one of those correspondences from the inside. You so nothing of the sort. As it stands one it seems too external to the juice of the exposition. If this is what passes for intimate knowledge of the whole exposition then it is possible to fake it. Anyone can learn this, memorize it and show it off. To actually have some command of actual moments of the exposition, let along the whole exposition, that is another story. It can't be faked.

                                          Regards,
                                          João.


                                          ---In hegel@yahoogroups.com, <jgbardis@

                                          Hello Joao,

                                          To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.

                                          The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.

                                          Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.

                                          Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.

                                          But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.

                                          I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.

                                          You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.

                                          So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.

                                          At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.

                                          So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!

                                          So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.

                                          The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.

                                          Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.

                                          And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.

                                          This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.

                                          So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?

                                          And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?

                                          John


                                        • John Bardis
                                          Hello Bill, I believe we have already had this conversation. At that time you were sporting a quote from James Joyce. Everyone knows that the underlying
                                          Message 20 of 22 , May 2, 2016
                                            Hello Bill,
                                             
                                            I believe we have already had this conversation. At that time you were sporting a quote from James Joyce.
                                             
                                            Everyone knows that the underlying structure of his novel Ulysses is Homer's poem. We are told, as well, that the underlying structure of Finegan's Wake is some work by Vico.
                                             
                                            My own interest in determining the possibility of an underlying structure to a work of literature (of high literature) comes, to begin with, from studying the Bible. Many of the books of the Bible turn out to be highly structured works of literature. And, oddly enough, there is some evidence that, coincidentally enough, the underlying structure of the Gospel of Mark is also provided by Homer's other poem.
                                             
                                            You use the word "mechanical". Of necessity a first introduction to anything will be mechanical. It must of necessity appeal to the "understanding". In regard to the Phenomenology it is just a matter of study and comparison--all fairly mechanical--to see that it is made up of nine moments, each of which itself contains nine moments. But, secondly, this isn't just a set of nine. Each of the moments has a particular quality.
                                             
                                            And then, further, the whole thing can be mapped on a circle which, again, isn't just a circle, but is, rather, a quite structured circle.
                                             
                                            In other words, the further you go into the matter the deeper it becomes. At the beginning it is, of necessity, quite mechanical. But that isn't a reflection on Hegel's Phenomenology. That is rather a reflection on what it means to be a beginner.
                                             
                                            But, of course, the full structure of the Phenomenology is already quite an advanced topic. It requires, to begin with, that one has actually read the Phenomenology from beginning to end and has a fairly good knowledge of it. If you, for instance, are still just trying to read the book, then this whole structure thing isn't something you need to worry about. But this is, after all, the Hegel list. One would suppose that there would be people here who had fulfilled those minimum requirements.
                                             
                                            You also use the word "speculative" as though you knew exactly what that meant, as though there were no ambiguity at all about the word.
                                             
                                            John
                                             
                                             
                                             
                                            -----Original Message-----
                                            From: bill.hord bill.hord@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                            To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                            Sent: Wed, Apr 27, 2016 6:14 pm
                                            Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc

                                             
                                            John, it has to do with what we think is the structure.

                                            Here's a simplistic example. Suppose a student has written a 5-paragraph persuasive essay. Broadly we can say -- even hope, pedagogically -- that this essay has the same structure as every other 5-paragraph persuasive essay. We can go further and say how many sentences should be in each paragraph. One sentence in each paragraph should be a topic sentence. Each paragraph should do something particular. There are ways to specify what kinds of sentences should be included in various ways.

                                            If our student has chosen something to write about, we can even outline the essay part by part. A student with talent can even write a decent essay this way. But it will still be a mechanical process and result that, we will hope, the student leaves behind once she has mastered the inner structure of the topic. Even a change of audience should affect the way she writes her argument.

                                            Now, if Hegel wrote the PhG this way, most of us would be disappointed -- not because we want Hegel to be difficult. (Let's admit that has some attraction.) The real problem would be that Hegel says thinking in a mechanical way is barely thought, and it isn't authentic speculative thought, so he'd be caught in a performative contradiction of a sort.

                                            I think that's why the mechanical outline you offered us doesn't sell very well. We want the inner structure of Hegel's thought, and that has to be presented in a manner that does service to the real Hegel.

                                            My $.02 in 5 paragraphs.

                                            Bill

                                            "Being is spoken of in many ways." (Aristotle)

                                            This email may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or
                                            have received this email in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this email. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this email is strictly prohibited.



                                            From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                            Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 2:26 PM
                                            To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                                            Subject: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc
                                             


                                            Hello Joao,

                                            To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.

                                            The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.

                                            Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.

                                            Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.

                                            But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.

                                            I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.

                                            You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.

                                            So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.

                                            At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.

                                            So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!

                                            So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.

                                            The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.

                                            Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.

                                            And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.

                                            This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.

                                            So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?

                                            And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?

                                            John




                                          • bill.hord
                                            John, I take speculative top mean having insight into the truth of the whole. While this may not be exact (by some measure), and the word itself may be
                                            Message 21 of 22 , May 2, 2016

                                              John, I take speculative top mean having insight into the truth of the whole. While this may not be "exact" (by some measure), and the word itself may be ambiguous to others, it's what I mean.


                                              I don't recall the previous discussion. It's true that Joyce used the Odyssey and Vico's cyclic conception of history to structure his 2 books. Stuart Gilbert teased out the analogies in Ulysses, with the help of Joyce, and John Bishop wrote a brilliant book about Joyce's debts to Vico (more than just the cyclic view of history). But any careful reader of either work by Joyce will soon see that this knowledge doesn't get you very far. This is especially true of FW, but even in Gilbert, all the analogies seem forced in the end and more or less irrelevant. For example, each chapter in Ulysses is supposed to associate with a part of the body. On the other hand, George Gibson has made a good case that FW is structured around the ancient Irish rites of Tara.


                                              I'm sure it's necessary to read Hegel to discuss him. Perhaps, like Joyce, he had any number of structural elements in mind. Seeing these and their connections (and disconnections) as a whole would correspond to speculative insight as I understand it.


                                              Bill

                                              "Being is spoken of in many ways." (Aristotle)


                                              This email may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or
                                              have received this email in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this email. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this email is strictly prohibited.

                                              From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of John Bardis jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                              Sent: Monday, May 2, 2016 9:30:19 AM
                                              To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                                              Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc
                                               
                                              Hello Bill,
                                               
                                              I believe we have already had this conversation. At that time you were sporting a quote from James Joyce.
                                               
                                              Everyone knows that the underlying structure of his novel Ulysses is Homer's poem. We are told, as well, that the underlying structure of Finegan's Wake is some work by Vico.
                                               
                                              My own interest in determining the possibility of an underlying structure to a work of literature (of high literature) comes, to begin with, from studying the Bible. Many of the books of the Bible turn out to be highly structured works of literature. And, oddly enough, there is some evidence that, coincidentally enough, the underlying structure of the Gospel of Mark is also provided by Homer's other poem.
                                               
                                              You use the word "mechanical". Of necessity a first introduction to anything will be mechanical. It must of necessity appeal to the "understanding". In regard to the Phenomenology it is just a matter of study and comparison--all fairly mechanical--to see that it is made up of nine moments, each of which itself contains nine moments. But, secondly, this isn't just a set of nine. Each of the moments has a particular quality.
                                               
                                              And then, further, the whole thing can be mapped on a circle which, again, isn't just a circle, but is, rather, a quite structured circle.
                                               
                                              In other words, the further you go into the matter the deeper it becomes. At the beginning it is, of necessity, quite mechanical. But that isn't a reflection on Hegel's Phenomenology. That is rather a reflection on what it means to be a beginner.
                                               
                                              But, of course, the full structure of the Phenomenology is already quite an advanced topic. It requires, to begin with, that one has actually read the Phenomenology from beginning to end and has a fairly good knowledge of it. If you, for instance, are still just trying to read the book, then this whole structure thing isn't something you need to worry about. But this is, after all, the Hegel list. One would suppose that there would be people here who had fulfilled those minimum requirements.
                                               
                                              You also use the word "speculative" as though you knew exactly what that meant, as though there were no ambiguity at all about the word.
                                               
                                              John
                                               
                                               
                                               
                                              -----Original Message-----
                                              From: bill.hord bill.hord@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                              To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                              Sent: Wed, Apr 27, 2016 6:14 pm
                                              Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc

                                               
                                              John, it has to do with what we think is the structure.

