Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:15:35.802Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Metaphysics without Pre-Critical Monism: Hegel on Lower-Level Natural Kinds and the Structure of Reality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2015

James Kreines
James Kreines*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Claremont McKenna College, [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Recent debates about Hegel's theoretical philosophy are marked by a surprising lack of agreement, extending all the way down to the most basic question: what is Hegel talking about? On the one hand, proponents of ‘metaphysical’ interpretations generally read Hegel as aiming to articulate the overall structure or organisation of reality itself, and the nature of a highest or most fundamental being. Particularly influential is the idea that Hegel is reviving and modifying a form of Spinoza's metaphysical monism, according to which the organised whole of everything is the highest being, providing a ground or reason for everything real. On the other hand, proponents of ‘non-metaphysical’ interpretations argue Hegel's topic is something else entirely. The idea is that Hegel agrees with Kant in finding pre-critical forms of metaphysics to be uncritical or dogmatic. And the topic of Hegel's positive project is supposed to be not the nature of reality itself, nor any most fundamental being, but rather ‘forms of thought’ akin to Kant's categories and the objectivity, legitimacy, or normative authority of those forms of thought.

This is of course only a rough sketch of the most basic recent debate, about which there is more to say than can fit in this paper. My focus here is on what Hegel has to say about nature and natural kinds, in ‘Observing Reason’ from the Phenomenology, and also in similar material from the Logic and Encyclopedia. I intend to argue that this material suggests a surprising way of stepping beyond the fundamental debate sketched above. There can of course be no question of elaborating and defending here a complete interpretation of Hegel's entire theoretical philosophy. I will have to restrict myself to arguing for the unlikely conclusion that there is an approach that can combine and integrate the strongest points made by both sides in the most basic debate shaping recent Hegel interpretation.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the Hegel Society of Great Britain , Volume 29 , Issue 1-2: number 57/58 , 2008 , pp. 48 - 70
Copyright
Copyright © The Hegel Society of Great Britain 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Armstrong, D. M. (1993), A Materialist Theory of the Mind. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
Beiser, F.C. (1993), ‘Introduction: Hegel and the Problem of Metaphysics’, in The Cambridge Companion to Hegel. Beiser, F. C. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CCOL0521382742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beiser, F.C. (2005), Hegel. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203087053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackburn, S. (1990), ‘Filling in Space’, Analysis 50: 62–5.10.1093/analys/50.2.62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandom, R. (1999), ‘Some Pragmatist Themes in Hegel's Idealism’, European Journal of Philosophy, 7, 164–189.Google Scholar
Chalmers, D. (1996) The Conscious Mind. New York: Oxford UP.Google Scholar
Hartmann, K. (1972), ‘Hegel: a Non-metaphysical View’, in MacIntyre, A. ed., Hegel: A Collection Of Critical Essays. Notre Dame: Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F (1995), Lectures on the History of Philosophy. 3 vols. Haldane, E. S. and Simson, F. H. trans., Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F (1969), Hegel's Science of Logic. Miller, A.V. trans., London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F (1970), Hegel's Philosophy of Nature. Wallace, W. and Miller, A. V. trans., New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F (1970–1971), Werke in zwanzig Bände. Moldernhauer, E. und Michel, K. eds., Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F (1971), Hegel's Philosophy of Mind. Wallace, W. and Miller, A. V. trans., New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F (1975), Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art. Knox, T.M. trans., 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F (1977), Phenomenology of Spirit Miller, A.V. tr., Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F (1986), The Philosophical Propaedeutic. George, M. & Vincent, A., eds., Miller, A. V., tr. Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F (1991), Encyclopaedia Logic. Geraets, T.F, Harris, H.S, and Suchting, W.A trs., Indiana: Hackett Publishing Co. Google Scholar
Horstmann, R. P. (1991), Die Grenzen der Vernunft. Eine Untersuchung zu Zielen und Motiven des Deutschen Idealismus. Frankfurt am Main: Anton Hain.Google Scholar
Horstmann, R. P. (1998/2004), ‘Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich’, in Craig, E. ed., Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. London: Routledge. <http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/DC036>Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1998), Critique of Pure Reason. Guyer, P. and Wood, A. trans., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511804649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreines, J. (2004), ‘Hegel's Critique of Pure Mechanism’, European Journal of Philosophy. 12:1:38–74.10.1111/j.0966-8373.2004.00198.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreines, J. (2007), ‘Between The Bounds of Experience and Divine Intuition: Kant's Epistemic Limits and Hegel's Ambitions’, Inquiry 50:3: 306–334.10.1080/00201740701356253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreines, J. (2008), ‘The Logic of Life: Hegel's Philosophical Defense of Teleological Explanation in Biology’ in Beiser, F., ed., The Cambridge Companion to Hegel and Nineteenth-Century Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lin, M. 2007. ‘Spinoza's Arguments for the Existence of God’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 75:2. 269–297.10.1111/j.1933-1592.2007.00076.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinkard, T. (1994), Hegel's Phenomenology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781316036433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pippin, R. (1989), Hegel's Idealism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511621109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pippin, R. (1991), Modernism as a Philosophical Problem: On the Dissatisfactions of European High Culture. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Redding, P. (1996), Hegel's Hermeneutics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.10.7591/9781501737596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, B. (1954), The Analysis of Matter. 2 nd ed. Dover, New York: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Spinoza, B. (1994), A Spinoza Reader. Curley, E. ed., and trans., Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691209289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, R. (1990), Hegel, Kant and the Structure of the Object. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. (1975), Hegel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139171465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westphal, K. R. (1989), Hegel's Epistemological Realism. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-009-2342-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar