Half Hour Hegel: The Complete Phenomenology of Spirit (Sense Certainty, sec. 106-108)

Get Hegel's Phenomenology - amzn.to/2hVyru6
The entire series - / the-half-hour-hegel-se...
Support my work here - / sadler
Philosophy tutorials - reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
In this forty-third video in the new series on G.W.F. Hegel's great early work, the Phenomenology of Spirit, I read and comment on paragraphs 106, 107, and 108 of the text, nearing the end of our study of the first portion of the section "Consciousness," i.e "Sense Certainty".
It turns out that in attempting to signify the Now of sense-certainty, we fail to do so, because in the very time of signifying or uttering it, it has passed and been replaced by another Now. A dialectic comes to light between the Now as having been as as being, in the course of which a determinate negation (a negation of negation) occurs, in which the This contains its own otherness. We realize then that Now, as a universal, is actually a plurality of Nows.
A similar dialectic holds for and applies to spatiality, i.e. to the Here, which turns out to likewise be a complex plurality of many Heres, each providing a frame of reference, but not encompassing the totality of space. It is through language and the universal, through consciousness, that we can grasp the Here as also a universal.
In this video series, I will be working through the entire Phenomenology, paragraph by paragraph -- for each one, first reading the paragraph, and then commenting on what Hegel is doing, referencing, discussing, etc. in that paragraph.
This series is designed to provide an innovative digital resource that will assist students, lifelong learners, professionals, and even other philosophers in studying this classic work by Hegel for generations to come. If you'd like to support this project -- and also receive some rewards for your support -- please contribute! - / drgbsadler
I'll be using and referencing the A.V. Miller English-language translation of the Phenomenology, which is available here: amzn.to/1jDUI6w
The introductory music for the video is: Johann Sebastian Bach, Partita No. 1 in Bm, BWV 1002, is available in the public domain, and can be found at musopen.org.
#Hegel #Phenomenology #Philosophy #Idealism #German #Dialectic #Spirit #Absolute #Knowledge #History

[@josephbuccati2369]

Dr. Sadler, Visiting you from 2021 - Yes, Now in 2021 - to pass along my gratitude for your contributions to the philosophy community. With each new video, my fondness for Hegelian thought grows ever stronger and my enjoyment of this course (if we can call it so) grows as well. The cordiality with which you teach makes such a daunting book into one of pleasure and intellectual intrigue.

[@GregoryBSadler]

We're getting close to the end -- and the resolution -- of this early phase of the dialectic, the Sense Certainty section. One more video to go after this, and then we launch into the Perception section!

[@MrMarktrumble]

Hiedegger thinks existence is not the ever vanishing "now"( or "I"), but future possibilities. "this first, which is now reflected into itself". Posting the point gives a point of reference that a comparison can be made. First I compare the point to another, and then I compare the point to itself. But the contradiction has changed what I have identified as the point. If Hegel overcomes and includes all otherness, then the final point can only be compared to itself, of which there would be no difference. The universal = " a negative this". " a negative schema". "comprehensive whole" united by the negation. hmmmm( I've got the stoic cosmology clamouring in my head...)...thank you.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Marcelle Elliott "Is it the case that Hegel is implying that language itself ( verbal and nonverbal) makes the process of mediation and relation inevitable to produce meaningful communication?" -- Yes. Or rather, mediation and relation are themselves inevitable, since reality itself involves mediation, and language is involved in that "It seems that only universals can indicate immediacy and particularity; and those universals are the result of mediation" -- Yes, that's entirely correct

[@GregoryBSadler]

Leo Podstanicky Mark Trumble You're welcome!

[@GregoryBSadler]

Leo Podstanicky Which particular problem?

[@MrMarktrumble]

Ryle in the concept of mind identifies words like "I", Here" and "now" as index words, apparently indicating position, but not content.. But Hegel is to be understood in terms of Hegel first.

[@noahgreco930]

Dark Helmet: What the hell am I looking at? When does THIS happen in the move? Col. Sandurz: NOW. You're looking at now, sir. Everything that happens now is happening now. Dark Helmet: Go back to then! Col. Sandurz: What? Dark Helmet: THEN! Col. Sandurz: I can't! Dark Helmet: Why not? Col. Sandurz: We passed it! Dark Helmet: When? Col. Sandurz: Just now! Dark Helmet: When will then be now? Col. Sandurz: SOON!

[@mortimermacmanus8965]

15:23 Still watching this in 2021.

[@eatsbugs4577]

24:24. Thanks for this video. I like that we're getting lots of repetition on Aufgehoben.

[@lyndonbailey3965]

This reminds me of basic classical philosophy in some ways, I see how this relates to Plato and socrates, breaking down apparent simples into something else, the loss or vanishing of what you thought you had and the generation of complex discourse and ideation, and less certainty in place of lots of certainty and less complex discourse. Its funny because I had not started with the idea that Hegel is covering very classical ground...especially the universal V particular distinction.

[@GregoryBSadler]

yes, Hegel is certainly continuing in a long tradition

[@charliegrapski8383]

I think the way t o explain the latter part of the discussion on Section 107 is that say - the second Now points back to the first Now - BUT (even now) the first Now isn't what it was - in the sense that there are an infinite number of nows - and if you say "Now is Day" even in saying it - you are experiencing more than one Now - the first as you BEGIN to pronounce the N in Now ... the last as you complete the Y in Day - and so even that "Now" really isn't the same as "the Now."

[@charliegrapski8383]

This is similar to the sense you are getting at in 108 - about the Here really being a manifold. So with Now - the thought itself is not instantaneous but "takes time" to think - so that Now really isn't "that" Now. But is already a manifold of Nows in itself.

[@RoyalAnarchist]

I also stumble on "moment " and "movement", not to mention that I had to learn new meanings of those words for this book

[@GregoryBSadler]

Yes, that's probably true

[@jackhamilton1700]

Hi Dr.Sadler Could you please tell me what Hegel means by "Pure Being"?

[@GregoryBSadler]

Not in a comment, no

[@ShaneKidd702]

Do we take Hegel's thoughts about here and now as a part of his "system" in a similar manner to Kant's architectonic and avoid juxtaposing it with newer information that contradicts his specific points such as special relativity's treatment of time and space in something like light cones? Is the important point he's making that time and space operate the way he proposes, or do I miss the forest for the tree so to speak in getting bogged down with those counterfacutals? I find it difficult to know where to draw the line with some ancient/early modern thinking between what they could not have known and therefore can't be faulted for because it's not material to the underlying point with what they could not have known but is in fact devastating to their thesis.

[@GregoryBSadler]

No. We do not do that

[@elijahclaude3413]

Im curious, how is special relativity devastating to Hegel's thesis in this section? If anything, relativity is even more supportive of this idea, because it shows how the now and here are connected as is space and time. It shows how when we speak of 'now' or 'here' what we really mean is a universal concept that is relative to the person, which also seems to be the case with relativity. (But I'm just a casual learner, so may not be understanding neither relativity or hegel right, lol)

[@ShaneKidd702]

@@elijahclaude3413 I'm no expert either, but I believe Hegel's position reflects the Newtonian view of space an time prevailing during his lifetime. That is, he takes it as given that space and time are absolutes that exist as independent of the objects and events that occur within them. Special Relativity contrasts this viewpoint in that space and time are relative to an observer and that they can be affected by mass and energy.

[@lyndonbailey3965]

In what way is the 2nd/3rd truth 'superceded'?

[@pritampratimdas1995]

2nd truth is superseded. Hegel says, “this first, thus reflected into itself, is not exactly the same as it was to begin with, viz. something immediate; on the contrary, it is some-thing that is reflected into itself, or a simple entity which, in its other-ness, remains what it is: a Now which is an absolute plurality of Nows. And this is the true, the genuine Now, the Now as asim pleda ywhich con tains wi thin i t man y N ows-hours. A Now of this sort, an hour, similarly is many minutes, and this Now is likewise many Nows, and so on”

[@AJJ129]

I’m watching this now six years from your recorded now

[@GregoryBSadler]

Hopefully people will have these as a resource for decades

[@jacobhargreaves9191]

I'm struggling with the negation of the 2nd 'truth' by the 3rd. I don't 'buy' that the second truth "has been" and that it itself has been superseded. I think the assertion that the first truth "has been superseded" is irrespective of the now and cannot therefore be superseded. If he said something like "The first truth has now been superseded", then I can see how it can be negated. Or does the very assertion of something make it a 'now' in Hegel's logic?

[@GregoryBSadler]

Well, keep on reading, I suppose. Hegel doesn't have to convince you

[@fred989]

Seven years from “Now”

[@GregoryBSadler]

And. . . that Now is gone!

[@TheeeMiiiz]

Please make a video about David Hume

[@GregoryBSadler]

not relevant here, I'm afraid

[@mrpersona5114]

!

[@TAXXPAYERMONEY]

now

[@GregoryBSadler]

Well, it was. . . then

[@eatsbugs4577]

This now is 5 years after that now.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Indeed, and I'm writing this in a new subsequent to the one you wrote in