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
 

PhdG Preface #8

Expand Messages
  • robert fanelli
    Dear Group (that is, if you are allowed to read this), I am sending you this commentary (#8 Preface PhdG) to hegel@yahoogroups.com both directly by Verizon E
    Message 1 of 14 , Sep 22, 2009
      Dear Group (that is, if you are allowed to read this),

      I am sending you this commentary (#8 Preface PhdG) to hegel@yahoogroups.com both directly by Verizon E mail and Yahoo.com. It is plain text.

      I am also sending this specifically to the several E Mail addresses I have for the members of this Hegel Yahoo group, and to several of my friends who are interested in Hegel.

      My membership in this Yahoo Group goes back several years, and until recently I was able to freely communicate with the group; and I might add, I have always conducted my self on line according to the decorum of the various Yahoo groups, and with the academic standards worthy of this great philosopher, Hegel. In addition I belong to the Hegel Society and had the pleasure of attending their meeting in NYC several years ago. It dealt with the Science of Logic.

      I would appreciate it if whoever is in charge of the ‘imprimatur’ of my comments would respectively respond to me addressing the reasons why I can not be read by the Group, if in fact my writings have been blocked. It may however be a technical problem rather than a deliberate blockage.
      If I don’t receive a response to this I will still continue to send my comments to the group and copy various recipients. Hopefully, at least, I will continue to receive the various comments from the Group.

      I remain respectively yours,

      Bob Fanelli

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

      From Harris, “Hegel’s Ladder1: The Pilgrimage of Reason:”

      <This world used to be just an image of the other one. The eye of the spirit had to be turned forcibly to this life, and it took a long time. Now we need the awareness of Heaven again, and the measure of our loss is the immediate contact that is accepted as enough.> p45

      My comments:

      Since medieval and religious ideology have withered on the vine, there is a craving in Hegel’s time for replacement to this ethereal community, a frenzied effort on the part of all kinds, by Schelling, Schiller, Kant, and the like….Experience and empirical knowledge have overtaken all other ideology and hence the search for more meaningful beliefs….Hegel, of course will offer his PhdG. Now (in this early nineteenth century) the natural sciences have burst on to the scene and the sensate or power of empiricism have taken hold. Harris says, “that thread was broken by the Enlightenment which taught us our bourgeois values and made us worldly once again.” I think Harris gets carried away with the bourgeois values; the point is the Church and aristocracy were challenged in the eighteenth century and empiricism, soon to be called positivism or logical positivism took over.

      How do we get the focus back to the stars and to the divine? Experience has taken over. Kant himself has split reality into two; that is, knowledge of reality from experience and the pure ethical substance of transcendent reality. Hegel clearly says ‘Now we have apparently the need for the opposite of all this; man's mind and interest are so deeply rooted in the earthly that we require a like power to have them raised above that level.’ Even if we have to reach for the abstract divine, at least it goes beyond the immediate crassness of the sensate. We are wandering in the desert or wasteland of limited and arguably skeptical knowledge.

      Thanks for reading this.
    • hegelnet
      Hi Bob, ... I would appreciate it if whoever is in charge of the ‘imprimatur’ of my comments would respectively respond to me addressing the reasons why I
      Message 2 of 14 , Sep 22, 2009
        Hi Bob,

        >>>
        I would appreciate it if whoever is in charge of the ‘imprimatur’ of my comments would respectively respond to me addressing the reasons why I can not be read by the Group, if in fact my writings have been blocked. It may however be a technical problem rather than a deliberate blockage.
        <<<

        At the moment, this group is not moderated, since Levi has no more time for the moderation task.

        From time to time, I recieve mails from people who have been set to moderated by Levi and/or are new, and I approve their mails. I am nbot aware of any mail from you that was rejected. And I also don't see any mail in the folder of mails pending for approval.

        From time to time, mails are being bloked by yahoo as "spanm" (principle unknown except that real spam seems never to be egorized by yahoo in that category), in such cases, I dont get a message by yahoo. I see that recently Beat was friendly enoug to check and release seevral of such spam messages, probably also yours.

        AsI mentioned already in the past, in such cases it is just enough to write me (or Beat) a small message so that I can check if your mail is hold back in the spam folder so that I can release it.

        As I wrote before, I have always promoted a very lightweight moderation in our Hegel.net mailing lists, only holding back mails unrelated to Hegel (e.g. spam) or agressive mails in offending tone, just the usual exceptions. fortunately, it was very seldom that this was ever needed.

        Hope that helps, all the best, keep us posting,
        Kai
      • eupraxis@aol.com
        Robert, I am a member of several yahoo groups, and a moderator of some of them. I have noticed that the service is a bit spotty at times, including the Hegel
        Message 3 of 14 , Sep 22, 2009
          Robert,

          I am a member of several yahoo groups, and a moderator of some of them. I have noticed that the service is a bit spotty at times, including the Hegel Group. I doubt if your posts have been deliberately withheld, especially if you have not received anything from one of the moderators. I know that it can be very frustrating not to have something post, or to have it post long past a time when it would make sense.

          For all that, I usually post right from the site now. That seems to be the most reliable.

          Wil







          -----Original Message-----
          From: robert fanelli <robertfanelli2001@...>
          To: hegel hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
          Cc: deirdre deirdre <deirdrellen@...>; chris fanelli <fanellichris@...>; chris fanelli <cfanelli@...>; gregory gregory <falon@...>; mark mark <marktacit@...>; paul paul <comatunes@...>; rob rob <fanelli20@...>; ted ted <tedhumphrey@...>; beat beat <greuterb@...>; wallace wallace <philosop@...>
          Sent: Tue, Sep 22, 2009 3:55 pm
          Subject: [hegel] PhdG Preface #8



























          Dear Group (that is, if you are allowed to read this),



          I am sending you this commentary (#8 Preface PhdG) to hegel@yahoogroups.com both directly by Verizon E mail and Yahoo.com. It is plain text.



          I am also sending this specifically to the several E Mail addresses I have for the members of this Hegel Yahoo group, and to several of my friends who a
          re interested in Hegel.



          My membership in this Yahoo Group goes back several years, and until recently I was able to freely communicate with the group; and I might add, I have always conducted my self on line according to the decorum of the various Yahoo groups, and with the academic standards worthy of this great philosopher, Hegel. In addition I belong to the Hegel Society and had the pleasure of attending their meeting in NYC several years ago. It dealt with the Science of Logic.



          I would appreciate it if whoever is in charge of the ‘imprimatur’ of my comments would respectively respond to me addressing the reasons why I can not be read by the Group, if in fact my writings have been blocked. It may however be a technical problem rather than a deliberate blockage.

          If I don’t receive a response to this I will still continue to send my comments to the group and copy various recipients. Hopefully, at least, I will continue to receive the various comments from the Group.



          I remain respectively yours,



          Bob Fanelli



          <8. With this demand there goes the strenuous effort, almost (over) zealous in its activity, to rescue mankind from being sunken in what is sensuous, vulgar, and of fleeting importance, and to raise men's eyes to the stars; as if men had quite forgotten the divine, and were on the verge of finding satisfaction, like worms, in mud and water. Time was when man had a heaven, decked and fitted out with endless wealth o
          f thoughts and pictures. The significance of all that is, lay in the thread of light by which it was attached to heaven; instead of dwelling in the present as it is here and now, the eye glanced away over the present to the Divine, away, so to say, to a present that lies beyond. The mind's gaze had to be directed under compulsion to what is earthly, and kept fixed there; and it has needed a long time to introduce that clearness, which only celestial realities had, into the crassness and confusion shrouding the sense of things ,earthly, and to

          make attention to the immediate present as such, which was called Experience, of interest and of value. Now we have apparently the need for the opposite of all this; man's mind and interest are so deeply rooted in the earthly that we require a like power to have them raised above that level. His spirit shows such poverty of nature that it seems too long for the mere pitiful feeling of the divine in the abstract, and to get refreshment from that, like a wanderer in the desert craving for the merest mouthful of water. By the little which can thus satisfy the needs of the human spirit we can measure the extent of its loss.>



          From Harris, “Hegel’s Ladder1: The Pilgrimage of Reason:”



          <This world used to be just an image of the other one. The eye of the spirit had to be turned forcibly to this life, and it took a long time. Now we need the awareness of Heaven again, and the measure of our loss is th
          e immediate contact that is accepted as enough.> p45



          My comments:



          Since medieval and religious ideology have withered on the vine, there is a craving in Hegel’s time for replacement to this ethereal community, a frenzied effort on the part of all kinds, by Schelling, Schiller, Kant, and the like….Experience and empirical knowledge have overtaken all other ideology and hence the search for more meaningful beliefs….Hegel, of course will offer his PhdG. Now (in this early nineteenth century) the natural sciences have burst on to the scene and the sensate or power of empiricism have taken hold. Harris says, “that thread was broken by the Enlightenment which taught us our bourgeois values and made us worldly once again.” I think Harris gets carried away with the bourgeois values; the point is the Church and aristocracy were challenged in the eighteenth century and empiricism, soon to be called positivism or logical positivism took over.



