A. Consciousness: III. Force and understanding (79-103)*
Notes by Marton Ribary
Hegel demonstrates the same dialectical movement by which
opposites are first unified in order to be later disintegrated by
self-supersession which eventually leads them being collapsed to one another.
The process was first demonstrated at the level of sense-certainty, then at the
level of perception, and finally (in the current section) at the level of
understanding. Even though the unification, disintegration and collapse of the
opposites may seem to run in a vicious circle, the process actually results in
a reflected form of consciousness higher than before, but at each level the
same process starts over again.
Force:
The German term Kraft describes the movement between the
“being-for-self” and the “being-for another” which are the more reflected forms
of what traditional, dogmatic epistemology would call subject and object. The Force
is an intermediary between the perceiving subject and the perceived object.
However, it is by no means a substantive entity, but rather the process or
movement which happens between the two. Hegel’s example of gravity is
quite illuminating in this respect: gravity does not exist as a thing,
it is the process by which two physical bodies relate to each other. The
Force is the energy[1]
which resonates between the perceiving subject and the perceived object, and
eventually abolishes their separation so that the subject and object shall
collapse into each other
Understanding:
With the expression and withdrawal of the unreflected dynamic
process of the Force, consciousness reaches its reflected counterpart
which Hegel calls Understanding. The reflected nature of the same
dynamic dance between the perceiving subject and the perceived object achieves
that the way things appear and the way they express themselves are clearly
distinguished in consciousness. In §145, Hegel writes that “Our object
is thus from now on the syllogism which has for its extremes the inner being of
Things and the Understanding, and for its middle term, appearance”. (88)
The supersensible worlds:
With the reflected dynamic dance of Understanding,
consciousness discovers itself as subject to laws. Similarly to the laws of
gravity which defines the behaviour of distinct physical bodies, Understanding
is discovered as a set of laws by which the sensible world is grasped. The
realm of static laws is the first supersensible world which, however, is
subject to the same dialectical movement as all elements in the Hegelian system.
This means that the first supersensible world, i.e. the realm of laws, is
destined to contradict and eventually supersede itself so that it may turn into
its own opposite in the second supersensible world. In §§156-157, Hegel writes
that “in the play of Forces this law showed itself to be precisely this
absolute transition and pure change; the selfsame, viz. Force, splits
into an antithesis which at first appears to be an independent difference, but
which in fact proves to be none … Through this principle, the first
supersensible world, the tranquil kingdom of laws, the immediate copy of the
perceived world, is changed into its opposite.” (96)
Infinity:
The content of the law in the first supersensible world is
infinity which encapsulates the recurring unification, disintegration and
collapse of the opposites. However, infinity as the content is an empty idea
and one would do great injustice to Hegel if jumping to this end-result as the
“meaning” of Hegel’s philosophy. Jumping to infinity would be just another
empty philosopher’s slogan which Hegel always warns against. It is not the
content, but the process which matters. The endpoint is indifferent, what
matters is rather “the way of the Soul which journeys through the series of its
own configurations as though they were the stations appointed for it by its own
nature.” (§77 on 49) To use an analogy not far from Hegel’s spirit, without the
stations towards the Cross, the death on the Cross would be a mere execution,
rather than an act of salvation.
[1]
In a Heideggarian vein we may exploit the etymological potential of the
Aristotelian neologism of ενεργεια
which is the contracted form of εν-εργον-ειναι,
or in its well-known Heideggerian mirror-translation, the “in-dem-Werk-sein”.
(Marton Ribary) In attempt to identify Hegel’s Kraft in the
Aristotelian-Hedeggerian vocabulary, φυσις may be another likely candidate. (Howard Kelly)
*Page numbers in these notes refer to G.W.F. Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit. Translated by A. V. Miller (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977) and its reprints. A document collecting the notes of the reading session is available on the group's dropbox. Please e-mail Marton Ribary (marton.ribary@gmail.com) to join the reading group and gain access to the group's dropbox folder.
No comments:
Post a Comment