                                              Here's a simplistic example. Suppose a student has written a 5-paragraph persuasive essay. Broadly we can say -- even hope, pedagogically -- that this essay has the same structure as every other 5-paragraph persuasive essay. We can go further and say how many sentences should be in each paragraph. One sentence in each paragraph should be a topic sentence. Each paragraph should do something particular. There are ways to specify what kinds of sentences should be included in various ways.

                                              If our student has chosen something to write about, we can even outline the essay part by part. A student with talent can even write a decent essay this way. But it will still be a mechanical process and result that, we will hope, the student leaves behind once she has mastered the inner structure of the topic. Even a change of audience should affect the way she writes her argument.

                                              Now, if Hegel wrote the PhG this way, most of us would be disappointed -- not because we want Hegel to be difficult. (Let's admit that has some attraction.) The real problem would be that Hegel says thinking in a mechanical way is barely thought, and it isn't authentic speculative thought, so he'd be caught in a performative contradiction of a sort.

                                              I think that's why the mechanical outline you offered us doesn't sell very well. We want the inner structure of Hegel's thought, and that has to be presented in a manner that does service to the real Hegel.

                                              My $.02 in 5 paragraphs.

                                              Bill

                                              "Being is spoken of in many ways." (Aristotle)

                                              This email may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or
                                              have received this email in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this email. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this email is strictly prohibited.



                                              From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                              Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 2:26 PM
                                              To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                                              Subject: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc
                                               


                                              Hello Joao,

                                              To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.

                                              The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.

                                              Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.

                                              Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.

                                              But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.

                                              I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.

                                              You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.

                                              So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.

                                              At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.

                                              So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!

                                              So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.

                                              The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.

                                              Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.

                                              And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.

                                              This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.

                                              So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?

                                              And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?

                                              John




                                            • John Bardis
                                              Hello Bill, That s a good definition of speculative . So, to begin with, just by definition one can t be speculative straight out of the gate. It is only the
                                              Message 22 of 22 , May 2, 2016
                                                Hello Bill,
                                                 
                                                That's a good definition of "speculative".
                                                 
                                                So, to begin with, just by definition one can't be speculative straight out of the gate. It is only the end result that can be speculative.
                                                 
                                                The best illustration of the speculative is an animal organism--a frog, for instance. To begin with, it is just what it is--a frog. It is that one thing. But, secondly, it is the unity of a number of different systems. And, third, it is its own end; it has no other purpose but itself.
                                                 
                                                The Phenomenology is like an animal organism. It is a circle beginning with Sense-certainty at the top and ending, again at the top, with Absolute Knowing. So ultimately the book is about the transformation of sense-certainty into absolute knowing.
                                                 
                                                But the other seven moments are not lost in the final result. The circle contains them all, and there are relations of various kinds between them.
                                                 
                                                And the Phenomenology is holistic in the sense that its nine moments have the same form as the whole--each of them forming its own circle.
                                                 
                                                It would be nice if I could explain all this to someone. I suppose, though, that you, for instance, even if you might have read Joyce a little bit (or a lot) have no great knowledge of Hegel's Phenomenology. But there is a cure for that, you know. Just read the damn thing.
                                                 
                                                John
                                                 
                                                 
                                                 
                                                 
                                                -----Original Message-----
                                                From: bill.hord bill.hord@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                                To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                                Sent: Mon, May 2, 2016 11:04 am
                                                Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc

                                                 
                                                John, I take speculative top mean having insight into the truth of the whole. While this may not be "exact" (by some measure), and the word itself may be ambiguous to others, it's what I mean.

                                                I don't recall the previous discussion. It's true that Joyce used the Odyssey and Vico's cyclic conception of history to structure his 2 books. Stuart Gilbert teased out the analogies in Ulysses, with the help of Joyce, and John Bishop wrote a brilliant book about Joyce's debts to Vico (more than just the cyclic view of history). But any careful reader of either work by Joyce will soon see that this knowledge doesn't get you very far. This is especially true of FW, but even in Gilbert, all the analogies seem forced in the end and more or less irrelevant. For example, each chapter in Ulysses is supposed to associate with a part of the body. On the other hand, George Gibson has made a good case that FW is structured around the ancient Irish rites of Tara.

