addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupsimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonStartprice-ribbonImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruseryahoo

Hegel: "Science of Logic"

The third of ten (alternating) discussions on Hegel's (non-"lesser") "Science of Logic" covering through the end of "Section One:  Determinateness (Quality)" (of "Book One:  The Doctrine of Being" of "Volume One:  The Objective Logic");
and stopping before "Section Two:  Magnitude (Quantity)".

Put yet another way, we'll apply ourselves to the latter two of the three Chapters that comprise "Section One:  Determinateness (Quality)":
"Chapter 2:  Determinate Being" (aka "Existence");
"Chapter 3:  Being-for-self" (aka "Being-for-itself").

In my old version (@ 1969  George Allen & Unwin, London), translated by A.V. Miller and foreword-ed by J.N. Findlay, this third dose amounts to pp. [masked].

In the newer translation by George di Giovanni,
this third chunk amounts to pp. 82-151 (or the marginal notations therein:  #[masked])

Among some excerpting Marxists,
the paragraphs range from #188 through #386:

For an ongoingly encouraging "description," I still pilfer from others more concise (not to mention credible):

Mr. G.R.G. Mure:
"...philosophy is no more the exclusive business of professionals than is art or religion."

J.N. Findlay:
"Hegel will appear as the greatest of European thinkers, engaged in a self-critical enterprise which even he only half understood, whose most obscure, botched utterances are often worth many of the lucidities of modern philosophers."

Etienne Gilson:
"Hegel was not a philosopher;  he was a world, a self-creating world..."

Join or login to comment.

  • Rick O.

    I've been working closely with the section on Infinity. Particularly on the section of "reciprocal determination of the finite and infinite." I was particularly enjoying how the finite posits the infinite and the infinite posits the finite - "thus the finite has disappeared in the infinite, and what is, is nothing but the infinite." Once this became clear (I hope?), I could see Hegel's point on how the claim that the contradictions of Understanding somehow become 'resolved' in Reason (ala Kant) is really for the Understanding to "remain in a state of contradiction unreconciled, unresolved, and absolute."

    Therefore, I thought, the contradiction goes away once we know that the finite is tied up with the infinite. Becoming is the relation between the finite and infinite "and so on to infinity."

    1 · May 2, 2014

    • Rick O.

      But then I realized that this was an elaboration of BAD infinity. I spent all this effort in understanding the BAD stuff! Ug - but like I told George at the beginning, once you go down the rabbit hole there's no going back. I'm addicted and I want more. But now at least I can get the GOOD stuff.

      1 · May 2, 2014

  • Rick O.

    Euclid: "A point is that which has no part." - Elements, bk I def 1

    Hegel: "A point is the determinate of of a part. And being determinate, has Being, Not-Being, and Negation. The relation of these give rise to Other (negation of Not-Being or negation of Being). The relation of Other and Being gives rise to Being-In-Itself (negation of Other), and Being-For-Other (negation of Being). The relation of these gives rise to Something (Unity, or negation of Being-In-Itself and Being-For-Other). Relation of Somethings gives rise to Limit (negation of Something).

    Or, in other words, "A point is that which has more parts than you can shake a stick at."

    Ahh, the world is so much more lovely with Hegel.

    May 1, 2014

  • George

    Please consider the established (and accessible)approach to Hegel in our philosophical culture (if only cuz it has me nearly soiling myself):

    2 · April 27, 2014

    • George

      "The advantage of tertiary literature is clear: those who choose to cite secondary literature in preference to actually citing the primary source are already compromised and are already under the general suspicion of faking, so taking ideas from them is simply expropriating from the expropriators (as Lenin aptly put it). When you fake with the fakers, everyone wins!..."

      I take license to watch sometimes (in lieu of reading):­

      April 30, 2014

  • George

    Late, as usual, but on my way.
    See y'all soon.

    April 30, 2014

  • George

    And here's another link that may be helpful:

    April 24, 2014

6 went

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy