Sede Amministrativa: Università degli Studi di Padova Dipartimento di Filosofia SCUOLA DI DOTTORATO DI RICERCA IN FILOSOFIA INDIRIZZO: FILOSOFIA TEORETICA E PRATICA CICLO XXIII “Spirit That Knows Itself in the Shape of Spirit”: On Hegel’s Idea of Absolute Knowing Direttore della Scuola : Ch.mo Prof. Giovanni Fiaschi Coordinatore d’indirizzo: Ch.mo Prof. Francesca Menegoni Supervisore : Ch.mo Prof. Francesca Menegoni Dottoranda: Valentina Ricci “Spirit That Knows Itself in the Shape of Spirit”: On Hegel’s Idea of Absolute Knowing ______________________________________________________ CONTENTS INTRODUCTION p. 7 CHAPTER 1: The Role of Moral Self-Consciousness in the Attainment of the Absolute Standpoint Introduction p. 19 1. Absolute Knowing and Morality p. 20 2. The Development of Moral Self-Consciousness p. 24 2.1 The Moral Worldview p. 24 2.2 The Verstellung (“Dissemblance or Duplicity”) p. 34 2.3 Gewissen (Conscience) p. 39 3. Towards Absolute Knowing p. 47 3.1 The Beautiful Soul and the Final Reconciliation p. 47 3.2 The Beautiful Soul as the Form of the Concept p. 50 CHAPTER 2: The Role of Religion in the Attainment of the Absolute Standpoint 1. Absolute Knowing and Religion p. 55 2. Religion in the Phenomenology p. 61 2.1 The Concept of Religion p. 61 2.2 The Forms of Religion p. 66 3. Revealed Religion and Absolute Knowing p. 73 CHAPTER 3: Absolute Knowing as the Shape of Concept Introduction p. 89 1. Form and Gestalt p. 92 2. The Form as the Differentiating Feature of Religion and Absolute Knowing p. 97 3. The Nature of Absolute Knowing: Its Status p. 103 4. The Nature of Absolute Knowing: Its Subject p. 109 5. The Nature of Absolute Knowing: Its Existence p. 115 Concluding Remarks p. 124 CHAPTER 4: Absolute Knowing: Beyond Time, in History Introduction p. 129 1. The Role of Time and History in the Phenomenology as a Whole p. 131 2. Time in Absolute Knowing p. 134 2.1 The Implicit Temporal Dimension in Absolute Knowing p. 134 2.2 The Explicit Temporal Dimension in Absolute Knowing p. 136 3. History and “Erinnerung” in Absolute Knowing p. 158 4. Beyond Time, in History p. 167 CONCLUSIONS p. 175 BIBLIOGRAPHY Works by Hegel p. 187 Essays on Hegel p. 188 Other Works Cited p. 203 Introduction To judge a thing that has substance and solid worth is quite easy, to comprehend it is much harder, and to blend judgment and comprehension in a definitive description is the hardest thing of all1. The object of the present study is Hegel’s conception of absolute knowing, the concluding moment of consciousness’s path, as it is described in the Phenomenology of Spirit. This topic is of central significance for a number of reasons, that I will illustrate in the course of this introduction and that will become even clearer throughout the whole work. The literature on the Phenomenology, as we know, is very rich, as well as the specific literature on absolute knowing. The major interpreters of Hegel’s thought have addressed it in their studies, and nonetheless this text keeps causing a considerable embarrassment, even after more than two hundred years from its publication. Even though, in fact, there are certainly many illuminating texts on this topic2, it is equally true that very often only a few concluding pages in the                                                                                                                 1 G.W.F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes, in Gesammelte Werke, Bd. 9. hg. von W. Bonsiepen u. R. Heede, Meiner, Hamburg 1980, p. 11; Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit, transl. by A. V. Miller, with analysis of the text and foreword by J. N. Findlay, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1977, § 3. The following references to the Phenomenology will be given with the abbreviation PhG, followed by the page number of the German edition and, in parentheses, the section number of the English translation. Some translations will be modified: where Miller translates “Vorstellung” as “picture thinking”, I will prefer “representation”, and where he translates “Begriff” as “notion” I will prefer “concept” (with the small letter). 2 See, for example, G. Baptist, Das absolute Wissen. Zeit, Geschichte, Wissenschaft, in D. Köhler u O. Pöggeler (hg.), G.W.F. Hegel. Phänomenologie des Geistes, Akademie Verlag, Berlin 2006, pp. 245-61; A. De Laurentiis, Absolute Knowing, in K. R. Westphal (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit, Wiley Blackwell, Malden (Mass.) 2009, pp. 246-64; L. De Vos, Absolute Knowing in the Phenomenology, in A. Wylleman (ed.), Hegel on the Ethical Life, Religion and Philosophy (1793-1807), Leuven University Press and Kluwer Academic Publishers, Leuven/Dordrecht 1989, pp. 231-270; J. Flay, Absolute Knowing and Absolute Other, «The Owl of Minerva» 30 (1998), n.1, pp. 69-82 (this whole issue of the «Owl of Minerva» is devoted to On Hegel’s Idea of Absolute Knowing monographs on the Phenomenology are devoted to absolute knowing, that is described in terms of a “concluding