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

Re: [hegel] Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32

Expand Messages
  • Beat Greuter
    ... What para 32 does deal with is the sublation of the immediate truth of being. It is at the same time the transition from the classical and medieval
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 27, 2011
      Am 26.04.2011 01:04, Robert Fanelli writes:

      > Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
      > Comments on # 32:
      >
      > These are difficult concepts. Ideas have familiarity. Ideas can be
      > broken up into elements each with moments-the meaning of moment takes
      > on more than time. Moments are fleeting. In the analysis of the
      > moments of an idea, we are not left with the forms of these moments,
      > because they are fleeting, but strictly with the self, apparently
      > meaning the self-conscious or reflective aspects of the thinking self.
      > But at this point in our analysis we are left with inert
      > determinations, that is, determinations which are not interrelated.
      > What is left are concrete facts self divided and turning into
      > non-reality, because we cannot structure them adequately. Thus
      > understanding takes command and circular thought comes into play. This
      > thinking process, along with its negative methods has through self
      > consciousness, properties of freedom (freedom of thinking),
      > independence (from the other in reality), and what Hegel calls an
      > existence of its own, not a limited
      > finite being (dasein), but a universal type of being. Here then is the
      > rub. Thinking has the portentous power of the negative, a great
      > energy, and within the confines of self-consciousness, a powerful
      > intellectual ego. The power of death is great. We try to understand
      > Beauty itself, but we cannot reason it. It is beyond understanding.
      > Beauty for Kant has no cognitive substance. A taste of the concept of
      > immortality shows itself, perhaps, in these words of death and mind.
      > Mind has the power to face death, which is the greatest negative of
      > all. The negative has its own being. Consciousness can eliminate the
      > abstract nature of immediacy and all that goes with this abstractness.
      >
      > This paragraph is all about negativity and its potential to be a
      > complete statement of what is. Death is the ultimate negative and the
      > most profound of all negation. It is the height of Hegel’s thesis on
      > the reality of Being as it is conceptualized by consciousness and
      > self-consciousness. The human mind adhering to Hegel’s System has the
      > capability to generate enormous images of reality, of absolute
      > reality, and of even confrontation with the full meaning of reality,
      > and thereby, with life itself. These images, for Hegel, far outweigh
      > the empirical or experiential entities we are bombarded with in life.
      > It is thus a case of reality as it impresses us from without and
      > reality as we conjure it through the development of a consciousness of
      > Spirit and Substance. It is not a dualism in any sense of the word. It
      > is a substance that rears its head through the world and through the
      > Self. It is evident, for example in art and in the sublime, revealing
      > itself as substance subjectively and objectively. Hegel does not deny
      > the reality of the objective universe, but he does offer a philosophy
      > which can generate a reality that can structure an immense absolute
      > inner reality.
      >
      > Regards,
      >
      > Bob Fanelli
      >
      >


      What para 32 does deal with is the sublation of the immediate truth of
      being. It is at the same time the transition from the classical and
      medieval philosophy into modern philosophy (starting from Descartes but
      prepared already by some philosophers of the Middle Ages and the
      Renaissance) as well as the transition from Hegel's Logic of Being into
      his Logic of the Essence. Kant was the first who brought to mind this
      epistemological turn of the modern age. For Hegel this was an important
      step of spirit as the labour of the abstraction from the concrete and
      cannot be withdrawn by an epistemoglogy of intuition and beauty which
      looks for a new immediacy without this negative labour of the concept
      (Schelling, Jacobi):

      "Beauty, powerless and helpless, hates understanding, because the latter
      exacts from it what it cannot perform." (PhdG, Preface, para 32,
      translated by J.B. Baillie)

      However, according to Hegel Kant did not overcome the negativity of the
      understanding with its fixed unreal determinations as determinations of
      self-consciousness (the I), the outer being taken only as semblance
      while creating an own divorced actuality. In his Logic of the Essence
      then Hegel shows the inherent movement of these fixed and opposite
      determinations what is the presupposition for the arising of the pure
      concept which has the sublation of its other fully in its own movement.
      With this a new immediacy is initiated which, however, is only as
      mediating (see also the continuation in para 33).

