We need your help to correct our translation! Please send us an email when you see errors or misprints!If in doubt, please consult the German version of this text. You can change the language by clicking on the rightmost menu item from the top menu bar .
“The [beginning of education] ..will always have to be done with, acquire knowledge of general principles and points of view, only to get to the bottom of the matter first. to work your way up…” (Preface by PdG)
If this sentence applies in general, it will also apply to the Philosophy.
However, it is precisely with the philosophy of our time that the least agreement on what the general public should agree on at all. principles and aspects of this discipline.
This maladministration, that the philosophy of today not even agrees to the answers to the most basic questions such as, what the object, means the target, the method etc, let alone what the Result of philosophy, certainly does not contribute to the good reputation of philosophy as a science.
Least probably the view, one does not have to communicate at all about such questions and unify sb./sth. and I could do an investigation into anything in any way right away.
This work is an excerpt from what Hegel has said about some of these basic, and thus also for the study of Hegel’s philosophy, the first and most important questions.
It is a very limited excerpt, because Hegel has us, not least because of the priority of such questions, in the prefaces, introductions as well as in several remarks and additions to his actual systematic work, a very detailed presentation not only of the about it, what he understands by philosophy, but has also widely responded to possible objections, that you have in the first place against what he generally says. could.
But all this, as Hegel himself often emphasizes, what he predicts in these introductory writings and thus is also said in this work, does not claim to be scientific in its own right, is not responsible for proved themselves, but is only insurance, whose opposite I would have the same right to be insured.
The actual scientific proof of what’s there is asserted in the introduction, is found alone in the systematic work Hegels.
It may seem unfamiliar to often use the name God in this work. find it.
After all, it is supposed to be a philosophical and not to do theological work.
On the one hand, however, it is precisely an endeavour of this work, the close relationship of philosophy and theology too show.
On the other hand, the use of the expression God leads to the disadvantage again, that immediately a concrete devotional-religious conception is assumed will be, like the idea of a kind father in heaven.
With this expression however here at first no longer is pronounced than the meaning you have in front of you, if in the more philosophical usage of language of the absoluteor of the pure being the talk is.
Hegel uses these expressions in his introductory writings, where, as I said, the first thing is to understand the meaning of the whole. often first synonymously.
“So if in the expressions of the Absolute or the Eternal or God (and God would have the most undisputed right, that with him the beginning to be made), when there is more in their outlook or thoughts than in pure being, then that which lies in it shall be known as the thinking, not the imagining, only [[later ”the way you’ve come forward." (Logic)
1. object and task of philosophy
So the question is: what does Hegel understand by philosophy? or, more precisely, what does Hegel have to do with?
Hegel asks this question and answers it very firmly:
"The first question is: what is the object of our science?
The simplest and most understandable answer to this question is that, that the truth this object is.
Truth is a high word and the even higher thing.
When the spirit and the mind of man are still healthy, the breast must immediately beat higher." (Enz-L)
So the object or content of philosophy is truth, “in the highest sense, in that God that truth and he alone is the truth.” (Enz-L)
But God is the object of religion.
Philosophy and religion are thus, what concerns the content of their employment, the same.
“Recognizing God through reason is the highest task of the Science”. (Enz-L)
That the religion is God or the truth as the object of its has employment, is immediately apparent.
But that God should be the interest of philosophy, is not so immediately accepted and is not self-evident.
Rather, the very opposite is suspected, namely that philosophy has to doubt God or I have to assume or even prove it, that God, the absolute, definitive truth, could not be found.
One thinks, however, that if now the philosophy God or the truth as the content of their employment, it is not a science, because science has only dealt with realities, actually Existing, real being, not with vaguely, perhaps existing, or maybe not existing ones. (like God)
Viewed this way, faith in God, religion on the one hand, and religion on the other are and philosophy, science and knowledge on the other hand. knits separately from each other, because they are not only concerned about the way in which they treat their Contents, i.e. according to the shape, but also differentiated from each other according to their content.
For Hegel, God or the truth is not only nothing vague, perhaps Existing.
The truth or God is not only existent and real, but what exists and is real in the true sense of the word.
The transitory, finite things on the other hand are not the truly actual ones, precisely because they pass away and an end to it.
But the truth or God is the [imperishable, remaining] in this transience.
And the remaining is the true being.
“It’s what matters, in the appearance of the temporal and passer-by. the substance that is immanent, and the eternal that is present, to the”I’ll be able to tell." (RP)
In this, then, the finite things not as the truly existing, but rather God, this Eternal and permanent, as to recognize and consider what truly exists, philosophy and religion coincide.
This is what Hegel says:
"Every philosophy and religion is essential Idealism
and the idealism of philosophy is that, not to recognize the finite as truly being.
A philosophy, which is to be understood to the finite existence as such. true, last, absolute being," as physics, for example, “did not deserve the name philosophy.” (Logic)
2. Faith and Knowledge
If so for Hegel philosophy and religion indeed samecontent have, so they are nevertheless differentiated by form .
Their question is the same but their answers are different.
Where is this difference closer?
Religion proceeds from God as in the sense of an object.
An object is something immediately available and stands against something other.
Thus for religion or better for the religious person first of all applies God as immediately present and externally opposite to man.
"The position of religion is this:
The truth that comes to us through it“, the religion,”is on the outside.
It is claimed that the revelation of the true is one of the most given, that he humbly humbled himself; human reason could not come up with it for itself.
The truths of religion are; One does not know where they came from; The content is as given, which is above and beyond reason.
This is positive religion.
Somehow through a prophet, divine envoy, the truth is “the new president has proclaimed.” (VP)
Thus religion answers the question of God in an equally outwardly representational way for contemplation and conception in pictures, stories, single historical occurrences and Parables, the feeling, faith and imagination of the human being. to address.
The philosophy and the science speaks beyond that the human mind on, be Thinking,
his urge not only to feel God, to imagine God not only outwardly as a given, but to internalize it on the one hand and to [recognize] it,
on the other hand, to emerge from itself.
“If our religious life based on the authority of the Church consciousness teaches us that God is, who created the world by his almighty will, and that it is he who directs the celestial bodies in their orbits and gives all creatures their existence and prosperity, so also the Why to answer remains thereby , and the answer to that question is it at all, which is the common mission of science, both empirical and philosophical.” (Enz-L)
Thus religion and philosophy, faith and knowledge, however, stand side by side. but the philosophy only goes further than the Religion.
“Science understands the feeling and the faith”.
The philosophy goes rather from the inner drive of true religion itself.
For true religion is not mere belief in God, the outward feeling that God exists to want to stand still, but to justify and to recognize.
"However, the truth - it is on what level it itself stand - first come to people in an outward way, as a sensually imagined, contemporary object; as Moses saw God in the fiery bush and the Greeks have made marble paintings of the god or other ideas to the consciousness.
The further thing is that it does not remain with this outward way and should not remain - in religion as in philosophy.
Such figure of fantasy or historical content (like Christ) shall become a spiritual thing for the spirit; then it ceases to be an external thing, for the outward wise man is the spiritless one.
We shall recognize [God “in spirit and in truth”] .
God is the universal, the absolute, the essential spirit." (VP)
You shall become like our one < said God to Adam in the History of Creation.
To believe something also means to know it.
Because when I believe in something, I am immediately certain of what I believe.
Faith is therefore certainty.
To have certainty of something is a way of knowing it.
The difference between faith and knowledge is therefore not absolute, as if faith was not knowledge and knowledge was not faith.
The difference between faith and knowledge falls rather into the knowledge yourself, i.e. into the difference, whether the knowledge is a direct or a mediated.
Faith is only immediate, felt knowledge.
It should be mediated by thinking, i.e. become secured, justified, reflected knowledge.
Everything that is at all for man is knowledge and in knowledge.
To imagine something that would lie outside knowledge, would be an abstract empty notion and impossible, for as imagined it is known.
But what matters most is is the Fashion how a certain content was known will be.
One can learn many individual and also correct knowledge about the most different objects of reality have and show themselves very learned and educated.
This mere erudition remains something unsatisfactory, for:
"The known at all is, because it is known, not [recognized.] (Phenomenon)
Recognizing the familiar means, the individual knowledge in its necessary context
to understand, and that’s what matters.
Faith in God, faith in the truth, i.e. the immediate knowledge of God and of the truth is, as I said, religion.
But the knowledge that is imparted, the justification and knowledge of God, the goal of true religion, is philosophy "- this is the true theodicy the justification God in history.
Only the insight can make the spirit with world history and reality, that what has happened and happens every day, not only not without God, but is essentially the work of himself." (VG)
So, as an inner difference of knowledge, the faith is not against knowledge, but against it. assuming
Faith or inner conviction is not an obstacle, but motivation to recognize and prove the believed content.
How Kepler found the laws of celestial mechanics only because of this, because he was convinced, that in the movement the heavenly body is governed by an eternal law of God.
Only this conviction motivated him, to look for these laws for half his life.
It is the inner drive of man, to prove and justify his own inner convictions.
Socrates says that it is no shame not to know but it’s a shame not to want to learn.
So it is no disgrace not to have known or justified but it’s probably a, don’t realize, don’t give an account to want, for that which distinguishes man from the beast is the thought] , not just feeling.
Frequently, however, the feeling of for the more truthful inner being of man, even though thinking is actually human.
3. the first condition of philosophical study
Philosophizing is therefore not only about believing, that there is truth and God, but also to believe that the truth and God is known. and is already recognized and represented in philosophy.
That the truth cannot only be recognized, but that it is recognized and represented by philosophy also means that philosophy has not only the goal to make the truth find it, but that she also found the truth.
“Science does not seek the truth, but is in the truth and the truth itself] .” (Pro)
In his inaugural address to the teaching profession in Berlin, Hegel says this about his Students:
"I may wish and hope that I will succeed, on the way we enter, to win your trust and to to earn; but first I must claim nothing but this, that you have faith in science, faith in reason, Bring trust and faith to yourself.
The Courage of Truth "Faith in the power of the Spirit is the first condition of philosophical study; Man should honor himself and respect himself worthy of the Most High.
He cannot think big enough of the greatness and power of the spirit; The closed nature of the universe has no power in itself, which could resist the courage of recognition; it must open before him and his riches and his depths before his eyes and bring them to enjoy." (PG)
When it is said that one brings to science faith and trust should, this does not mean that one should not have any doubt or not to think critically.
Hegel probably demands doubts and criticism, only they’re not supposed to be the first thing you approach a thing.
First of all, I should not be the first to approach the matter, whether it be philosophy or some kind of others, know and have understood them correctly, before I crite them or doubt.
I walk from the beginning with a negative attitude or with a bad will in the matter, I won’t be able to get to know her the way she is.
But because it “the easiest thing is what has substance and solidity to judge," but "harder to grasp,” one is faster with one’s judgement and judgment and then you’re done with it before you actually get it.
But “[the heaviest] ,” it says still conclusively,“which unites both, to bring forth its representation.” (Phenomenon)
The sequence for the development of the thing and its knowledge must read: first understand; then judge, criticize, doubt; Thirdly, however, criticism must also be criticized again. and doubt the doubt.
"The duty to hold back the gossip , is an essential condition for any education.
You have to start by understanding the thoughts of others; it is the renunciation of own conception , and this is the very condition of learning, studying." (VP)
If thus the criticism not from the outset against the thing
to be judged, but so is probably first criticism of itself [itself],
to practice their own thinking and prejudices.
Criticism must then occur when it occurs first, is to put an end to the false prejudices of his time.
And since one can overcome the prejudices of the public opinion of his time, because you have grown up with it, internalized it and become your own made and operated on it himself, the criticism is first to be directed essentially against itself.
"In the public opinion everything is wrong and true,… the independence from the public opinion
is the first formal condition to something great and reasonable. (in reality as in science)." (RP)
Just the philosophy often experiences the contempt,
that even those who didn’t bother with her, they understand from the bottom of their hearts, what the reason is for philosophy, and be able to philosophize without learning the philosophy and judge them.
One admits that the other sciences are I must have studied to know her, and that one is entitled only by virtue of such knowledge, to have a verdict on her.
One also admits that to make a craft, that this must have been learned and practiced.
Only for philosophizing should such study, learning and effort may not be necessary.
“The worst of contempt is this one, that everybody, as he stands and goes, about philosophy at all to know about it and to be able to discuss it is convinced.” (RP)
This contempt is based on this, to mean, in his own consciousness, mind and conscience. the scale and the dexterity for it directly itself to the have, to adequately assess the results of the philosophy and philosophize for yourself.
But one will admit that, even to make a shoe, that this must have been learned and practiced, although each at his foot the yardstick for it and hands and in them the natural dexterity to the necessary business.
Thinking right therefore does not mean, to produce many of our own peculiar ideas and ideas.
This would be only subjective, own thinking.
But it’s not about thinking yourself, it’s about thinking the thing, to deepen in their process and to forget about it, i.e. his own ideas about the matter, because they’re not the thing to leave out.
“The own incursion into the immanent rhythm of the conceptual decisions , not to interfere with him by arbitrariness and wisdom otherwise acquired, this abstinence is itself an essential moment of attention to the term.” (Phenomenon)
“By thinking, I give up my subjective peculiarity, I immerse myself in the matter, let thinking be granted for itself ; and I think badly by adding something of mine.” (Enz-L)
So it’s like love in thinking.
Because the first moment in love is the will to no longer be selfish and selfish for myself alone want, but to give up my self.
The second is the surrender of my self to another person, but so that thirdly, in the other and in union with him. my actual self enriches regain.
It is the same with thinking.
I should give up my own subjective thinking. and give my thoughts to the cause.
Thus thinking regains itself as true.
For it is so in unity with the thing and thus true knowledge of the matter.
Only this identity of thinking and being is true.
When it is demanded, then, that one should be aware of one’s own invention to be resolved, it is by no means meant servant subservience.
On the contrary:
"It is a great obstinacy the stubbornness that is that makes people honor, not to want to acknowledge anything in your mind, which is not justified by the [objective] thought, - and this obstinacy is the characteristic of recent times, anyway the peculiar principle of Protestantism. (RP)
4. Eternity is present
To false prejudices, which for Hegel block the entrance into philosophy and must therefore be deposited at the entrance to them, I told you, besides thinking that thinking is just one of the thing itself. remote subjective production of ideas, the opinion, among other things, faith and knowledge, religion and science are absolutely opposed to each other.
Furthermore the firm opinion, that either the one absolute truth didn’t exist. or, if it existed, nevertheless the [knowledge of the truth] was impossible] .
This doubt about recognition consists, among other things, in the fact that one thinks that God, the truth be to his creation, to the world, to man a distant hereafter.
Here in this world, in the world, everything is finite, transient, in time.
But there, beyond our world, is the infinite and eternal.
Man belongs to the world and therefore himself is finite and limited.
He could not go beyond the finite, not to the infinite. will be.
The finite, the human being, stand firmly on one side, the infinite, God, firmly on the other and between them is an insurmountable border.
But Hegel says that to know of one’s boundary means to be beyond it .
The view that the finite is here, the infinite there, is not the true view of truth as infinity.
An infinity that would have its limits at the finite, i.e. limited by a finiteness other than its own, would only be finite itself.
Because to be finite means to have an end, to be limited by something else.
But infinity has no end, has no border or barrier outside of itself and therefore has nothing under, in front of or next to him, which limited or limited them.
It is the Unlimited and Unlimited.
The true infinity is therefore not about or behind or beside finiteness, but in the finiteness itself .