          How do we get the focus back to the stars and to the divine? Experience has taken over. Kant himself has split reality into two; that is, knowledge of reality from experience and the pure ethical substance of transcendent reality. Hegel clearly says ‘Now we have apparently the need for the opposite of all this; man's mind and interest are so deeply rooted in the earthly that we require a like power to have them raised above that level.’ Even if we have to reach for the abstract divine, at least
          it goes beyond the immediate crassness of the sensate. We are wandering in the desert or wasteland of limited and arguably skeptical knowledge.



          Thanks for reading this.


























          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • robert fanelli
          Kai   Thanks for such a prompt reply.  What is difficult to understand is that many of the Yahoo Group messages get through, because I receive them.  My
          Message 4 of 14 , Sep 22, 2009
            Kai
             
            Thanks for such a prompt reply.  What is difficult to understand is that many of the Yahoo Group messages get through, because I receive them.  My last Hegel PhdG #8,  Commentary of this date,which you received on your email, did not come back to me at hegel@..., which probably means that it is somehow being blocked.  Let's hope things will get better.  I will continue to send my commentaries to hegel@yahoogroups.com and to the individual emails.  Psychologically, at least I know that it's being received by some members of the group, as well, of course, by my interested friends.
             
            Thanks again,
            Bob

            --- On Tue, 9/22/09, hegelnet <froeb-list@...> wrote:


            From: hegelnet <froeb-list@...>
            Subject: [hegel] Re: PhdG Preface - moderation issues
            To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 6:11 PM


             



            Hi Bob,

            >>>
            I would appreciate it if whoever is in charge of the ‘imprimatur’ of my comments would respectively respond to me addressing the reasons why I can not be read by the Group, if in fact my writings have been blocked. It may however be a technical problem rather than a deliberate blockage.
            <<<

            At the moment, this group is not moderated, since Levi has no more time for the moderation task.

            From time to time, I recieve mails from people who have been set to moderated by Levi and/or are new, and I approve their mails. I am nbot aware of any mail from you that was rejected. And I also don't see any mail in the folder of mails pending for approval.

            From time to time, mails are being bloked by yahoo as "spanm" (principle unknown except that real spam seems never to be egorized by yahoo in that category), in such cases, I dont get a message by yahoo. I see that recently Beat was friendly enoug to check and release seevral of such spam messages, probably also yours.

            AsI mentioned already in the past, in such cases it is just enough to write me (or Beat) a small message so that I can check if your mail is hold back in the spam folder so that I can release it.

            As I wrote before, I have always promoted a very lightweight moderation in our Hegel.net mailing lists, only holding back mails unrelated to Hegel (e.g. spam) or agressive mails in offending tone, just the usual exceptions. fortunately, it was very seldom that this was ever needed.

            Hope that helps, all the best, keep us posting,
            Kai



















            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Beat Greuter
            ... In the last days and weeks several messages were in the spam folder. Bob Fanelli s messages were not in it. From time to time there are messages which are
            Message 5 of 14 , Sep 23, 2009
              Kai wrote:

              >
              >
              > Hi Bob,
              >
              > >>>
              > I would appreciate it if whoever is in charge of the
              > âEUR~imprimaturâEUR^(TM) of my comments would respectively respond to
              > me addressing the reasons why I can not be read by the Group, if in
              > fact my writings have been blocked. It may however be a technical
              > problem rather than a deliberate blockage.
              > <<<
              >
              > At the moment, this group is not moderated, since Levi has no more
              > time for the moderation task.
              >
              > >From time to time, I recieve mails from people who have been set to
              > moderated by Levi and/or are new, and I approve their mails. I am nbot
              > aware of any mail from you that was rejected. And I also don't see any
              > mail in the folder of mails pending for approval.
              >
              > >From time to time, mails are being bloked by yahoo as "spanm"
              > (principle unknown except that real spam seems never to be egorized by
              > yahoo in that category), in such cases, I dont get a message by yahoo.
              > I see that recently Beat was friendly enoug to check and release
              > seevral of such spam messages, probably also yours.
              >
              > AsI mentioned already in the past, in such cases it is just enough to
              > write me (or Beat) a small message so that I can check if your mail is
              > hold back in the spam folder so that I can release it.
              >
              > As I wrote before, I have always promoted a very lightweight
              > moderation in our Hegel.net mailing lists, only holding back mails
              > unrelated to Hegel (e.g. spam) or agressive mails in offending tone,
              > just the usual exceptions. fortunately, it was very seldom that this
              > was ever needed.
              >
              > Hope that helps, all the best, keep us posting,
              > Kai
              >
              >
              >
              > __