      Regards,
      Beat Greuter


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • robert fanelli
      Beat, your quote is well taken.  I refer to Kant s Critique of Judgment (KU):   “The beautiful is that which without any concept cognized as the object is
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 27, 2011
        Beat, your quote is well taken.  I refer to Kant's Critique of Judgment (KU):
         
        “The beautiful is that which without any concept cognized as the object is a necessary satisfaction.” KU 77A (Bernard)
         
         
        "Beauty, powerless and helpless, hates understanding, because the latter exacts from it what it cannot perform." (PhdG, Preface, para 32, translated by J.B. Baillie)

        <We try to understand beauty itself, but we cannot reason it. It is beyond understanding. Beauty for Kant has no cognitive substance.>   from my analysis-
         
        Hegel, of course, would argue that 'understanding' is a lower level of cognition and thus would not have the final say on whether beauty is subject to the laws of Reason.
         
        Referring to your other comments on # 32, one would need considerable prerequisites in philosophy and the history of philosophy in order to grasp your analysis of the  speculative aspects of Hegel's thesis.  My comments on each paragraph attempt to offer Hegel on a more prosaic and primer type of exposition.   This is my goal, to get people more interested in understanding Hegel.
         
        Thanks for your reply.
         
        Bob Fanelli


         

         
         
         
         
         
         
        --- On Wed, 4/27/11, Beat Greuter <greuterb@...> wrote:


        From: Beat Greuter <greuterb@...>
        Subject: Re: [hegel] Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
        To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Wednesday, April 27, 2011, 5:13 AM


         



        Am 26.04.2011 01:04, Robert Fanelli writes:

        > Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
        > Comments on # 32:
        >
        > These are difficult concepts. Ideas have familiarity. Ideas can be
        > broken up into elements each with moments-the meaning of moment takes
        > on more than time. Moments are fleeting. In the analysis of the
        > moments of an idea, we are not left with the forms of these moments,
        > because they are fleeting, but strictly with the self, apparently
        > meaning the self-conscious or reflective aspects of the thinking self.
        > But at this point in our analysis we are left with inert
        > determinations, that is, determinations which are not interrelated.
        > What is left are concrete facts self divided and turning into
        > non-reality, because we cannot structure them adequately. Thus
        > understanding takes command and circular thought comes into play. This
        > thinking process, along with its negative methods has through self
        > consciousness, properties of freedom (freedom of thinking),
        > independence (from the other in reality), and what Hegel calls an
        > existence of its own, not a limited
        > finite being (dasein), but a universal type of being. Here then is the
        > rub. Thinking has the portentous power of the negative, a great
        > energy, and within the confines of self-consciousness, a powerful
        > intellectual ego. The power of death is great. We try to understand
        > Beauty itself, but we cannot reason it. It is beyond understanding.
        > Beauty for Kant has no cognitive substance. A taste of the concept of
        > immortality shows itself, perhaps, in these words of death and mind.
        > Mind has the power to face death, which is the greatest negative of
        > all. The negative has its own being. Consciousness can eliminate the
        > abstract nature of immediacy and all that goes with this abstractness.
        >
        > This paragraph is all about negativity and its potential to be a
        > complete statement of what is. Death is the ultimate negative and the
        > most profound of all negation. It is the height of Hegel’s thesis on
        > the reality of Being as it is conceptualized by consciousness and
        > self-consciousness. The human mind adhering to Hegel’s System has the
        > capability to generate enormous images of reality, of absolute
        > reality, and of even confrontation with the full meaning of reality,
        > and thereby, with life itself. These images, for Hegel, far outweigh
        > the empirical or experiential entities we are bombarded with in life.
        > It is thus a case of reality as it impresses us from without and
        > reality as we conjure it through the development of a consciousness of
        > Spirit and Substance. It is not a dualism in any sense of the word. It
        > is a substance that rears its head through the world and through the
        > Self. It is evident, for example in art and in the sublime, revealing
        > itself as substance subjectively and objectively. Hegel does not deny
        > the reality of the objective universe, but he does offer a philosophy
        > which can generate a reality that can structure an immense absolute
        > inner reality.
        >
        > Regards,
        >
        > Bob Fanelli
        >
        >

        What para 32 does deal with is the sublation of the immediate truth of
        being. It is at the same time the transition from the classical and
        medieval philosophy into modern philosophy (starting from Descartes but
        prepared already by some philosophers of the Middle Ages and the
        Renaissance) as well as the transition from Hegel's Logic of Being into
        his Logic of the Essence. Kant was the first who brought to mind this
        epistemological turn of the modern age. For Hegel this was an important
        step of spirit as the labour of the abstraction from the concrete and
        cannot be withdrawn by an epistemoglogy of intuition and beauty which
        looks for a new immediacy without this negative labour of the concept
        (Schelling, Jacobi):