God or the truth as infinity is therefore also not one of the finite world and the man far away Beyond, but in this world, in man himself.
Man has to look into the world and into himself, if he wants to know the truth and he can recognize her because she’s in the world and in himself.
As I said, it depends on “in the appearance of the temporal and passer-by the substance that immanent, and to know the eternal that is present.” (RP)
And: “Eternity will not be, nor was it; but it is .” (PN)
So eternity or God is present and real in the world.
The world itself is the existence and revelation of God.
The world is not abandoned, not as it should not be.
The task of philosophy is therefore not either, to construct a world, to imagine how it should be but is not.
It has no utopia to imagine how the world would once be good and but it has to recognize the world as it is. and to show and show that the world is like it is also his should.
Philosophy is the scientific representation of the world as the God’s revelation.
"It is easier to overcome the lack of individuals, of states, of the to see the world leadership than her true salary.
Because when it comes to negative blaming. you stand above it with a high face and elegance, without having penetrated them, i.e. they themselves have grasped their positive side…
- The insight to which now, in contrast to those ideals, philosophy is supposed to lead, is that [the real world is as it should be] , that the true good, the universal divine reason. is also the power to accomplish oneself.
This good, this reason in its most concrete conception is God.
God rules the world, the content of his government, the execution of his plan is world history.
Philosophy wants to grasp this; for only that which is accomplished from it has reality, what’s not in his nature is just lazy existence.
Before the pure light of this divine idea, which is not a mere ideal, it is only lazy existence. the light disappears, as if the world were a crazy, foolish event.
Philosophy wants the content, the reality of the divine idea detect and justify the spurned reality.
For reason is the hearing of the divine work." (VG)
"The unsatisfied pursuit disappears, when we realize that the final purpose of the worldalso accomplished is when he [is eternally accomplished] .
This is the very position of the man, while the youth thinks that the world is in the wrong place. and it had to be made out of the same first a completely different one." (Enz-L)
But what has been said is not to be misunderstood in the following way as the philosophy paints out the world as only a beautiful and perfect one denying the evil, the bad, the wrong, the negative at all.
On the contrary only through the negative one gets to the truth :
“He”, the mind, "wins his truth only, by finding himself in absolute turmoil.
This power he is not as the positive, which is not the negative looks away, like when we say something, this is nothing or wrong, and now, done with that, move away from it to something else; but he is that power only, by looking the negative in the face, staying with him." (Phenomenon)
The Wrong is not contrary to the True , but the true contains the false in itself as the abolished.
The false or negative, which is negated or abolished, hasn’t just disappeared, but has rather entered into a higher unity as a moment.
Within this unit, even it is negated, at the same time it is also and kept it in a safe place.
The word “Cancel”
also has these two opposite meanings in linguistic usage, once of negating or finishing, to the other but also of storing and keeping.
In our finite lives. we can’t usually see or experience it, that the infinite purpose is truly achieved.
But this powerlessness is a deception.
The execution of the infinite purpose and recognition is so only to lift the deception as if he has not yet performed is.
The good, the absolutely good, accomplishes itself eternally in the world , and the result is the realization that it has already been accomplished. and doesn’t have to wait for us first.
This deception, as if reason were not, is the one in which we live, but at the same time it is alone the activating, whereupon the interest in the of the world.
One must even say that the truth or God, as the whole, this process is to make yourself that deception, to face another, and his activity is to abolish that deception.
Only out of this error and its overcoming goes the truth-emphasis] , and here lies reconciliation with error and finiteness.
Otherness or error, as abolished, is itself a necessary moment of truth, which is only by making herself her own result.
It’s up to Hegel at all, that the True not taken as one side of the opposite will be.
The true is rather the wholeand that means, it is the unity of opposition .
To grasp this concrete unity is for the mind, insofar as it is only pure, abstract mind, who doesn’t understand feeling is not reason, but impossible.
"In this dialectical, as it is taken here, and thus the speculative consists in grasping the opposite in its unity or the positive in the negative .
It is the most important, but for the untrained, unfree thinking power “I’ve got the heaviest side.” (Logic)
5. There’s only one truth
Just like the truth the whole, not one side of the opposition, but the unity of the is the opposite, it is another fundamental principle of Hegel’s philosophy, that there is only one truth, not several truths there is.
This seems to contradict itself at first, as far as one says, that the truth as the whole but both sides of the opposition must contain.
So we would not have one truth, but at least one double truth, which is both sides of the opposite.
But one has to counter this and say that the difference of the truth that the truth is only one does not contradict, insofar as it is not an outer, but an inner difference.
The truth is one, but it is not easy. in the sense of abstract and indefinite, but it is determined or concrete, i.e. it has the difference or contradiction within itself, it is different in itself, but has no difference outside themselves.
“But the truth is one ; this insurmountable feeling or belief has the instinct of the Reason.” (VP)
"But this sentence, that the truth is only one, is itself still abstract and formal; and the most important thing is rather to recognize, that the one truth is not a mere simple abstract
thought or sentence; rather it is an in itself concrete ." (VP)
The next important sentence is that the one in itself concrete truth does not initially appear to be concrete, but develops from itself and to concretized.
Developing means that the initially only inner, idealistic differences then also step out into existence.
The truth, God does not remain a closed in himself, which remains hidden behind existence and reality.
But it unfolds, shows itself, manifests their differences and lets them exist freely.
It is not only the possibility of existence, not only a fortune, but has existence itself and sets itself the reality.
The development of the truth is linked to the development of the plant. compare.
The whole plant is already in the germ of the plant, contain all their differences such as root, stem, leaves etc., but only internally.
They are also not contained in the germ in miniature, but ideal, i.e. only in itself.
The development of the germ into a plant is that the ideational Differences emerge.
Nothing new arises, but that which is [in itself] , emerges .
6. There’s only one philosophy
Philosophy as the knowledge of truth is the [knowledge of this development of truth] .
The truth is not to be imagined as something deadly solid, what exists immediately and doesn’t change, but it is the result of their own development process.
“It is to be said of the Absolute that it is essentialResult , it’s only in the end that it’s what it really is; and this is his nature,”To be real, subject, or to become yourself.
This becoming self of truth or of the Absolute recognizes the philosophy and represents it.
Like the absolute, what philosophy represents is also philosophy itself Development; i.e. it is not directly the realization and representation of the Truth, but it has evolved as well, and historically.
The course of the history of philosophy is, that she is the truth that is inside the world, in a corridor of steps exposed and made figurative for consciousness.
The change from the state of interiority to the state of Outward appearance, "constitutes the tremendous change of state.
All recognition, learning, science, acting oneself is nothing more than what is inward in itself, and to become representational."
Every philosophy in this story the objectification or realization of the truth is one stage of this development.
Both the development itself, as well as every such stage, every philosophy in this history is necessary, i.e. follows necessarily from the previous and is necessary prerequisite for the following Philosophy.
One can also say that a certain philosophy in history that refutes its previous philosophy, that they have disproved the refutation of the previous philosophy.
Likewise, a particular philosophy is described by its subsequent refuted.
The refutation of the earlier philosophy by the later but is not to be imagined in such a way that the disproved, earlier philosophy was completely wrong and mistaken.
But she was only not the last, highest in the progressive development of the knowledge of truth.
The principle of an earlier philosophy is not wrong but it’s not the whole truth either, but it’s a moment the truth.
The philosophy that follows it is not opposed to it, but is their further development, so that it repeals the principle of the former as refuted but annulled, so stored within itself.
So all earlier principles are not passed and forgotten , but because they are moments of truth, themselves true and eternal.
"It is the basic condition of development, that one and [the same idea]
- it is only one truth - all philosophy is based on and that each subsequent one also contains the determinants of the preceding one. contains and is.
The result is the view for the history of philosophy, that we have in it, whether it is equal to history, not to do with the past .
The contents of this story are the [scientific products of the Reasonableness, and these are not transitory.
