G.W.F. Hegel's "Phenomenology of Spirit" (Part 1/4)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 січ 2020
- Patreon: / theoryandphilosophy
Podbean: theoretician.podbean.com/
Instagram: @theory_and_philosophy
In the first episode of this four part series, I turn my attention to G.W.F. Hegel's "Phenomenology of Spirit," a text as necessary to read as it is difficult to read. This episode specifically tackles the chapters: "Preface" (beginning); "Introduction" (34:50); and "Consciousness" comprised of the sub-chapters "Sense-Certainty" (38:45), "Perception" (49:50), and "Understanding" (57:10). In these chapters, he begins by outlining what he hopes his project to accomplish, and then moves into delineating exactly how human consciousness moves through various phases on the way to Absolute Spirit.
Great video. Only request is like a video on loop of a candle flicker or a sheet in the wind etc. it helps me think while listening.
Great explanation and share this with others who are interested in Hagel. Thank You
I was waiting for you to take this one on! Good luck dude
I'll need it
I'm loving these videos! Thanks very much, friend.
Fantastic presentation.
I am so happy to have this podcast. Very rich and tough material to get into. Thank you for this. Very cogent and clinical explanation.
Bs
@@jamesbarlow6423 you should've tried listening my prof explain it.
@@contrivedserum . My prof was pretty good. But we got bogged down midway through the preface.
Fantastic presentation.
In German, geist (Spirit) means both ghost, soul and mind. Compare ésprit in french.
Yea for sure! Suppose I should have mentioned the ghost and soul thing.
Hey I’m french Canadian : Esprit means ghost and mind and soul as well ! And spirit is spelled : esprit in french ! Be careful with the misinformation! Don’t be a sophist ;)
Derrida talked about this in On Spirit, esprit contains humor, geist is dead serious
thank you , your voice sounds kind
Great effort of communicating a complex topic. The term "Geist" in all its different forms/scales is hard to define even for German speakers. I would translate it as the self-conscious spirit on an individual, collective, and global (as in universal - Weltgeist) level, the underlying force of dialectic development throughout history.
Hey bro, love your work. Will this be up on your Spotify? Or is it there already?
I want to know as well. Let’s keep the pressure up!
That was a workout, thanks!
I switched to porn when my mom walked in because it was easier to explain
I summed up the preface from what you said as follows (please correct if mistaken):
we are all unique in ourselves, and only through identifying in a dynamic relation with others (people, predicates, objects, objectified-self) can we realize and become ourselves. Such a tensioned relation that determines and propels the subject to become --is like science, which both determines how the object is in itself and propels it to greater realization of it to us (for itself) through the dialectic with falsity and imperfection, relativity, or notionality of how things in themselves are and not as we construct them perfectly in our heads (that is, speculative realism). That is, like how science determines what a thing is and shows its potential to us and does so through dialectic with falsity --do we realize ourselves and gain the autonomy of self-determination through our dialectic with predicates and others. God, for example, is being because Being to him is not a characteristic, but an other, a predicate that he sees and realizes himself through [I add: say, Jesus seeing himself in life/Father, being as such Agape, embodiment in sacrificial love as seen by his crucifixion].
I concluded this from the following (which I mostly noted as I am listening to the video):
1-What unites all (say Spirit/Geist) is that everything is unique and different; they unite as being ununited, say. 2-Science is the actuality that is consequential, that tells you what to come not what is formal and set like pythagoras theorem. By that, it maps to the Spirit; Geist is Science, the history, like facts, that determines and capacitates the present to be something else. That system of science, however, is not settled in the world that we could call upon to move us or work like a ladder to that Spirit. Science itself is always in a struggle with itself like the subject. By that you can see the science of the phenomenology/experience of Spirit/Geist (an alternative title to Hegel's phenomenology) will be filled with tensions and struggles all over (say, he admires understanding, then few pages later he hates it, admonishes it, sees it as a limitation). 3-When we think of the triangle form, we picture a perfect triangle that is explained in its abstract united dismembered parts that constitute its form, by that, we construct something lifeless. To think scientifically with all the negativity and tension, we must think of it in terms of the notion, to take it as close as possible to it as itself (not as we constructed it perfectly). 4-In thinking of the subject, also, one shouldn't just think that we determine the object of thought, that we have primacy over things, but also we are as much determined by the predicate; for example, God is not a closed system, God is being, where being is the predicate which becomes here (the predicate, that is) the essence of God. Not simply a characteristic, but a fluid, organic dynamic between the predicate that determines the subject (Being) and the subject itself (God). 5-Only once this has been realized and embraced can a continual becoming happen, since you open up the door for perpetual becoming by taking on these attributes and predicated as part of you as much as you are part of them which allows you to differentiate and become something else.
These points can be summerized as follows:
1-All have a unique positivity, and that is what unites us (say, as being, we all have a being in ourselves that is different from being for others).
2-Science is about the organic and living relation between a determined, past fact and the capacity it holds for becoming something else; a consequential, dynamic, fluid movement. Not only for us, but also between itself always in struggle and dialectic.
3-Science doesn't picture perfect, lifeless forms in the abstract, but has concepts like a notion that carries with it the tension it has as it maps to triangles in themselves, say in real life instead of in our heads.
4-As subjects, as much as we determine such perfect forms and realize the predicates --do the predicates determine us; God is essentially Being, not that it is a characteristic of him or one he determines, but also a predicate that determines him and is in a tension relation with.
5-Only through such availability, embrace, acceptance, and openness to predicates' determinism of you can you realize your being by perpetually becoming Geist through taking on and determining yourself via different attributes and predicated.
I was watching another Hegel video where they guy claimed that the word 'gist' comes from 'Geist' .. I wasn't convinced so I checked, it is actually from Old French gist, from the verb gesir, to lie down. Apparently gist used to mean a resting place. Still, a trivial matter, Hegel himself had a habit of making much out of (often dubious) etymologies. Great video, you are really on top of it all.
I also made the same false assumption :)
Geist m. ‘Hauch, Atem, menschliches Denk- und Erkenntnisvermögen, Esprit, idealistisches schöpferisches Prinzip, Gespenst’, ahd. geist (8. Jh.; nur in der Übersetzung für lat. spīritus), mhd. geist, asächs. mnd. gēst, mnl. gheest, nl. geest, afries. gāst, aengl. gāst, engl. ghost (westgerm. *gaista-) sind Bildungen mit Dentalsuffix zu einer s-Erweiterung ie. *g̑heis- ‘aufgebracht, bestürzt, erschreckt (sein)’. Germ. Verwandte sind aengl. gǣstan ‘in Schrecken versetzen’, engl. ghastly ‘gräßlich, entsetzlich, furchtbar’ und (ohne Dentalsuffix) got. usgeisnan ‘erschrecken’ (intransitiv), usgaisjan ‘erschrecken’ (transitiv) sowie vielleicht anord. geiskafullr ‘voll Schrecken’, geiski ‘Schrecken’; außergerm. sind aind. hīḍ- ‘zürnen’, hḗḍa-, hḗḍas- ‘(Götter)zorn’ und (ohne Dental) awest. zaēša- ‘schauderhaft’ vergleichbar. Im Germ. bedeutet Geist danach ursprünglich soviel wie ‘Ekstase’
Awesome! FASCINATING
but w about 20 commercial breaks is obscene
Ughhh I know I'm sorry! Follow the link to podcast in the description to get no ads!
Get UA-cam Premium. Its a few quid a month.
@@MegaLotusEater or a better yet... a completely free ad blocker.
Isn't this precisely what Jung ultimately describes as the process of individuation? Except perhaps this is the description of that process from the standpoint of the person undergoing individuation?
Nice connection
When I hear "Hegel", I always remember this "End of history" concept, the process of becoming, consciousness, teleology etc.
But then I read Descartes and there was one meditation that is said, proves God's existence: "something more perfect can't come from something that is less perfect". How would you respond to this thought?
I haven't read Descartes, so I'm hesitating to give an answer I would deem adequate. However, I think I'm inclined to disagree that there is an implicit regression implied in the act of creation. For if this were the case, we could surmise that the entire project of history--a project that necessarily implies creation--would be a regression, a kind of negative dialectics that Adorno writes about. In this way, Hegel is very much opposed to Descartes. Hegel doesn't want to bracket off experience in favor of 'pure knowing' (at least not always). Hegel wants to stare the negative (anything that is not immediate self-conscious certainty (please be kind to my butchering of Hegel here)) so that newness may emerge; a newness that augments and synergizes the constitutive components that birthed it. What do YOU think???
@@TheoryPhilosophy I never read Hegel but I did read Marx' Critique of Hegel's philosophy of right and the latter is polemical towards Hegel.
Apart from watching your channel, I am watching "Philosophical overdose" and today he had posted this video: ua-cam.com/video/wh8tbV5mUOE/v-deo.html
What do you think about it?
There are a bunch of right-wingers in the comments. I do know that Hegel can be interpreted as a fascist but was he one?
If he wasn't a proto-fascist, then how would you defend his 'liberalism'?
To me, the questions about consciousness and knowledge are very interesting. The right wing is trying to keep Hegel and even Foucault to themselves, as they do not believe in universalism and reason.
@@lostintime519 you gotta calm down with the partisan talk. Hegel was not s fascist, but its intellectual doctrine originated from a distortion of his thoughts just like Marxism originated from a distortion of his thoughts. Both Marx and Gentiles sought to do what he explicitly states not to do lol.
The Panentheist God is always enhancing and becoming more perfect.
@@emmanueloluga9770 Yup, and the atomic bomb originates from a distortion of smart scientists' thoughts... distortion leading to creation and destruction seems to be the human fate!
thanks!
Hey there man, is there any way to contact you besides YT comments?
Through Instagram or Patreon (you don't need to pledge money to contact me through it I believe). Links in the description.
Best
D
we used to be able to write and recieve messages on youtube but i dont think you can anymore
Nice
The thing about cognition and consciousness sounds like Descartes.
Lenin translated Marx’s thoughts so the peasants could understand them, Marx translated Hegel’s thoughts so European Intellectuals could understand them, and Hegel translated god’s thoughts so that humanity could understand them.
Accurate username
@@quinnwindsor8718 boom roasted
no one understood Hegel, everyone ignored Marx, fortunately no one remembers what Lenin thinks about Marx lol
2 commercials in 5 minutes? R u 4 real ?
What is your qualification to discuss Hegel?
Does hegel have any influence of some oriental philosophies?
_no_
May be the other way round
@@rajkgambhir speaking as if you have read them all.
Hey, late answer.
Hegel has quite the influence on Japanese philosophers in the 20th century, especially Hajime Tanabe (you can find him on Wikipedia).
38:51 Chapter I
Lol!
So this is not the audiobook and rather a lecture?
Ya not an audiobook. And I have no idea about his influence on other philosophies :/
@@TheoryPhilosophy I think the question was whether Hegel had been influenced by Oriental philosophies...
Whose translation are you using?
A.V. Miller's
@@TheoryPhilosophy thanks
I'm insanegoing
like if quarantine made you a Hegelian
Too many commercials, cut the meaning when you are trying to understand!
I lived through the 1990s, and like Baudrillard I saw them as very dull years both culturally and politically; a dreary fin de siecle as the 20th century winded down.
But now I look back at images of the 90s and they kinda look interesting. An interesting period of history - Chirac looks like a great statesman, the Spice Girls look cool, even the Monica-gate farce seems interesting. Not the boring snorefest I recall living through.
My lived perception of the 90s will not be the preserved for future generations, they will never understand the true spirit of the times. They will only understand the historical legacy
And I got to thinking maybe all lived consciousness is amorphous, opaque, nebulous - it's only as time passes and history is framed that its 'spirit' emerges.
The subjective reality of Baudrillard will be forgotten, and the objective illusion of the historical legacy will dominate the discourse on the 1990s.
But perhaps the subjective reality of the 90s for individual journalists, commentators, politicians etc wasn't dull, given they were in the thick of the news cycle, for them it was always interesting, and it's their perception of events that is passed down for posterity, not the outside observer's.
Which is where Marx enters the equation - perceptions of reality and history are of course influenced by class and ownership. The upper class perception dominates given it dominates the means of recording history.
So within the many subjective consciousnesses there are competing universals, competing objectivity as it were, the battle between which is decided by means of production and their ownership.
Meant *couldn’t
Ads make it insufferable
You aren't explaining Hegel. You're editorializing on your own interpretation/understanding of him.
I mean anything you read besides reading Hagle itself in its original language (you will still be interpreting it yourself), it will likley has a least a bit of interpretation or how they understand it. So if you don't want this read it or lots of different versions to get a broad cover 🤷♂️
Not making a judgment on the interpretation , just that it's no wonder it's not 100% objective
I had to stop this podcast (16 min in) when it turned into a “word salad.” I’m sure you probably understand the Hegelian concepts but you did not describe them in a way I could put any clear meaning from the words you are using. I know Hegel is difficult to understand but we are counting on your wisdom to decipher his ambiguous writing style, so it has meaning for the rest of us. After listening to 15 min of this podcast, I concluded that I might as well read Hegel. This podcast was not very helpful.
I get that, I hope your reading goes well, I'm reading at least some of it as well as listening to some of this.
Edit: sorry, I just saw this was a year old, so my comment might be outdated.
Please remove the ads... 🙄
I appreciate the content but there are too many adds on these videos
Google the podcast version where there shouldn't be any, or very few, ads :)
Geist=God Emergent In Space Time. God=Gift of Diversity, therefore, "Gift of Diversity Emergent in Space Time." This is how I experience Geist. Becoming, realizing through one's individual purpose within the particular purpose towards the universal purpose. We then embrace the diversity, nurture, protect, enjoy and celebrate the Gift of Diversity (in its integrated wholeness), and this is the aim of the Grand Synthesis (unfolding over the course of history), the harmony of the absolute spirit. The Geist has risen.
_17 ads? Fuck that_