        "Beauty, powerless and helpless, hates understanding, because the latter
        exacts from it what it cannot perform." (PhdG, Preface, para 32,
        translated by J.B. Baillie)

        However, according to Hegel Kant did not overcome the negativity of the
        understanding with its fixed unreal determinations as determinations of
        self-consciousness (the I), the outer being taken only as semblance
        while creating an own divorced actuality. In his Logic of the Essence
        then Hegel shows the inherent movement of these fixed and opposite
        determinations what is the presupposition for the arising of the pure
        concept which has the sublation of its other fully in its own movement.
        With this a new immediacy is initiated which, however, is only as
        mediating (see also the continuation in para 33).

        Regards,
        Beat Greuter

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








        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Beat Greuter
        ... Bob, Schelling and Jacobi did refer also to Kant s Critique of Judgement for founding the immediate cognition as truth. With this all three tried to
        Message 3 of 6 , Apr 28, 2011
          Am 28.04.2011 02:06, Robert Fanelli writes:

          > Beat, your quote is well taken. I refer to Kant's Critique of
          > Judgment (KU):
          >
          > “The beautiful is that which without any concept cognized as the
          > object is a necessary satisfaction.” KU 77A (Bernard)
          >


          Bob,

          Schelling and Jacobi did refer also to Kant's Critique of Judgement for
          founding the immediate cognition as truth. With this all three tried to
          overcome the result of the Critique of Pure Reason that the
          thing-in-itself cannot be known by the understanding. For Hegel just
          this means to transcend the mediation what he criticizes in para 32 of
          the Preface of the PhdG. He says elsewhere: "Hic Rhodus, hic saltus".


          > "Beauty, powerless and helpless, hates understanding, because the
          > latter exacts from it what it cannot perform." (PhdG, Preface, para
          > 32, translated by J.B. Baillie)
          >
          > <We try to understand beauty itself, but we cannot reason it. It is
          > beyond understanding. Beauty for Kant has no cognitive substance.>
          > from my analysis-
          >
          > Hegel, of course, would argue that 'understanding' is a lower level of
          > cognition and thus would not have the final say on whether beauty is
          > subject to the laws of Reason.
          >


          I am afraid that you offer us an inadequate interpretation of this Hegel
          quotation. In this text Hegel does not refer to the comprehension of
          Beauty itself but he simply compares the power of abstraction of the
          understanding with the powerless and helpless talking about Beauty as
          intuitive (subjective or objective) grasping of the truth. For Hegel
          Beauty and the Good are moments of the Absolute Spirit in which these
          moments are mediated and get their objective truth. In para 32 of the
          PhdG there is no reasoning on the Absolute Spirit but on epistemological
          questions showing the necessity and function of the abstracting power of
          the understanding for speculative thought. This abstracting power is
          precisely the opposite of the intuition of Beauty since it dissects the
          concrete whole and as this negative moment of speculative thought it is
          by no means on a lower level.

