This article investigates Hegel's later theory of perception and cognition, identifying and analysing its general assumptions about the relation among the mind's activities. These often unremarked upon assumptions, I claim, continue to underwrite recent interpretive controversies. I demonstrate how a correct understanding of such assumptions points us toward an alternative interpretation of Hegel's model of the mind. I argue that this new model changes how we understand (a) Hegel's later notion of ‘non-conceptual content’ and (b) his distinction between human and (...) animal minds—two areas that constitute the fault line dividing interpretations of late Hegel. To isolate the relevant assumptions, I use Matthew Boyle's influential conceptual distinction between ‘additive’ and ‘transformative’ models of rationality. I demonstrate that Hegel himself addresses the basic issues characterizing this distinction and clarify how approaching his work in these terms presents considerable interpretative and conceptual advantages, including allowing us to defend the position that Hegel adopts a ‘transformative’ framework of mind. To support this argument, this paper closely analyses Hegel's treatment of sensation (Empfindung), which has not yet been systematically addressed by scholars. I show how sensation can be best understood as part of Hegel's later ‘transformative’ framework for cognition. I also show how this framework can be extended to other parts of Hegel's theory. (shrink)

In the Remark to the final paragraph of the Chapter on “existence” (Dasein) in the Logic of the Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Basic Outline (1830) Hegel states that the “ideality of the finite is the chief proposition of philosophy” and that “every true philosophy is for that reason idealism” (Enz § 95A). In turn, at the end of the Chapter on “existence” in the Science of Logic (1832) Hegel claims, further, that “every philosophy is essentially idealism or at (...) least has idealism for its principle, and the question then is only how far this principle is carried out” (GW 21.142). Along this line, Hegel conceives of absolute idealism not only as the result of the history of philosophy, but also as the philosophical system that reveals the essence of the philosophical systems before idealism, that is to say, as the philosophy that reveals, by developing it and formulating it adequately, what the precedent philosophies, mostly unknowingly, tried to develop and formulate, namely a general theory about reality based on the principle of the unity of being and thought. According to Hegel, every particular philosophy throughout history exposed in a successive, partial and complementary way the process of identification of being and thought; inasmuch as the system of absolute idealism assumes the latently idealist theses present in former philosophies, it makes those theses explicit and exposes the process of the identification of being and thought as its own internal development. Thus, absolute idealism is for Hegel the philosophy that exposes and shows what philosophy is actually about. The purpose of this essay is to render explicit the metaphilosophical implications of Hegel´s conception of absolute idealism as the “true philosophy” (wahre Philosophie, wahrhafte Philosophie). (shrink)

In this paper, I shall investigate whether Hegel can be considered as a sort of ancestor of McDowell’s disjunctivism. If this hypothesis turns out to be plausible, then the paper offers two gains. On the one hand, it offers an innovative interpretation of the way in which Hegel conceives of our sensible epistemic access to the world. On the other hand, McDowell's own claim that his own theoretical proposal has a Hegelian sound is supported by a previously unexplored argument. I (...) organize my analysis into three parts: I sketch McDowell’s version of disjunctivism (Section 2); I analyze some passages from Hegel that I believe are important for showing some similarities between his and McDowell’s argumentative strategy (Section 3); in the conclusion (Section 4), I highlight a number of core features that Hegel seems to share with McDowell’s disjunctivism and I submit that they are sufficient to label Hegel the “grandfather” of McDowell's disjunctivism. (shrink)

According to a widely shared view, a radical change took place in the role of intersubjectivity in Hegel's philosophy somewhere between Jena and Berlin. For instance, Jürgen Habermas's judgement is that whereas in the Jena writings – in the JenaRealphilosophien, and perhaps still in the 1807Phenomenology of Spirit– Hegel conceived of intersubjectivity as an essential element in the constitution of subjectivity and of objectivity, in Berlin Hegel's intersubjectivist conception was replaced by a metaphysics of the absolute I or absolute self-consciousness, (...) in which intersubjectivity no longer plays any important constitutive role.Perhaps it is due to something like this view having been mostly taken for granted even among Hegel-specialists that scholarly literature on intersubjectivity in Hegel's late Encyclopaedic system is indeed very scarce. Robert R. Williams'Hegel's Ethics of Recognitionargues convincingly that the theme of intersubjective recognition can be seen as a central thread running through the whole of Hegel's Encyclopaedic philosophy ofobjectivespirit. But very little has so far been written on the theme of intersubjectivity or intersubjective recognition in Hegel's Encyclopaedic philosophy of subjective spirit. My thesis in what follows is that intersubjectivity or intersubjective mediation in recognition can and should in fact be seen as an essential constituent also of subjective spirit as Hegel conceptualises it in the 1830 Encyclopaedia. (shrink)

