Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:01:04.880Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hegel on Action

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2010

Michael Inwood
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the things that makes Hegel hard to understand is the difficulty of identifying the problems and questions to which he was responding, at least in a form in which we can appreciate them. There are several reasons for this. Firstly, he was involved in the intellectual life of his time, and many of the themes which engaged him have now lost their urgency. Secondly, because he wanted to connect every topic into a single, coherent system, and because the transition from one topic to the next usually depends on some problem which cannot be solved unless the transition is made, some of the problems he unearths seem fairly insubstantial. Finally, his desire to philosophize without making any presuppositions means that he is reluctant to state the problems which he is trying to solve in advance. Any problem involves presuppositions, both of facts and about the meaning and coherence of the words or concepts used in stating it. Problems arise within Hegel's system, therefore, and they do so in a guise appropriate to their context. To some extent, the appreciation of the problems presupposes an understanding of the system.

Type
Papers
Information
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements , Volume 13: Idealism Past and Present , March 1982 , pp. 141 - 154
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 E.g. Enz, I, i (W. 3)Google Scholar; Wiss. Log. I, 65ff.Google Scholar (M. 67ff.). References are to the following German editions and English translations of works by Hegel, : Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften, Moldenhauer, E. and Michel, K. M. (eds) (Frankfurt am Main, 1970): I.Google Scholar Die Wissenschaft der Logik [Enz. I]Google Scholar (Hegel's Logic, trans. Wallace, W. (Oxford, 1975)Google Scholar3 [W.]); III. Die Philosophic des Geistes [Enz. III] (Hegel's Philosophy of Mind, trans. Wallace, W. and Miller, A. V. (Oxford, 1971)Google Scholar [W.]). Wissenschaft der Logik, Moldenhauer, E. and Michel, K. M. (eds), 2 vols. (Frankfurt am Main, 1969)Google Scholar [Wiss. Log.] (Hegel's Science of Logic, trans. Miller, A. V. (London, 1969) [M.])Google Scholar. Phänomenologie des Geistes, Hoffmeister, J. (ed.) (Hamburg, 1952)Google Scholar [P.G.] (Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit, trans. Miller, A. V. (Oxford, 1977)Google Scholar [M.], Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts Lasson, G. (ed) (Leipzig, 1921)2 [P.R.]Google Scholar (Philosophy of Right, trans. Knox, T. M. (Oxford, 1952) [K.]).Google Scholar

2 P.G. 133ff. (M. 104E); Miller, A. V. (Oxford, 1977) [M.]).Google Scholar Grundlinien Enz. III, 213ff. (W. 165ff.).Google Scholar

3 P.G. 139f. (M. 109f.); Enz. III, 215f. (W. 167f.).Google Scholar

4 Enz. III, 189ff. (W. 145f.).Google Scholar

5 P.G. 140ff. (M. 110ff.); Enz. III, 219ff. (W. 170ff.).Google Scholar

6 P.G. 133ff. (M. 104f.); Enz. III, 213ff. (W. 165ff.).Google Scholar

7 P.G. 175ff. (M. 139ff.).

8 Fichtes Werke, II, Fichte, I. H. (ed.) (Berlin, 1845/1846), 169ff.Google Scholar (The Vocation of Man, by Fichte, J. G., Chisholm, R. M. (ed.) (New York, 1956), 5ff.).Google Scholar

9 P.G. 87f. (M. 65); P.R. 54 (K. 41f.); P.R. 298 (K. 236).

10 P.G. 180ff. (M. 144f.); Enz. I, 119 (W. 70f.).Google Scholar

11 P.G. 183ff. (M. 145ff.). Cf. n. 9.

12 Enz. III, 23 (W. 13).Google Scholar

13 P.G. 139 (M. 109); Enz. III, 215 (W. 167).Google Scholar

14 Cf. P.G. 438f. (M. 378); Enz. I, 386f. (W. 291).Google Scholar

15 P.R. 287 (K. 227).

16 Wiss. Log. II, 451ff. (M. 745ff.).Google Scholar

17 P.G. 191f. (M. 152f.).

18 Enz. III, 238f. (W. 186f.).Google Scholar

19 Ibid.

20 P.G. 370f.(M. 315f.).

21 Wiss. Log. II, 498ff.Google Scholar (M. 783ff.); Enz. I, 378ff. (W. 283ff.).Google Scholar

22 Cf. ‘Truth and Self-satisfaction’, by Solomon, Robert C., in The Review of Metaphysics XXVIII, No. 4 (06 1975), 698ff.Google Scholar

23 E.g. Enz. III, 317ff. (W. 253ff.).Google Scholar

24 P.R. 293f. (K. 232f.); Enz. I, 115f. (W. 67f.).Google Scholar

25 Enz. III, 237 (W. 185).Google Scholar

26 Enz. III, 166f. (W. 127).Google Scholar

27 Enz. III, 237 (W. 185).Google Scholar

28 P.R. 285 (K, 225f.); Enz. III, 199f. (W. 153 f.).Google Scholar

29 P.R. 68 (K. 53). Cf. P.R. 27 (K. 20).

30 Cf. Putnam, H., in Mathematics, Matter and Method (Cambridge, 1975), 222f.Google Scholar: ‘Of [certain meta-scientific terms, for example, “science” itself] we might say … that they are not defined in advance—rather science itself tells us (with many changes of opinion) what the scope of “science” is, or of an individual science, for example, chemistry, what an “object” is, what “physical magnitudes” are’.

31 Wiss. Log. II, 225f.Google Scholar (M. 560f.); Enz. I, 297f. (W. 215f.).Google Scholar

32 Wiss. Log. II, 227ff.Google Scholar (M. 561ff.); Enz. III, 52ff. (W. 36ff.).Google Scholar

33 Wiss. Log. II, 82f. (M. 446f.).Google Scholar

34 P.G. 239ff. (M. 196ff.).

35 Enz. III, 43ff. (W. 29f.).Google Scholar

36 Enz. III, 143 (W. 109).Google Scholar

37 P.G. 223ff. (M. 182ff.).

38 P.G. 226f. (M. 184f.).

39 Cf. Malcolm, N., in The Mind/Brain Identity Theory, Borst, C. V. (ed.) (London, 1970), 176ff.Google Scholar

40 E.g. P.R. 28f. (K. 21f.).

41 P.R. 29f. (K.22f.).

42 P.R. 28f. (K.29); P.R. 287f. (K. 227f.).

43 P.R. 35f. (K. 27f.).

44 Ibid.

45 E.g. Enz. III, 299 (W. 237f.).Google Scholar

46 E.g. P.R. 39 (K. 30f.).

47 P.R. 291 (K. 230).

48 E.g. P.R. 38f. (K 29f.).

49 E.g. P.R. 293 (K. 232).

50 P.G. 301ff., 423ff. (M. 252ff., 364ff.); P.R. 95ff. (K. 75ff.); Enz. III, 312ff. (W. 249ff.).Google Scholar

51 P.R. 131ff. (K. 103ff.); Enz. III 317ff.Google Scholar (W. 253ff.). Hegel distinguishes this conception, Sittlichkeit, from Moralität.

52 E.g. Enz. II, 303ff. (W. 241f.).Google Scholar

53 P.R. 135ff. (K. 107f.); Enz. III, 296f. (W. 235f.).Google Scholar

54 P.R. 154ff. (K. 122ff.); Enz. III, 321ff. (W. 257f.).Google Scholar

55 Enz. III, 288f. (W. 228).Google Scholar

56 Enz. III, 23f. (W. 13).Google Scholar

57 Wiss. Log. I, 1445.Google Scholar (M. 133ff.); Enz. I, 386f.Google Scholar (W. 291). Cf. n. 50.

58 E.g. Enz. III, 23f. (W. 13)Google Scholar; Enz. III, 303f. (W. 241f.).Google Scholar

59 P.R. 6ff. (K. 4ff.).

60 P.R. 15 (K. 11); Enz. III. 23f. (W. 13).Google Scholar

61 Enz. III, 85f. (W. 63f.).Google Scholar