          Regards,
          Beat Greuter


          > Referring to your other comments on # 32, one would need considerable
          > prerequisites in philosophy and the history of philosophy in order to
          > grasp your analysis of the speculative aspects of Hegel's thesis. My
          > comments on each paragraph attempt to offer Hegel on a more prosaic
          > and primer type of exposition. This is my goal, to get people more
          > interested in understanding Hegel.
          >
          > Thanks for your reply.
          >
          > Bob Fanelli
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > --- On Wed, 4/27/11, Beat Greuter <greuterb@...
          > <mailto:greuterb%40bluewin.ch>> wrote:
          >
          > From: Beat Greuter <greuterb@... <mailto:greuterb%40bluewin.ch>>
          > Subject: Re: [hegel] Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
          > To: hegel@yahoogroups.com <mailto:hegel%40yahoogroups.com>
          > Date: Wednesday, April 27, 2011, 5:13 AM
          >
          >
          >
          > Am 26.04.2011 01:04, Robert Fanelli writes:
          >
          > > Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
          > > Comments on # 32:
          > >
          > > These are difficult concepts. Ideas have familiarity. Ideas can be
          > > broken up into elements each with moments-the meaning of moment takes
          > > on more than time. Moments are fleeting. In the analysis of the
          > > moments of an idea, we are not left with the forms of these moments,
          > > because they are fleeting, but strictly with the self, apparently
          > > meaning the self-conscious or reflective aspects of the thinking self.
          > > But at this point in our analysis we are left with inert
          > > determinations, that is, determinations which are not interrelated.
          > > What is left are concrete facts self divided and turning into
          > > non-reality, because we cannot structure them adequately. Thus
          > > understanding takes command and circular thought comes into play. This
          > > thinking process, along with its negative methods has through self
          > > consciousness, properties of freedom (freedom of thinking),
          > > independence (from the other in reality), and what Hegel calls an
          > > existence of its own, not a limited
          > > finite being (dasein), but a universal type of being. Here then is the
          > > rub. Thinking has the portentous power of the negative, a great
          > > energy, and within the confines of self-consciousness, a powerful
          > > intellectual ego. The power of death is great. We try to understand
          > > Beauty itself, but we cannot reason it. It is beyond understanding.
          > > Beauty for Kant has no cognitive substance. A taste of the concept of
          > > immortality shows itself, perhaps, in these words of death and mind.
          > > Mind has the power to face death, which is the greatest negative of
          > > all. The negative has its own being. Consciousness can eliminate the
          > > abstract nature of immediacy and all that goes with this abstractness.
          > >
          > > This paragraph is all about negativity and its potential to be a
          > > complete statement of what is. Death is the ultimate negative and the
          > > most profound of all negation. It is the height of Hegel’s thesis on
          > > the reality of Being as it is conceptualized by consciousness and
          > > self-consciousness. The human mind adhering to Hegel’s System has the
          > > capability to generate enormous images of reality, of absolute
          > > reality, and of even confrontation with the full meaning of reality,
          > > and thereby, with life itself. These images, for Hegel, far outweigh
          > > the empirical or experiential entities we are bombarded with in life.
          > > It is thus a case of reality as it impresses us from without and
          > > reality as we conjure it through the development of a consciousness of
          > > Spirit and Substance. It is not a dualism in any sense of the word. It
          > > is a substance that rears its head through the world and through the
          > > Self. It is evident, for example in art and in the sublime, revealing
          > > itself as substance subjectively and objectively. Hegel does not deny
          > > the reality of the objective universe, but he does offer a philosophy
          > > which can generate a reality that can structure an immense absolute
          > > inner reality.
          > >
          > > Regards,
          > >
          > > Bob Fanelli
          > >
          > >
          >
          > What para 32 does deal with is the sublation of the immediate truth of
          > being. It is at the same time the transition from the classical and
          > medieval philosophy into modern philosophy (starting from Descartes but
          > prepared already by some philosophers of the Middle Ages and the
          > Renaissance) as well as the transition from Hegel's Logic of Being into
          > his Logic of the Essence. Kant was the first who brought to mind this
          > epistemological turn of the modern age. For Hegel this was an important
          > step of spirit as the labour of the abstraction from the concrete and
          > cannot be withdrawn by an epistemoglogy of intuition and beauty which
          > looks for a new immediacy without this negative labour of the concept
          > (Schelling, Jacobi):
          >
          > "Beauty, powerless and helpless, hates understanding, because the latter
          > exacts from it what it cannot perform." (PhdG, Preface, para 32,
          > translated by J.B. Baillie)
          >
          > However, according to Hegel Kant did not overcome the negativity of the
          > understanding with its fixed unreal determinations as determinations of
          > self-consciousness (the I), the outer being taken only as semblance
          > while creating an own divorced actuality. In his Logic of the Essence
          > then Hegel shows the inherent movement of these fixed and opposite
          > determinations what is the presupposition for the arising of the pure
          > concept which has the sublation of its other fully in its own movement.
          > With this a new immediacy is initiated which, however, is only as
          > mediating (see also the continuation in para 33).
          >
          > Regards,
          > Beat Greuter
          >
          >



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • robert fanelli
          Beat,   This is getting really interesting.     You said:
          Message 4 of 6 , Apr 28, 2011
            Beat,
             
            This is getting really interesting.
             
              You said:
            <For Hegel  Beauty and the Good are moments of the Absolute Spirit in which these
            moments are mediated and get their objective truth. >

            I agree # 32 is not about Beauty per se, but as soon as you refer to Absolute Spirit and mediated moments, you are talking about rational thought and knowledge of things.  Kant's take on beauty has no rational basis.  It is out of the blue and pure intuition.  KU is loaded with quotes about this.  I will try to research the texts and offer them to the group.  KU is however not an easy text.
             
