However, I feel that Hegel is in a difficult situation here. On the one hand, he does not want to deny the existence of an objective nature, not a superficial person like us. He does not want to deny an objective nature that we understand in the ordinary sense. He wants to affirm this, in fact, and not only that, he believes that even for his system, it is important.
Why?
Because he said you should not forget my philosophy, which studies the absolute. What is absolute?
It is definitely a unity of subjectivity and objectivity with differences.
If there is subjectivity in reality, then there must be objectivity in reality, and the objectivity of reality is nature. On this point, he does not deny it at all. If he denies it, the whole book will be incomplete. So, on the one hand, Hegel absolutely does not deny nature, but rather absorbs it into his system. However, on the other hand, it is not easy for him to explain how contingency holds any position in an absolute theory of ideas.
I still can't figure it out. Hegel emphasized the contingency of nature, the unsolvable contingency of nature. Is it to emphasize the particularity of nature or to prove that nature is inferior to human spirit? Now it seems that I am more inclined towards the latter, because our human spirit is inevitable and can be determined by his logic, and there are many things in nature that are unsolvable and unreasonable.
Just like the impact of the Lisbon earthquake on Westerners in modern times, in the past, especially during the Enlightenment era, Westerners believed that reason ruled the world and that people were always developing in the direction of the world becoming better and better. The Lisbon earthquake destroyed three-quarters of the city in one fell swoop, causing many deaths. Lisbon itself had over 600000 people, and about 400000 people died in one fell swoop. For him, the death toll was very high, and the basic city was destroyed because it was not just the earthquake and tsunami, but also the devastating damage.
So, whether it's Kant or Voltaire, especially those like Voltaire, from then on, they were very pessimistic about the future of humanity because they acknowledged that there are many mysteries in nature, and humans have no way to explain why they have to be so cruel and die so many people at once.
I don't think Hegel has no influence at all, this is the background of an era. He needs to admit this locally, otherwise he won't admit it. He's daydreaming, daydreaming. However, he had contradictory issues. Hegel himself once said that what is realistic is reasonable, and what is reasonable is realistic.
If nature is a very realistic objectivity, it should also be reasonable and reliable. What is rational is explainable. Why can't it be explained?
And in his view, irrationality is unreality, which can be found in many works and various places in his books. For him, irrationality is unreality, chance is not in line with reason, and irrationality is irrational. However, if he accepts chance, he has to admit that there are two binary realities of a certain reality, including both reasonable and unreasonable things. But I don't think Hegel will go that far.
Because this makes the problem more difficult for him, I think he hasn't dealt with it well. Either he admits to some kind of dualism, or he emphasizes that nature is irrational and has contingency, but on the other hand, he brushes over the contingency factors in nature, which are not truly real. However, I don't think it makes sense because as a unity with differences, there is subjectivity, and there is objectivity in reality. Obviously, he emphasizes that nature is necessary and a prerequisite for our spirit.
In this situation, how he handles the problem is a very difficult question for everyone. In this sense, Hegel's natural philosophy is not as ridiculous as others criticize him, but he did not handle nature well. This is worse than Xie Lin.
We talked about Hegel's natural philosophy last time, and he believed that philosophers should express nature from various stages, and each stage must start from that stage. But such a stage system does not mean that we describe the natural processes of the universe through experience.
This cannot be a natural history of experience, but rather a dialectical development process of concepts. Of course, nature is first and foremost an experiential process that naturally develops. If you say Hegel opposes this, he does not oppose it. This is a requirement for philosophers to view nature as a system of development, and we should regard it as a dialectical process of conceptual development.
Hegel was criticized and praised by others, and it is precisely here that some people would say that this is simply nonsense. It is the most popular criticism of Hegel to let facts accommodate his concepts. He created a set of concepts there and then filled in distorted facts. Such people are called philosophers, and this is a criticism of him by many people.