              In the last days and weeks several messages were in the spam folder. Bob
              Fanelli's messages were not in it. From time to time there are messages
              which are in the moderated status (from new members but even from older
              members what I do not understand). After approving these messages I
              usually change also the moderation status from moderated to
              non-moderated. I hope Kai agrees with this.

              Best wishes,
              Beat Greuter



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • wmdepot
              From Harris, “Hegel’s Ladder : The Pilgrimage of Reason
              Message 6 of 14 , Sep 23, 2009
                From Harris, “Hegel’s Ladder": The Pilgrimage of Reason

                <8. With this demand there goes the strenuous effort [Hegel's strenuous effort ???], almost (over) zealous in its activity, to rescue mankind from being sunken in what is sensuous, vulgar, and of fleeting importance, and to raise men's eyes to the stars; as if men had quite forgotten the divine, and were on the verge of finding satisfaction, like worms, in mud and water. Time was when man had a heaven, decked and fitted out with endless wealth of thoughts and pictures.

                JH:
                ... by the way before Hegel climbs up a ladder, he is climbing down ... down to a philosophical base-level beyond (psychological) Wahrnehmung, perception .... before Hegel get's material he get's formal ...

                JH:
                ... this comment - if it is a comment an Hegel - goes to heavily into a material direction; and thus into the direction of a pure empiricism, where in the last instance even causality is a pure empirical phenomenon ... I therefore would have to reclaim Hegel more formally against that, that's to say: more philosophically ... the 'comment' of Harris refers far to much to a negative material discourse on sensuality ... to nihilism, nothingness of the sensual ... for me it seems clear that - towards this discourse - there's formal discourse on sensuality possible an necessary ... and may be so, that each material undergoing (like the one of Harris), that each negative, sinnenfeindliche - sense-fiendly - undergoing in the materia, is determined by a formal condition of possibilty: ... sensuality as such ...

                ... with Verstand/mind - Verstandesrationalität - apriorily related to sensuality as such, that's to say: in Critique of pure Reason, it is aprioriy dealt with "the sensual mind" ... that's to say; if I make mind a theme, I cannot abstract thereby from sensuality as such ... that's to say: I can abstract materially from sensuality but I cannot abstract formally from sensuality as such ... sorry, but that is hard-core Kant ... and that's a thing to keep (in mind) ... Hegel has to be taken towards a more formal concept of sensuality ... formal, because Hegel works philosophically ... that's to say: a formal concept of something that itself is not a concept: sensuality ... and with Verstand as the absolutely integrated other of sensuality ...

                ... or so ... imho ... guys

                regards - jh

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • wmdepot
                ... oops ... the cited text is not from Harris but from GWFH himself ... that s to say: Hegel demonstrates a certain position of the spirit ... see:
                Message 7 of 14 , Sep 23, 2009
                  ... oops ... the cited text is not from Harris but from GWFH himself ... that's to say: Hegel demonstrates a certain position of the spirit ... see:


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

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

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

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


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


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

                  Get inspired

                  by a good cause.

                  Y! Toolbar
                  Get it Free!

                  easy 1-click access

                  to your groups.

                  Yahoo! Groups
                  Start a group

                  in 3 easy steps.

                  Connect with others.
                  .



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • hegelnet
                  ... sure, please do. thank you, Beat
                  Message 8 of 14 , Sep 23, 2009
                    --- In hegel@yahoogroups.com, Beat Greuter <greuterb@...> wrote:
                    > In the last days and weeks several messages were in the spam folder. Bob
                    > Fanelli's messages were not in it. From time to time there are messages
                    > which are in the moderated status (from new members but even from older
                    > members what I do not understand). After approving these messages I
                    > usually change also the moderation status from moderated to
                    > non-moderated. I hope Kai agrees with this.

                    sure, please do.
                    thank you, Beat
                  • robert fanelli
                    Beat and Kai, Thanks for your concern with this spam thing... Bob Fanelli ________________________________ From: hegelnet To:
                    Message 9 of 14 , Sep 23, 2009
                      Beat and Kai,

                      Thanks for your concern with this spam thing...