            Regards,
             
            Bob
            --- On Thu, 4/28/11, Beat Greuter <greuterb@...> wrote:


            From: Beat Greuter <greuterb@...>
            Subject: Re: [hegel] Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
            To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Thursday, April 28, 2011, 11:07 AM


             



            Am 28.04.2011 02:06, Robert Fanelli writes:

            > Beat, your quote is well taken. I refer to Kant's Critique of
            > Judgment (KU):
            >
            > “The beautiful is that which without any concept cognized as the
            > object is a necessary satisfaction.” KU 77A (Bernard)
            >

            Bob,

            Schelling and Jacobi did refer also to Kant's Critique of Judgement for
            founding the immediate cognition as truth. With this all three tried to
            overcome the result of the Critique of Pure Reason that the
            thing-in-itself cannot be known by the understanding. For Hegel just
            this means to transcend the mediation what he criticizes in para 32 of
            the Preface of the PhdG. He says elsewhere: "Hic Rhodus, hic saltus".

            > "Beauty, powerless and helpless, hates understanding, because the
            > latter exacts from it what it cannot perform." (PhdG, Preface, para
            > 32, translated by J.B. Baillie)
            >
            > <We try to understand beauty itself, but we cannot reason it. It is
            > beyond understanding. Beauty for Kant has no cognitive substance.>
            > from my analysis-
            >
            > Hegel, of course, would argue that 'understanding' is a lower level of
            > cognition and thus would not have the final say on whether beauty is
            > subject to the laws of Reason.
            >

            I am afraid that you offer us an inadequate interpretation of this Hegel
            quotation. In this text Hegel does not refer to the comprehension of
            Beauty itself but he simply compares the power of abstraction of the
            understanding with the powerless and helpless talking about Beauty as
            intuitive (subjective or objective) grasping of the truth. For Hegel
            Beauty and the Good are moments of the Absolute Spirit in which these
            moments are mediated and get their objective truth. In para 32 of the
            PhdG there is no reasoning on the Absolute Spirit but on epistemological
            questions showing the necessity and function of the abstracting power of
            the understanding for speculative thought. This abstracting power is
            precisely the opposite of the intuition of Beauty since it dissects the
            concrete whole and as this negative moment of speculative thought it is
            by no means on a lower level.