Hegel's natural science also has three parts, which are in the natural philosophy of the entire philosophical book: mechanics, physics, and organic matter. However, Hegel's natural philosophy actually has two systems, he serves as the original system and the system of natural philosophy. But both of these systems start from space, which is far away from the mind and spirit, and then dialectically enter the organic matter of animals. Why do they enter the organic matter of animals?
That is the closest place among all things in nature. Space is an absolute externality, and in organic matter, without involving the foundation outside of human beings, we have discovered the internalization. Subjectivity can be said to arise in animal organisms, although at this time it is not yet in the form of self-awareness, naturally leading us to the doorstep of the spirit. Why?
Leaving us humans aside doesn't count. There is already an inherent and spiritual nature within animal organisms. His meaning is not outside of the spiritual realm, but has already led us to the gateway of the spiritual realm. However, we must not misunderstand that Hegel never had such eyes and used our unique philosophical methods to do the work of a scientist.
He only cares about finding an example of a dynamic rational pattern in the natural world through observation and scientific understanding. Sometimes, it leads him to make a common attempt to indicate natural phenomena, that is, what they are, or what Hegel believed to be what they are, because that is reasonable, so to speak, because they are reasonable, and ultimately they should be what they are.
We generally welcome this kind of speculative physics, but how can you think like this? Some people are particularly uncomfortable with it, but Hegel believed that empirical science should be taken for granted, and we can observe it as philosophy. He would think why we can conduct some philosophical research on nature, that is, natural strategy. He is not trying to compare ourselves with empirical philosophy, but rather why we cannot study nature from a conceptual perspective.
Or in other words, why can't we understand the concept of nature. A natural concept as a whole. What's wrong with playing a normative role in the entire natural research?
He said it's completely feasible, consistent with the development of natural sciences. I think this is right. When we study nature, what is nature ultimately? I don't think it's an empirical thinking, because as a holistic concept, nature must be a philosophical problem, not just any one. If you say physicist, I will define it in the future. Chemists don't do it, biologists don't do it either. So why do you define it?
So, ultimately, as a whole, it is nature as a whole.
And this concept, you say, is not defined by a philosophy. After studying nature, one should study human subjective spiritual abilities. In his philosophy of spirit, Hegel said that the absolute is the spirit, which is the highest regulation of the absolute. It can be said that discovering the understanding of laws is the ultimate goal of all cultures and philosophies, and all religions and sciences strive to achieve this.
Our culture and philosophy ultimately reach absoluteness. Absolute itself is spirit, but absoluteness itself is now potential rather than reality. Self made absolutes are naturally spirit, but they are self alienated spirits.
Hegel did have a relatively low view of nature. He is the spirit of self alienation, speaking of nature in the language of religion, and is the God in his faith. That is to say, God appears in nature as an alienated being, alienated in his own face. Only when we ascend to the human will, does the spirit truly begin to exist.
Hegel, in his philosophy of spirit, aims to study the human will, which is still divided into three parts according to the old practice. The first two parts deal with subjective spirit and objective spirit, dealing with finite spirit, while the third part deals with absolute spirit, which is the idea of self thinking.
The limited spirit can be divided into two parts: subjective spirit and objective spirit. What we are talking about now is subjective spirit, because why is objective spirit the sole focus of Hegelian legal philosophy? In our current philosophy of spirit, we will first talk about his subjective philosophy.
Subjective spirit is also divided into three parts: anthropology, phenomenology, and psychology. He deals with people as sensory subjects, that is, as emotional beings, it can be said that the soul is a soul that transitions from nature to spirit. On the one hand, the concept of the soul is a natural conceptualization, and on the other hand, in Hegel's original words, it is the sleep of the spirit. It has not yet reached a conscious consciousness, and it has a sense of self, but not a reflective self-awareness. It is precisely because it must be realized in the physical body that it experiences the particularity of sensation.
The body is the externalization of the soul, and at this stage, we are addicted to our own feelings. In the human organism, the soul and body are internal and external aspects of it. From the concept of the limited meaning of the soul, Hegel goes further. In fact, in anthropology, as sensory beings, we need to enter into the phenomenology of spirit as the soul.
网友评论