What has been worked out in this field is the true, and this one is eternal, does not exist at any time and no longer to “and one to another.” (VP)
In the history of philosophy, as this progressive development in time of the knowledge of the Truth, so the [first philosophy is the simplest and poorest] .
But the [last philosophy is the highest, truest and richest] , by taking the principles of all previous philosophies as moments in themselves. contains.
“Therefore, today, no Platonists, Aristotelics, Stoic, Epicurean” [or Kantian] "give more.
Awaken them again, bring back the more educated, deeper mind to it to want, would be an impossible, an equally foolish thing, as if the man wanted to make an effort, young man, to be a boy or a child again, although the man, youth, and child are one and the same individual." (VP)
In addition, the newest philosophy is the richest and most developed, Hegel claims, “that one must not be afraid to do what is in the nature of things. I’ll tell you what, that the idea, as formulated and presented in the latest philosophy is, is the most developed, richest, deepest.” (VP)
But again, this does not mean that we should only have remembered what we had to say. hold, what in recent times under the name philosophy was published.
Because not everything, which calls itself philosophy, is also real Philosophy, but only as system of all previous principles of philosophy, as [system of the necessary connection of all principles of the truth it is real, real philosophy and Science. (cf. Wittgenstein, Adorno, Heidegger, Habermaß, etc.?!)
"..Insurances about the true -, can’t be for the the way they apply, in which the philosophical truth is to be presented.
The true form in which truth exists, only the scientific system “the same.” (Päno)
Hegel claims for his philosophical system, the last previous true philosophical system, i.e. to have pointed out and eliminated its deficiency and thus contain all the principles of truth.
Those who, in the various philosophies in history only want to realize that they are different from each other. and contradictory and not identical, that all the philosophies, even if they are different, but have in common to be philosophy at all.
Hegel compares them, the communality and context of philosophies. deny it, with a “pedantic sick that the doctor would eat fruit from. advises and to which cherries or plums or grapes are added, but who does not grasp in a pedantry of the mind, because none of these fruits are fruit, but cherries or plums, or Grapes.” (VP)
You see in the multitude of philosophical systems nothing but a stock of subjective mutually contradicting Opinionsand do not recognize their systematic context .
“She,” the opinion, “understands the diversity of philosophical systems not so much as the progressive development of truth, when she sees only contradiction in difference.” (Päno)
There are many different opinions about each other.
The truth, however, is nothing of anything else, nothing different and nothing Unilateral.
It is the General and Objectives.
There can’t be multiple truths, as there are multiple opinions.
“The randomness, and the opinion is mental randomness,”one must give up by entering philosophy." (VP)
"What can useless than a series of mere opinions to get to know the other, what [more boring?] [red text]
Writer’s works, which tell stories of philosophy in the your senses are, that they list the ideas of philosophy in the way of opinions and treat, it’s easy to look and find, how skinny, boring and uninterested it all is.
An opinion is a subjective idea, an arbitrarythought , an imagination that I can have one way or the other and another can have another.
One opinion is mine; it [is] not an in itself general, in and for itself being Thought.
Philosophy, however, does not contain opinions; there are no philosophical opinions] ." (VP)
If philosophy were a collection of opinions, it wouldn’t be science, because science is about [objective thought, i.e. also thoughts, which are created by understanding thinking comprehensible must be.
Therefore “in science the content is essentially bound to the form” (RP) i.e. also to an objectively comprehensible understanding Method.
To be reasonable is to be determined. and "only what is perfectly determined is at the same time exoteric, comprehensible and capable of being learned and the property of all.
The sensible form of science is the way offered to all and made equal for all too you, and through the mind to reach reasonable knowledge, is the just demand of the consciousness that leads to the science into it; for the mind is thinking, the pure ego at all; and understanding is what is already known and what is communal of science and unscientific consciousness, whereby this may enter directly into those." (Päno)
“- Those”, however, who are part of an objective method and thus “to be relieved of proof and deduction in philosophy. can believe, show that they are aware of the first thought of what Philosophy is, are still distant, and may well talk otherwise, but in philosophy they have no right to have a say the”I don’t want to talk to you without a term." (RP)
7. Philosophy as a system of science
Hegel now claims the final objective method for philosophy, for the science of all sciences, in his “science of logic” and in the rest of his “system of science.” the “Phenomenology of the Spirit,” the “Science of Nature.” and the science of the mind.
“The System of Science is a new treatment of the Philosophy, is set up according to a method, which I hope will still be used as the only true, with the content identical will be recognized.” (Enz-L)
Hegel’s philosophy claims as this system of science not only the true method and principles of all the previous Philosophies, but also the principles of all special sciences within themselves. must be included, i.e. the science of all science to be.
Today’s philosophy sees itself against it rather than a special science next to other special ones. Sciences.
It is regarded more closely as a humanities science, i.e. not as a Science.
It is considered to be one of the other humanities, such as psychology, sociology, etc. and puts them on an equal footing with them as if, like the others, she had her own peculiar special Subject area.
In the same way one separates them, as spiritual science, from the science, as if the spirit and nature were completely different.
If philosophy thus distances itself from other sciences precludes and not claim the whole as his object, what particular object would remain peculiar to her, that wouldn’t be the subject of another particular science?
The answer in Hegel’s sense is, that philosophy has no special, limited subject, but the general, the whole, the absolute.
Their task is to make science (theory) essential as a whole. to understand, as they see the universe (practice), both the spiritual and the natural, as a whole.
And it has the special sciences of as organic parts of this one whole, as they are the natural and spiritual things (facts, facts) as organic parts of this whole universe.
Hegel’s System of Science is the image of the organic reasonableness of the universe.
It consists of two parts.
The first part is to be understood as an introduction. and forms the guide of our unscientific, untruthful and deceived consciousness to science and truth, - the “Phenomenology of the Spirit”.
The second part forms the actual representation of the universe as of a rational.
It decays into three parts:
- into the science of pure thinking, i.e. the logic,
- into the science of nature,
- into the science of the mind.
Each of these parts again breaks down into three parts and of these each in turn in three and so on, so that each part constitutes a particular science, the deeper down, the more special and special but in such a way that the connection to the whole always remains.
If we are talking about organic parts here, then this is only a preliminary picture, used to bring the thing closer to the imagination, i.e. to describe them.
An image which does not fully do justice to the matter itself, because the reasonableness of the universe consists in more, than being just an organic body.
God is not only alive, but essentially spirit.
Another picture that hits the nail on the head but also because it’s harder to imagine, is the Christian view of the Trinity of God
than the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. (i.e. of the human spirit, there is no other!)
In this view the truth is adequate not presented as consisting of parts, but God as the Triune One is in each of his three moments himself the whole thing.
The only difference of the moments is, that the whole is in different determinacy, as it were in another Light, appear.
The truth or God is presented in the Trinity than an eternal process of itself.
It consists in the fact that God himself of himself discriminated or to set himself as the Other of himself and to [return to] himself from this Other.]
The three moments of this process are:
- God as the Father, before the creation of the world, so to speak,
- this is the content of the science of logic.
"This kingdom is the truth, as it is without shell in and of itself is himself.
One can therefore express oneself that this content is the representation of God as he is in his eternal being before the creation of nature and a finite spirit." (Logic)
This realm of logic or pure thought includes all determinations of thinking, the so-called categories.
However, these categories may not only be can be understood as subjective or human categories, but as absolute determinations of the [Thought of God] . (Which one can know after all!)
- God as the Son. i. e. the creation, the world, which, since God is the whole, is actually nothing but himself but yet as the other is set by himself,
- the content of the science of nature (closer: mechanics, physics and biology…).
- god as spirit. The Returning of God from the other to himself,
- the content of the science of the mind, which is closer to the doctrine of the soul, consciousness, psychology, justice and freedom as well as art, religion and philosophy.