            Regards,
            Beat Greuter

            > Referring to your other comments on # 32, one would need considerable
            > prerequisites in philosophy and the history of philosophy in order to
            > grasp your analysis of the speculative aspects of Hegel's thesis. My
            > comments on each paragraph attempt to offer Hegel on a more prosaic
            > and primer type of exposition. This is my goal, to get people more
            > interested in understanding Hegel.
            >
            > Thanks for your reply.
            >
            > Bob Fanelli
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --- On Wed, 4/27/11, Beat Greuter <greuterb@...
            > <mailto:greuterb%40bluewin.ch>> wrote:
            >
            > From: Beat Greuter <greuterb@... <mailto:greuterb%40bluewin.ch>>
            > Subject: Re: [hegel] Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
            > To: hegel@yahoogroups.com <mailto:hegel%40yahoogroups.com>
            > Date: Wednesday, April 27, 2011, 5:13 AM
            >
            >
            >
            > Am 26.04.2011 01:04, Robert Fanelli writes:
            >
            > > Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
            > > Comments on # 32:
            > >
            > > These are difficult concepts. Ideas have familiarity. Ideas can be
            > > broken up into elements each with moments-the meaning of moment takes
            > > on more than time. Moments are fleeting. In the analysis of the
            > > moments of an idea, we are not left with the forms of these moments,
            > > because they are fleeting, but strictly with the self, apparently
            > > meaning the self-conscious or reflective aspects of the thinking self.
            > > But at this point in our analysis we are left with inert
            > > determinations, that is, determinations which are not interrelated.
            > > What is left are concrete facts self divided and turning into
            > > non-reality, because we cannot structure them adequately. Thus
            > > understanding takes command and circular thought comes into play. This
            > > thinking process, along with its negative methods has through self
            > > consciousness, properties of freedom (freedom of thinking),
            > > independence (from the other in reality), and what Hegel calls an
            > > existence of its own, not a limited
            > > finite being (dasein), but a universal type of being. Here then is the
            > > rub. Thinking has the portentous power of the negative, a great
            > > energy, and within the confines of self-consciousness, a powerful
            > > intellectual ego. The power of death is great. We try to understand
            > > Beauty itself, but we cannot reason it. It is beyond understanding.
            > > Beauty for Kant has no cognitive substance. A taste of the concept of
            > > immortality shows itself, perhaps, in these words of death and mind.
            > > Mind has the power to face death, which is the greatest negative of
            > > all. The negative has its own being. Consciousness can eliminate the
            > > abstract nature of immediacy and all that goes with this abstractness.
            > >
            > > This paragraph is all about negativity and its potential to be a
            > > complete statement of what is. Death is the ultimate negative and the
            > > most profound of all negation. It is the height of Hegel’s thesis on
            > > the reality of Being as it is conceptualized by consciousness and
            > > self-consciousness. The human mind adhering to Hegel’s System has the
            > > capability to generate enormous images of reality, of absolute
            > > reality, and of even confrontation with the full meaning of reality,
            > > and thereby, with life itself. These images, for Hegel, far outweigh
            > > the empirical or experiential entities we are bombarded with in life.
            > > It is thus a case of reality as it impresses us from without and
            > > reality as we conjure it through the development of a consciousness of
            > > Spirit and Substance. It is not a dualism in any sense of the word. It
            > > is a substance that rears its head through the world and through the
            > > Self. It is evident, for example in art and in the sublime, revealing
            > > itself as substance subjectively and objectively. Hegel does not deny
            > > the reality of the objective universe, but he does offer a philosophy
            > > which can generate a reality that can structure an immense absolute
            > > inner reality.
            > >
            > > Regards,
            > >
            > > Bob Fanelli
            > >
            > >
            >
            > What para 32 does deal with is the sublation of the immediate truth of
            > being. It is at the same time the transition from the classical and
            > medieval philosophy into modern philosophy (starting from Descartes but
            > prepared already by some philosophers of the Middle Ages and the
            > Renaissance) as well as the transition from Hegel's Logic of Being into
            > his Logic of the Essence. Kant was the first who brought to mind this
            > epistemological turn of the modern age. For Hegel this was an important
            > step of spirit as the labour of the abstraction from the concrete and
            > cannot be withdrawn by an epistemoglogy of intuition and beauty which
            > looks for a new immediacy without this negative labour of the concept
            > (Schelling, Jacobi):
            >
            > "Beauty, powerless and helpless, hates understanding, because the latter
            > exacts from it what it cannot perform." (PhdG, Preface, para 32,
            > translated by J.B. Baillie)
            >
            > However, according to Hegel Kant did not overcome the negativity of the
            > understanding with its fixed unreal determinations as determinations of
            > self-consciousness (the I), the outer being taken only as semblance
            > while creating an own divorced actuality. In his Logic of the Essence
            > then Hegel shows the inherent movement of these fixed and opposite
            > determinations what is the presupposition for the arising of the pure
            > concept which has the sublation of its other fully in its own movement.
            > With this a new immediacy is initiated which, however, is only as
            > mediating (see also the continuation in para 33).
            >
            > Regards,
            > Beat Greuter
            >
            >

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








            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Beat Greuter
            ... Bob, As far as I know Kant s Critique of Judgement I agree with this. Nevertheless, it is interesting that in your previous quotation Kant speaks of
            Message 5 of 6 , Apr 29, 2011
              Am 29.04.2011 02:12, Robert Fanelli writes:

              > Beat,
              >
              > This is getting really interesting.
              >
              > You said:
              > <For Hegel Beauty and the Good are moments of the Absolute Spirit in
              > which these
              > moments are mediated and get their objective truth. >
              >
              > I agree # 32 is not about Beauty per se, but as soon as you refer to
              > Absolute Spirit and mediated moments, you are talking about rational
              > thought and knowledge of things. Kant's take on beauty has no
              > rational basis. It is out of the blue and pure intuition. KU is
              > loaded with quotes about this. I will try to research the texts and
              > offer them to the group. KU is however not an easy text.
              >
              > Regards,
              >
              > Bob
              >


              Bob,

              As far as I know Kant's Critique of Judgement I agree with this.
              Nevertheless, it is interesting that in your previous quotation Kant
              speaks of "NECESSARY satifsfaction" ("NOTWENDIGES Wohlgefallen") (in my
              German edition it is A 67 and B 68):

              “The beautiful is that which without any concept cognized as the object
              is a necessary satisfaction.”
              "Schön ist, was ohne Begriff als Gegenstand eines notwendigen
              Wohlgefallens erkannt wird."

              As far as I understand this, for Kant 'beautiful' is a qualification of
              an object without having a concept of this object. Nevertheless, this
              qualification is taken as 'necessary'. Why?

              Hegel and Kant have different ideas of a concept. For Kant the concept
              is a mere abstract identity of the understanding which has the object
              outside of itself. With such a form of the concept, of course, logically
              'the beautiful' as object of a satisfaction cannot be grasped
              conceptionally but only single qualities of the object and their
              combination in representations. Hegel would agree with this. But Hegel's
              concept grasps the mediation of the subjective and objective side within
              itself and with this he can derive the necessity within the movement of
              the concept. So, the question is how Kant can derive the necessity of
              such a (subjective) judgement on 'the beautiful'?

              Regards,
              Beat Greuter


              --- On Thu, 4/28/11, Beat Greuter <greuterb@...
              <mailto:greuterb%40bluewin.ch>> wrote:
              >
              >
              > From: Beat Greuter <greuterb@... <mailto:greuterb%40bluewin.ch>>
              > Subject: Re: [hegel] Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
              > To: hegel@yahoogroups.com <mailto:hegel%40yahoogroups.com>
              > Date: Thursday, April 28, 2011, 11:07 AM
              >
              >
              >
              > Am 28.04.2011 02:06, Robert Fanelli writes:
              >
              > > Beat, your quote is well taken. I refer to Kant's Critique of
              > > Judgment (KU):
              > >
              > > “The beautiful is that which without any concept cognized as the
              > > object is a necessary satisfaction.” KU 77A (Bernard)
              > >
              >
              > Bob,
              >
              > Schelling and Jacobi did refer also to Kant's Critique of Judgement for
              > founding the immediate cognition as truth. With this all three tried to
              > overcome the result of the Critique of Pure Reason that the
              > thing-in-itself cannot be known by the understanding. For Hegel just
              > this means to transcend the mediation what he criticizes in para 32 of
              > the Preface of the PhdG. He says elsewhere: "Hic Rhodus, hic saltus".
              >
              > > "Beauty, powerless and helpless, hates understanding, because the
              > > latter exacts from it what it cannot perform." (PhdG, Preface, para
              > > 32, translated by J.B. Baillie)
              > >
              > > <We try to understand beauty itself, but we cannot reason it. It is
              > > beyond understanding. Beauty for Kant has no cognitive substance.>
              > > from my analysis-
              > >
              > > Hegel, of course, would argue that 'understanding' is a lower level of
              > > cognition and thus would not have the final say on whether beauty is
              > > subject to the laws of Reason.
              > >
              >
              > I am afraid that you offer us an inadequate interpretation of this Hegel
              > quotation. In this text Hegel does not refer to the comprehension of
              > Beauty itself but he simply compares the power of abstraction of the
              > understanding with the powerless and helpless talking about Beauty as
              > intuitive (subjective or objective) grasping of the truth. For Hegel
              > Beauty and the Good are moments of the Absolute Spirit in which these
              > moments are mediated and get their objective truth. In para 32 of the
              > PhdG there is no reasoning on the Absolute Spirit but on epistemological
              > questions showing the necessity and function of the abstracting power of
              > the understanding for speculative thought. This abstracting power is
              > precisely the opposite of the intuition of Beauty since it dissects the
              > concrete whole and as this negative moment of speculative thought it is
              > by no means on a lower level.
              >
              > Regards,
              > Beat Greuter
              >
              > > Referring to your other comments on # 32, one would need considerable
              > > prerequisites in philosophy and the history of philosophy in order to
              > > grasp your analysis of the speculative aspects of Hegel's thesis. My
              > > comments on each paragraph attempt to offer Hegel on a more prosaic
              > > and primer type of exposition. This is my goal, to get people more
              > > interested in understanding Hegel.
              > >
              > > Thanks for your reply.
              > >
              > > Bob Fanelli
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > --- On Wed, 4/27/11, Beat Greuter <greuterb@...
              > <mailto:greuterb%40bluewin.ch>
              > > <mailto:greuterb%40bluewin.ch>> wrote:
              > >
              > > From: Beat Greuter <greuterb@...
              > <mailto:greuterb%40bluewin.ch> <mailto:greuterb%40bluewin.ch>>
              > > Subject: Re: [hegel] Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
              > > To: hegel@yahoogroups.com <mailto:hegel%40yahoogroups.com>
              > <mailto:hegel%40yahoogroups.com>
              > > Date: Wednesday, April 27, 2011, 5:13 AM
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Am 26.04.2011 01:04, Robert Fanelli writes:
              > >
              > > > Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit Preface # 32
              > > > Comments on # 32:
              > > >