                                                I'm sure it's necessary to read Hegel to discuss him. Perhaps, like Joyce, he had any number of structural elements in mind. Seeing these and their connections (and disconnections) as a whole would correspond to speculative insight as I understand it.

                                                Bill

                                                "Being is spoken of in many ways." (Aristotle)

                                                This email may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or
                                                have received this email in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this email. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this email is strictly prohibited.

                                                From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of John Bardis jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                                Sent: Monday, May 2, 2016 9:30:19 AM
                                                To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                                                Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc
                                                 
                                                Hello Bill,
                                                 
                                                I believe we have already had this conversation. At that time you were sporting a quote from James Joyce.
                                                 
                                                Everyone knows that the underlying structure of his novel Ulysses is Homer's poem. We are told, as well, that the underlying structure of Finegan's Wake is some work by Vico.
                                                 
                                                My own interest in determining the possibility of an underlying structure to a work of literature (of high literature) comes, to begin with, from studying the Bible. Many of the books of the Bible turn out to be highly structured works of literature. And, oddly enough, there is some evidence that, coincidentally enough, the underlying structure of the Gospel of Mark is also provided by Homer's other poem.
                                                 
                                                You use the word "mechanical". Of necessity a first introduction to anything will be mechanical. It must of necessity appeal to the "understanding". In regard to the Phenomenology it is just a matter of study and comparison--all fairly mechanical--to see that it is made up of nine moments, each of which itself contains nine moments. But, secondly, this isn't just a set of nine. Each of the moments has a particular quality.
                                                 
                                                And then, further, the whole thing can be mapped on a circle which, again, isn't just a circle, but is, rather, a quite structured circle.
                                                 
                                                In other words, the further you go into the matter the deeper it becomes. At the beginning it is, of necessity, quite mechanical. But that isn't a reflection on Hegel's Phenomenology. That is rather a reflection on what it means to be a beginner.
                                                 
                                                But, of course, the full structure of the Phenomenology is already quite an advanced topic. It requires, to begin with, that one has actually read the Phenomenology from beginning to end and has a fairly good knowledge of it. If you, for instance, are still just trying to read the book, then this whole structure thing isn't something you need to worry about. But this is, after all, the Hegel list. One would suppose that there would be people here who had fulfilled those minimum requirements.
                                                 
                                                You also use the word "speculative" as though you knew exactly what that meant, as though there were no ambiguity at all about the word.
                                                 
                                                John
                                                 
                                                 
                                                 
                                                -----Original Message-----
                                                From: bill.hord bill.hord@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                                To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                                Sent: Wed, Apr 27, 2016 6:14 pm
                                                Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc

                                                 
                                                John, it has to do with what we think is the structure.

                                                Here's a simplistic example. Suppose a student has written a 5-paragraph persuasive essay. Broadly we can say -- even hope, pedagogically -- that this essay has the same structure as every other 5-paragraph persuasive essay. We can go further and say how many sentences should be in each paragraph. One sentence in each paragraph should be a topic sentence. Each paragraph should do something particular. There are ways to specify what kinds of sentences should be included in various ways.

                                                If our student has chosen something to write about, we can even outline the essay part by part. A student with talent can even write a decent essay this way. But it will still be a mechanical process and result that, we will hope, the student leaves behind once she has mastered the inner structure of the topic. Even a change of audience should affect the way she writes her argument.

                                                Now, if Hegel wrote the PhG this way, most of us would be disappointed -- not because we want Hegel to be difficult. (Let's admit that has some attraction.) The real problem would be that Hegel says thinking in a mechanical way is barely thought, and it isn't authentic speculative thought, so he'd be caught in a performative contradiction of a sort.

                                                I think that's why the mechanical outline you offered us doesn't sell very well. We want the inner structure of Hegel's thought, and that has to be presented in a manner that does service to the real Hegel.

                                                My $.02 in 5 paragraphs.

                                                Bill

                                                "Being is spoken of in many ways." (Aristotle)

                                                This email may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or
                                                have received this email in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this email. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this email is strictly prohibited.