This paper ties together several anthropological and naturphilosophische themes in Hegel in order to re-examine the place of the philosophy of nature in the Encyclopedia. By taking Hegel’s anthropology as a starting point, I argue that his philosophy of nature has for its subject not nature “as such,” but nature as cognized by Geist, so that the identity of these two natures is only constructed by spirit itself retroactively. I trace the origin of this difference to the revolutionary event that (...) institutes Hegel’s anthropology – which is not a transition from nature to spirit, but a pure break or new beginning, culminating in the creation of the conceptual world of nature as “we” know it. As a result, the philosophy of nature does not precede, but follows from, the anthropology and the philosophy of spirit; the natural foundation is retroactively replaced by the philosopher with the anthropological one. (shrink)

En la exposición de la filosofía del espíritu subjetivo teórico, la filosofía del Espíritu Absoluto no parece a primera vista jugar ningún rol. Sin embargo, las formas del Espíritu Absoluto son en el Sistema de Hegel la explicitación de los contenidos implicados por las formas cognitivas de la inteligencia. En este sentido, la filosofía del Espíritu Absoluto es la realización de las formas del espíritu subjetivo teórico; en el contexto del Espíritu Absoluto, pues, Hegel presupone en forma directa la primera (...) forma general de su Psicología y, consecuentemente, la exposición precedente de la misma en el contexto de la filosofía del espíritu subjetivo. Pero a diferencia de su proceder en el caso de la Estética enciclopédica y las lecciones correspondientes así como en el de los capítulos de la Enciclopedia dedicados a la Filosofía y en las lecciones sobre la Historia de la Filosofía, en el caso de la Filosofía de la Religión –o, más precisamente, en el de las Lecciones sobre Filosofía de la Religión– Hegel expone nuevamente en forma cuasi-sistemática y en un grado considerable de extensión y detalle la entera filosofía del espíritu subjetivo teórico. A pesar de las numerosas modificaciones de estructura general y en parte de contenido de las diferentes lecciones sobre filosofía de la religión, en todas ellas Hegel mantiene la división de la misma en tres partes, a saber: "Concepto de religión", "Religión determinada" y "Religión consumada"; es en el contexto de la primera de estas partes, esto es, en la dedicada al Concepto de religión, donde Hegel retoma y desarrolla la teoría de las diferentes formas del espíritu subjetivo teórico. En este nuevo contexto, Hegel no se limita a recordar las tesis que había presentado en la Psicología propiamente dicha, sino que en algunos puntos precisa y complementa dichas tesis con valiosas observaciones y comentarios. En esta medida, a pesar de que han pasado inadvertidas en los estudios sobre la filosofía del espíritu subjetivo teórico de Hegel, las Lecciones sobre Filosofía de la Religión ofrecen una base textual ulterior para la reconstrucción de esa disciplina central del Sistema hegeliano. El presente trabajo tiene por objeto exponer la teoría de los actos teóricos del sujeto tal como Hegel la desarrolla en la lección sobre filosofía de la religión de 1827, toda vez que es en esta lección donde, en su etapa madura, Hegel ofrece los desarrollos más detallados y sistemáticos sobre el espíritu subjetivo teórico fuera del contexto específico de la filosofía del espíritu subjetivo. (shrink)

Following the revival in the last decades of the concept of “organism”, scholarly literature in philosophy of science has shown growing historical interest in the theory of Immanuel Kant, one of the “fathers” of the concept of self-organisation. Yet some recent theoretical developments suggest that self-organisation alone cannot fully account for the all-important dimension of autonomy of the living. Autonomy appears to also have a genuine “interactive” dimension, which concerns the organism’s functional interactions with the environment and does not simply (...) derive from its internal organisation. Against this background, we focus on a family of natural philosophical approaches that historically have already strongly taken in account this aspect of autonomy, notably going beyond Kant’s perspective on self-organisation. We thus review Hegel, Plessner, and Jonas’ different perspectives on living beings, focussing in particular on four points: the distinction between organic and inorganic, the theory of biological organisation, the processuality of the living, and the “boundary” between inside and outside, through which the organism establishes its relationship to the environment. We, then, compare the three perspectives on these four points, and finally address the question of what advantages their contribution present—especially compared to Kant’s theory—with respect to the topic of organism’s autonomy. This could help—we hope—to better understand what is at the stake still today. (shrink)

Contemporary philosophy of recognition represents probably the most prominent direction that presently claims to introduce an updated version of classical German idealism into ongoing debates, including the debate on the nature of sociality. In particular, studies of Axel Honneth offer triggering contributions in Frankfurt School fashion while at the same time rejuvenating Hegel’s philosophy in terms of a philosophy of recognition. According to Honneth, this attempt at a rejuvenation also involves substantial modification of Hegelian doctrines. It is shown that Honneth (...) underestimates the implications of Hegel’s thoughts about the theme, method and systematic form of philosophy. As a consequence, Honneth’s social philosophy is, on the one hand, in need of a plausible foundation. This leads, on the other hand, to a different construction of the social within philosophy than Honneth offers. (shrink)

Las fuentes principales para la reconstrucción de la teoría del conocimiento de Hegel en su Sistema maduro son la filosofía del espíritu subjetivo y la Lógica subjetiva o Lógica del Concepto. En este respecto, la filosofía del Espíritu Absoluto ocupa en principio, dentro de la estrategia general adoptada por Hegel para exponer su pensamiento gnoseológico, un lugar periférico; sin embargo, toda vez que las formas del Espíritu Absoluto, esto es, el Arte, la Religión y la Filosofía, son para Hegel resultados (...) de la progresiva explicitación del tipo de contenidos que implica la lógica interna de los sucesivos actos cognitivos del sujeto, en el marco de la exposición de la filosofía del Espíritu Absoluto Hegel desarrolla y precisa ulteriormente su teoría general sobre los actos de conocimiento. En este contexto, el tratamiento del concepto de la religión en las lecciones berlinesas sobre filosofía de la religión ofrece una oportunidad privilegiada -por regla general inadvertida- para profundizar en el análisis de las reflexiones de Hegel sobre el fenómeno del conocimiento humano. En sus cuatro cursos berlineses -1821, 1824, 1827 y 1831- sobre filosofía de la religión, Hegel divide a esta disciplina en tres partes, a saber: el Concepto de la Religión, la Religión Determinada y la Religión Consumada; en la primera de esas partes, esto es, en la que dedica al concepto de la religión, Hegel desarrolla las diferentes formas subjetivas de la conciencia religiosa sin considerar su contenido (de su contenido versarán las dos partes siguientes), es decir, analiza los actos cognitivos del sujeto de un modo puramente formal, tal como lo había hecho antes en el marco de la filosofía del espíritu subjetivo. En esta medida, la exposición del concepto de la religión ofrece una verdadera filosofía del espíritu subjetivo en compendio en la que se retoman, pero también se complementan las tesis expuestas en la filosofía del espíritu subjetivo -más precisamente, en la Psicología- en sentido estricto. El objetivo de nuestro trabajo es analizar la teoría de los actos de conocimiento presente en las Lecciones sobre Filosofía de la Religión; en razón de los requisitos de extensión que debe cumplir este trabajo, nos limitaremos a analizar los desarrollos que Hegel ofrece en el manuscrito que usa como texto base para el dictado de su primera Lección sobre Filosofía de la Religión en el semestre de verano de 1821 (cf. G.W.F. Hegel, Vorlesungen. Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte. Bd. 3. Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion. 1. Einleitung und Begriff der Religion, Hamburg, Felix Meiner, 1983, pp. 95-163). (shrink)

Šiame straipsnyje siekiama ištirti Hegelio hipnozės, kurią jis laiko patologine būsena, suvokimą. Didžioji dalis literatūros, tyrinėjusios Hegelio požiūrį į hipnozę, teigia, kad jo suvokimą paveikė Markizas de Puységuras, hipnozės reiškinio atradėjas. Tačiau šiame straipsnyje tyrinėjama galimybė, kad Hegelio hipnozės suvokimas kyla iš mesmeristo Klugės darbų. Siekdami tai atskleisti, ištirsime Hegelio hipnozės kritiką, kuri daug tiksliau derinasi su Klugės teiginiais apie hipnozę nei su Markizo de Puységuro hipnozės interpretacija.

Este artigo tem como objeto de investigação os principais níveis de fundamentação enquanto momentos estruturantes do sistema filosófico hegeliano. No contexto filosófico da comemoração dos duzentos anos de publicação da Enciclopédia das Ciências Filosóficas, o objeto do trabalho é a reconstrução dos momentos estruturantes da passagem da Ciência da Lógica para a Filosofia da Natureza, da Filosofia da Natureza para a Filosofia do Espírito e dessas para a esfera do Espírito Absoluto. O artigo não tem como meta a discussão de (...) tópicos intrínsecos à Ciência da Lógica ou à Filosofia do Espírito, mas visa à exposição de círculos da passagem dialética de uma esfera para a outra como um autodesenvolvimento sistemático qualitativo. Mesmo de caráter genérico, não aponta para a possível substantividade de uma parte do sistema, mas para as relações fundamentais entre os círculos. O texto é perpassado por uma chave interpretativa da filosofia hegeliana no sentido de que não é formado por partes fixas e estanques, mas é articulado na perspectiva de relações fundamentais caracterizadoras das interfaces entre as esferas. (shrink)