Half Hour Hegel: The Complete Phenomenology of Spirit (Introduction, sec. 81-83)

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 thirty-sixth video in the new series on G.W.F. Hegel's great early work, the Phenomenology of Spirit, I read and comment on the eighty-first, eighty-second, and eighty-third paragraphs of the text, continuing our study of the Introduction.
In these three paragraphs, Hegel begins by examining the need for some type of standard or criterion that will be used in the course of the investigation. What sort of criterion could be applicable when the Science is one in the process of being worked out?
Attention to the nature and development of consciousness clarifies this matter, since consciousness relates itself through knowing to objects, making them for-consciousness, but also positing that they retain something of being in-itself beyond consciousness.
And yet, the investigation is not only extends to the in-itself of objects, but also examines knowledge as it is in-itself, the being or truth of knowing. This also reveals that knowledge is for-us, for consciousness, and so the criterion we were seeking is not only within the object, the in-itself. It also resides within consciousness.
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 in D minor for solo violin, is available in the public domain, and can be found at musopen.org.
#Hegel #Phenomenology #Philosophy #Idealism #German #Dialectic #Spirit #Absolute #Knowledge #History

[@codawithteeth]

i absolutely love your appeals to common sense in explaining this esoteric dense text. brings me joy every time.

[@GregoryBSadler]

I expect we don’t have the same idea of “common sense”, given how you’re praising it here

[@codawithteeth]

@@GregoryBSadler I have a negative attitude towards common sense, but the way you phrase some of these things hits me like your tone is as if they are common sense, and it makes me gleeful. Forgive me for being unclear.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Got it.

[@tethyn]

“Consciousness… relating itself to what is true.” 20:58 🤘

[@jordanh1635]

Wonderful video Dr.Sadler, thank you so much for this video and series!

[@GregoryBSadler]

You're very welcome!

[@GregoryBSadler]

Here's a new Half-Hour Hegel video for a grey, drizzly Saturday morning . . . where Hegel starts to outline the relationship between consciousness, knowledge, objects, and what seemingly lies beyond the scope of consciousness, the in-itself

[@MrMarktrumble]

hmmmm....thank you

[@GregoryBSadler]

Mark Trumble You're welcome

[@dwroberts1001]

Gregory B. Sadler getting interesting......how do you get around the 'brain funk' when consciousness tries to approach the "in itself" of the object..... I will stay tuned.

[@epiccabbage6530]

Youre saving my life with these lol

[@GregoryBSadler]

Well, or at least least making it a little bit easier

[@SequinBrain]

(thx for these, would have never made it to 35, much less 81 w/out them) Presupposition - The necessity of verifying first truths, though not every Notion will have first truths. Or, are axioms required to even deal with truths in every case? (time/space/matter)

[@donthasslethahoff]

In section 83, when Hegel mentions essence, is he talking about the in-itself of the actual enquiry into the truth of knowledge, or is he talking about the in-itself of the actual knowledge its self?

[@Daydreamer0605]

Thank you for the arduous friendly and illuminating work. You have helped me in my self-education in the history of thought. I was wondering what you thought of / if you were aware of the work of Terrence Deacon, he is a biologist who proposes nature is incomplete, criticising many of the paradigms that Hegel does on the limits of science. His book Incomplete Nature seems pathbreaking in the domain of the natural sciences.

[@GregoryBSadler]

I was not aware of him, but it's not a thesis I'm unfamiliar with

[@Daydreamer0605]

@@GregoryBSadler I see. I find it quite humerous that his positing of this incomplete nature is so close to Hegel's as I learn more about Hegel's process, even more naive in some respects, but it appears as a huge challenge to the presuppositions of contemporary science. It gives a lot of empirical weight to Hegel to my mind.

[@hoochi8044]

perhaps this will be resolved in the next sections, but is Hegel consistent with his use of the term 'essence'. in the preface it was dynamic, but qua standard it is quite static or inert...but then we find the essence is actually within ourselves, not an inert standard, so the idea of a standard as the essence of science used an undeveloped concept of essence, or limit which we then overcome....oh don't need to wait for the next sections. but this is such a difficult part of the text, sometimes he seems to use concepts in their undeveloped sense or limited sense within a certain gestalt or problem, and as they develop (or the problem is resolved) their meaning then changes. so we have to wait till the end till we are really going to know the meaning of any of these technical hegelian terms...

[@GregoryBSadler]

Yes, sometimes he uses, as you put it, concepts in their less developed forms, and sometimes as they are fully worked out (at that point). You don't have to wait until the end, passively. You can distinguish between senses of a term, actively, thinking alongside the development of the dialectic.

[@TheMrBida]

I just started Hegel, but sorry, I wanted to ask if you were familiar with Islamic Philosophy, like Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, Al-Ghazali or Ibn Rushd? Despite their importance, they just don't seem to be mentioned anywhere, would love to see you doing something on one of them, I'm sure Avicenna or Averroes is worthy of your time. I took a medieval philosophy course where we went over them in brief, was surprised how so many of us are unaware of them.

[@GregoryBSadler]

They're interesting, but no, I've got plans to do any videos on them in the near future. I'm quite busy enough with my current projects.

[@raphaelurbain7705]

This is the point where I begin to think that although there is something right about that recursion, it might also be some kind of swindle or intellectual stunt. What is that criterion that falls into us?

[@GregoryBSadler]

You're pretty early in the work, right? What has Hegel said about needing to see things develop in the course of the work?

[@raphaelurbain7705]

@@GregoryBSadler Oh I see, that like beginning to swim in a lake, not knowing whether if there is a bottom or even an other shore.