              > > > These are difficult concepts. Ideas have familiarity. Ideas can be
              > > > broken up into elements each with moments-the meaning of moment takes
              > > > on more than time. Moments are fleeting. In the analysis of the
              > > > moments of an idea, we are not left with the forms of these moments,
              > > > because they are fleeting, but strictly with the self, apparently
              > > > meaning the self-conscious or reflective aspects of the thinking self.
              > > > But at this point in our analysis we are left with inert
              > > > determinations, that is, determinations which are not interrelated.
              > > > What is left are concrete facts self divided and turning into
              > > > non-reality, because we cannot structure them adequately. Thus
              > > > understanding takes command and circular thought comes into play. This
              > > > thinking process, along with its negative methods has through self
              > > > consciousness, properties of freedom (freedom of thinking),
              > > > independence (from the other in reality), and what Hegel calls an
              > > > existence of its own, not a limited
              > > > finite being (dasein), but a universal type of being. Here then is the
              > > > rub. Thinking has the portentous power of the negative, a great
              > > > energy, and within the confines of self-consciousness, a powerful
              > > > intellectual ego. The power of death is great. We try to understand
              > > > Beauty itself, but we cannot reason it. It is beyond understanding.
              > > > Beauty for Kant has no cognitive substance. A taste of the concept of
              > > > immortality shows itself, perhaps, in these words of death and mind.
              > > > Mind has the power to face death, which is the greatest negative of
              > > > all. The negative has its own being. Consciousness can eliminate the
              > > > abstract nature of immediacy and all that goes with this abstractness.
              > > >
              > > > This paragraph is all about negativity and its potential to be a
              > > > complete statement of what is. Death is the ultimate negative and the
              > > > most profound of all negation. It is the height of Hegel’s thesis on
              > > > the reality of Being as it is conceptualized by consciousness and
              > > > self-consciousness. The human mind adhering to Hegel’s System has the
              > > > capability to generate enormous images of reality, of absolute
              > > > reality, and of even confrontation with the full meaning of reality,
              > > > and thereby, with life itself. These images, for Hegel, far outweigh
              > > > the empirical or experiential entities we are bombarded with in life.
              > > > It is thus a case of reality as it impresses us from without and
              > > > reality as we conjure it through the development of a consciousness of
              > > > Spirit and Substance. It is not a dualism in any sense of the word. It
              > > > is a substance that rears its head through the world and through the
              > > > Self. It is evident, for example in art and in the sublime, revealing
              > > > itself as substance subjectively and objectively. Hegel does not deny
              > > > the reality of the objective universe, but he does offer a philosophy
              > > > which can generate a reality that can structure an immense absolute
              > > > inner reality.
              > > >
              > > > Regards,
              > > >
              > > > Bob Fanelli
              > > >
              > > >
              > >
              > > What para 32 does deal with is the sublation of the immediate truth of
              > > being. It is at the same time the transition from the classical and
              > > medieval philosophy into modern philosophy (starting from Descartes but
              > > prepared already by some philosophers of the Middle Ages and the
              > > Renaissance) as well as the transition from Hegel's Logic of Being into
              > > his Logic of the Essence. Kant was the first who brought to mind this
              > > epistemological turn of the modern age. For Hegel this was an important
              > > step of spirit as the labour of the abstraction from the concrete and
              > > cannot be withdrawn by an epistemoglogy of intuition and beauty which
              > > looks for a new immediacy without this negative labour of the concept
              > > (Schelling, Jacobi):
              > >
              > > "Beauty, powerless and helpless, hates understanding, because the latter
              > > exacts from it what it cannot perform." (PhdG, Preface, para 32,
              > > translated by J.B. Baillie)
              > >
              > > However, according to Hegel Kant did not overcome the negativity of the
              > > understanding with its fixed unreal determinations as determinations of
              > > self-consciousness (the I), the outer being taken only as semblance
              > > while creating an own divorced actuality. In his Logic of the Essence
              > > then Hegel shows the inherent movement of these fixed and opposite
              > > determinations what is the presupposition for the arising of the pure
              > > concept which has the sublation of its other fully in its own movement.
              > > With this a new immediacy is initiated which, however, is only as
              > > mediating (see also the continuation in para 33).
              > >
              > > Regards,
              > > Beat Greuter
              >
              >




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