                      Bob Fanelli




                      ________________________________
                      From: hegelnet <froeb-list@...>
                      To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 12:39:52 PM
                      Subject: [hegel] Re: PhdG Preface - moderation issues

                       
                      --- In hegel@yahoogroups. com, Beat Greuter <greuterb@.. .> wrote:
                      > In the last days and weeks several messages were in the spam folder. Bob
                      > Fanelli's messages were not in it. From time to time there are messages
                      > which are in the moderated status (from new members but even from older
                      > members what I do not understand). After approving these messages I
                      > usually change also the moderation status from moderated to
                      > non-moderated. I hope Kai agrees with this.

                      sure, please do.
                      thank you, Beat







                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • wmdepot
                      ... From: wmdepot To: hegel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: [hegel] Re: PhdG Preface #8 8. With this demand there goes the
                      Message 10 of 14 , Sep 26, 2009
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: wmdepot
                        To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 4:29 PM
                        Subject: [hegel] Re: PhdG Preface #8

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

                        JH:
                        ... this comment/description by Hegel - and it seems to be a comment of a certain position by Hegel - ... - goes too heavily into a mere material direction; and thus into the direction of a pure *material* discourse (of uncertainty) which is - somewhat - analogous to classical empiricism: where 'in the last instance' even causality is a pure *psychological* phenomenon of *analogy* and sheer habit ... I therefore would have to reclaim to read Hegel more formally against this position, that's to say: more philosophically ... the 'comment' (...) refers far too much to a negative material discourse on sensuality ... to nihilism, nothingness of the sensual, to clercalism not at least, to Sinnen-Feindlichkeit/sense-fiendliness (if this can be said in english) ... for me it seems clear that - towards this discourse - there's formal discourse on sensuality possible and necessary ... and may be in a way, that each material undergoing, that each negative, sinnenfeindliche - sense-fiendly - undergoing in the materia, is regarded to be determined by a formal condition of possibilty: ... sensuality as such ... sensuality as such which is irreducible, which can be sublated, yes, but nevertheless: it is and stays sensuality that is sublated ... it is and stays the mine/das Meinen: ' I ' will never be able to suspend this Mine/Meinen; ' I ' always will be thrown back into this Mine/Meinen although ' I ' am able to - psycho-anlalytically spoken - reject this fact ...

                        ... and if Hegel should under-estimate sensuality as such, we would have to urge him to keep it ... as Ludwig Feuerbach did and as Karl Heinrich Marx did ... and - why not - with a formal strength that can be read out of the "Critique of pure Reason" ...

                        regards
                        jh




                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • wmdepot
                        ... From: rf To: hegel hegel Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 10:55 PM Subject: [hegel] PhdG Preface #8 8. (...) From Harris, “Hegel’s Ladder1: The
                        Message 11 of 14 , Sep 26, 2009
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: rf
                          To: hegel hegel
                          Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 10:55 PM
                          Subject: [hegel] PhdG Preface #8

                          8.
                          (...)

                          From Harris, “Hegel’s Ladder1: The Pilgrimage of Reason:”

                          <This world used to be just an image of the other one. The eye of the spirit had to be turned forcibly to this life, and it took a long time. Now we need the awareness of Heaven again, and the measure of our loss is the immediate contact that is accepted as enough.> p45

                          My comments:

                          Since medieval and religious ideology have withered on the vine, there is a craving in Hegel’s time for replacement to this ethereal community, a frenzied effort on the part of all kinds, by Schelling, Schiller, Kant, and the like….Experience and empirical knowledge have overtaken all other ideology and hence the search for more meaningful beliefs….Hegel, of course will offer his PhdG. Now (in this early nineteenth century) the natural sciences have burst on to the scene and the sensate or power of empiricism have taken hold. Harris says, “that thread was broken by the Enlightenment which taught us our bourgeois values and made us worldly once again.” I think Harris gets carried away with the bourgeois values; the point is the Church and aristocracy were challenged in the eighteenth century and empiricism, soon to be called positivism or logical positivism took over.

                          How do we get the focus back to the stars and to the divine? Experience has taken over. Kant himself has split reality into two; that is, knowledge of reality from experience and the pure ethical substance of transcendent reality. Hegel clearly says ‘Now we have apparently the need for the opposite of all this; man's mind and interest are so deeply rooted in the earthly that we require a like power to have them raised above that level.’ Even if we have to reach for the abstract divine, at least it goes beyond the immediate crassness of the sensate. We are wandering in the desert or wasteland of limited and arguably skeptical knowledge.

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • stephen theron
                          JH, wmdepot, or was it Jürgen, I am looking forward to working through this series on the Preface when I get time. It looks interesting. Is this the first
                          Message 12 of 14 , Sep 26, 2009
                            JH, wmdepot, or was it J�rgen,



                            I am looking forward to working through this series on the Preface when I get time. It looks interesting. Is this the first one? Are they all a comment on Harris? Stephen.



                            To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
                            From: wmdepot@...
                            Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:29:21 +0200
                            Subject: [hegel] Re: PhdG Preface #8





                            From Harris, �Hegel�s Ladder": The Pilgrimage of Reason

                            <8. With this demand there goes the strenuous effort [Hegel's strenuous effort ???], almost (over) zealous in its activity, to rescue mankind from being sunken in what is sensuous, vulgar, and of fleeting importance, and to raise men's eyes to the stars; as if men had quite forgotten the divine, and were on the verge of finding satisfaction, like worms, in mud and water. Time was when man had a heaven, decked and fitted out with endless wealth of thoughts and pictures.

                            JH:
                            ... by the way before Hegel climbs up a ladder, he is climbing down ... down to a philosophical base-level beyond (psychological) Wahrnehmung, perception .... before Hegel get's material he get's formal ...

                            JH:
                            ... this comment - if it is a comment an Hegel - goes to heavily into a material direction; and thus into the direction of a pure empiricism, where in the last instance even causality is a pure empirical phenomenon ... I therefore would have to reclaim Hegel more formally against that, that's to say: more philosophically ... the 'comment' of Harris refers far to much to a negative material discourse on sensuality ... to nihilism, nothingness of the sensual ... for me it seems clear that - towards this discourse - there's formal discourse on sensuality possible an necessary ... and may be so, that each material undergoing (like the one of Harris), that each negative, sinnenfeindliche - sense-fiendly - undergoing in the materia, is determined by a formal condition of possibilty: ... sensuality as such ...

                            ... with Verstand/mind - Verstandesrationalit�t - apriorily related to sensuality as such, that's to say: in Critique of pure Reason, it is aprioriy dealt with "the sensual mind" ... that's to say; if I make mind a theme, I cannot abstract thereby from sensuality as such ... that's to say: I can abstract materially from sensuality but I cannot abstract formally from sensuality as such ... sorry, but that is hard-core Kant ... and that's a thing to keep (in mind) ... Hegel has to be taken towards a more formal concept of sensuality ... formal, because Hegel works philosophically ... that's to say: a formal concept of something that itself is not a concept: sensuality ... and with Verstand as the absolutely integrated other of sensuality ...

                            ... or so ... imho ... guys

                            regards - jh

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









                            _________________________________________________________________
                            Descubre todas las formas en que puedes estar en contacto con amigos y familiares.
                            http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • wmdepot
                            ... thank you for answering, ST ... the Preface #8-thing was just my starting point for a refresh in Hegel ... after my - at first - misunderstanding it as a
                            Message 13 of 14 , Sep 26, 2009
                              ... thank you for answering, ST ... the Preface #8-thing was just my starting point for a refresh in Hegel ... after my - at first - misunderstanding it as a comment of Harris (because of my laziness to to look it up in PhdG/PhoS), this - then - made me go into a sequenze of paragraphs of the preface towards paragraph #8 ... in order to just get a broader context and in order to see to what that would lead to ... that's to say: I just did a few paragraphs of PhdG/PhoS in public working which I hadn't done if not publicly ... done for self-understanding and for those, to whom it may concern ...

                              ST wrote:
                              JH, wmdepot, or was it Jürgen,

                              JH:
                              ... yes, and above all, it's the internet ...

                              regards
                              jh

                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • wmdepot
                              positivity of religion (Hegel): 8. With this demand there goes the strenuous effort, almost perfervidly zealous in its activity, to rescue mankind from being
                              Message 14 of 14 , Oct 14 3:24 PM
                                "positivity of religion" (Hegel):


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


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.