                                                From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
                                                Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 2:26 PM
                                                To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                                                Subject: [hegel] Re: Master/Slave etc
                                                 


                                                Hello Joao,

                                                To work out the structure of the Phenomenology is fairly complicated.

                                                The first step is just simply to read the book through from beginning to end (preferably a few times). Having done this, then the structural problems will be very manifest.

                                                Secondly, you would read a fair amount of the secondary literature. Here the problem of the structure of the Phenomenology comes up endlessly.

                                                Without this preliminary work, it really isn't possible to explain the structure of the Phenomenology to you. It would be a matter of me providing answers to questions you haven't asked.

                                                But this is, after all, the Hegel list. There are several real Hegel scholars here--people with credentials!. One would think one of them would meet these minimum standards.

                                                I know that you have read the Self-consciousness chapter. I presented the structure of that chapter. It is quite straight-forward. I don't think you should have any problem with it. It is the one part of the Phenomenology with an unambiguous structure. As it happens, each of the nine sections of the Phenomenology has a structure that corresponds to this nine-part structure of the Self-consciousness chapter.

                                                You read the Observing Reason section. The last time we spoke about this, I tried to show the nine-part structure of the Observing Reason section, as well as how it corresponds to the nine-part structure of the Consciousness section. Unfortunately the structures of these two parts aren't as clear cut. Much work and much thinking is required to get at the structure in these two cases.

                                                So, then, have you read The second and third parts of the Reason chapter? I know you have read them at least a little bit. So here, again the structure is pretty clear. I think you can readily see that Pleasure and Necessity corresponds to the Life section that begins the Self-Consciousness chapter. You can easily see that the Law of the Heart corresponds to the need for recognition. The fight between Virtue and the Way of the World corresponds to the fight to the death. It is less clear, but quite interesting, to see that the Spiritual Animal Kingdom corresponds to the work of the slave. It is pretty straight-forward that Law Making corresponds to the Stoic and Law Testing to the Sceptic.

                                                At this point it isn't a matter of "necessity". It is simply a matter of observation and thought.

                                                So then, finally, that the Unhappy Consciousness in its three forms corresponds to the Ethical Life section of the Spirit chapter was suggested by Harris in his _Hegel's Ladder_. The Ethical Life section which deals with ancient Greece from the perspective of the plays by Sophocles about Antigone, etc,--this describes the Happy Consciousness, the consciousness of ancient Greece!

                                                So, then, actually the next two sections of the Spirit chapter, on Culture and Morality, together form the fifth part of the Phenomenology. Together they have the same structure as the Self-consciousness chapter. Of course I would love to go into this. But as far as I know you haven't read this part of the Phenomenology--so what I might say would mean nothing to you.

                                                The sixth, seventh and eighth parts of the Phenomenology are the sections on Natural Religion, Religion of Art, and Revealed Religion. Natural Religion corresponds to the Consciousness section. The Religion of Art corresponds to the Self-consciousness section. And the Revealed Religion section corresponds to the Culture/Morality section.

                                                Then, of course, the Absolute Knowing chapter, in its nine parts, is the cap stone to the whole thing.

                                                And really I suppose this is just a table of contents. But it is just the first step. As a first step it is, of necessity, quite external--appealing only to the understanding. I wish I could get beyond these first steps. But to do so I would need someone who has actually read the Phenomenology, who has read it enough to be aware of the structural problems involved--and someone, quite simply, who was interested in the Phenomenology, interested enough to spend the time necessary in reading, and doing the work of comparing.

                                                This work would result in a truly speculative understanding of the book, an understanding that encompassed the whole book from beginning to end, a reading that would see the circular nature of the book as a whole and of each of the nine parts of the book.

                                                So, I'm afraid, Joao, that if, at this point you see no necessity--then perhaps that might be your short-coming? Perhaps you haven't done the work that would be necessary?

                                                And this has nothing to do with theology. All this talk about a "theological reading" is just the stupidity of atheism trying to avoid the hard work of actually reading Hegel. Of course those who aren't atheists also avoid reading Hegel to a very large extent. I really don't understand this reluctance to actually read Hegel. Why wouldn't we want to read Hegel?

                                                John




                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.