summary”3, identified by some distinctive features (the most “popular” of them are usually the gathering together of the preceding moments, indeed, the annulment of time and the transition to the system proper). It cannot certainly be denied that the chapter on absolute knowing is an extremely complicated and short text: and it is disproportionately so if one considers the extension of the preceding chapters of the Phenomenology and even more if one considers that it is its achievement and an essential moment of transition to what will come afterwards, thus the logic on the one hand, and the system with the Realphilosophie (that is, the philosophies of nature and of spirit) on the other hand. It is therefore an extremely dense text, that on the one side encloses the entire path that preceded it, and on the other side proceeds to the definition of the nature and conceptual structure of absolute knowing, or the standpoint of science. The difficulty of dealing with it in an adequate manner, therefore, is fully understandable. Given the richness of the themes addressed in it, besides, it enables multiple reading levels that are likely to create a considerable dispersion in the analysis of its structure and to jeopardize a full understanding of its meaning. Despite the chapter’s difficulty, however, it is necessary to fully recognize its significance and role as regards the subsequent development of the system and                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 absolute knowing); H. Fr. Fulda, Das erscheinende absolute Wissen, in K. Vieweg, W. Welsch (hg.), Hegels Phänomenologie des Geistes. Ein kooperativer Kommentar zu einem Schlüsselwerk der Moderne, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a. M. 2008, pp. 601-24; Nach dem absoluten Wissen. Welche Erfahrungen des nachhegelschen Bewußtseins muß die Philosophie begreifen, bevor sie wieder absolutes Wissen einfordern kann?, in K. Vieweg, W. Welsch (hg.), Hegels Phänomenologie des Geistes. Ein kooperativer Kommentar zu einem Schlüsselwerk der Moderne, op. cit., pp. 627-654; S. Houlgate, Absolute Knowing Revisited, «The Owl of Minerva» 30 (1998), n.1, pp. 51-68; W. Jaeschke, Das absolute Wissen, in A. Arndt u. E. Müller (hg. von), Hegels Phänomenologie des Geistes heute, Akademie Verlag, Berlin 2004, pp. pp. 194-214; S. Lumsden, Absolute Knowing, «The Owl of Minerva» 30 (1998), n.1, pp. 3-32; M. H. Miller, The Attainment of the Absolute Standpoint in Hegel’s Phenomenology, in J. Stewart (ed.), The Phenomenology of Spirit Reader. Critical and Interpretive Essays, State University of New York Press, Albany 1998, pp. 427-43; R. B. Pippin, The “Logic of Experience” as “Absolute Knowledge” in Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit, in D. Moyar u. M. Quante (eds.), Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit. A Critical Guide, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2008, pp. 210-27; R. Williams, Towards a Non- Foundational Absolute Knowing, «The Owl of Minerva» 30 (1998), n.1, pp. 83-101. 3 This is the expression used by Hans Friedrich Fulda to designate the core of these interpretations. See Das erscheinende absolute Wissen, cit. 8 Introduction Hegel’s overall conception of philosophy as science, and this awareness requires a careful analysis and reconstruction of the fundamental moments that, in the same work, have led to the attainment of this form of knowing, and the deepening and contextualization of several thematic nodes that are connected, as it were, to the conceptual core of absolute knowing and determine its meaning and significance in detail. It is therefore necessary, in my view, to provide an integrated interpretation of these different levels, handling the chapter on absolute knowing as a hypertext whose fundamental components can be elaborated in order to understand the complex structure and richness in references and themes that constitute it. One of the aspects most frequently emphasized by the scholarship about the concluding chapter of the Phenomenology is its substantial inadequacy as a text, that is referred to the well-known conditions under which Hegel himself said to have completed the book4: it is said to be a hasty text, in which Hegel tries to complete the work rapidly, but is not able to offer a clear, detailed and consistent account of what should constitute the standpoint of science and its conceptual structure. It is my persuasion, on the contrary, that the one on absolute knowing – although it cannot clearly be defined as a reader-friendly text (it is Hegel, after all, and furthermore in one of his best performances in this respect) – constitutes a unitary and consistent text, which answers in a very precise way to the work’s intent, and offers a clear theory of the way in which spirit, at the end of its path, achieves a comprehension of that same path by superseding the opposition of consciousness and self-consciousness, and an account of the kind of experiences that, in particular, allow this supersession, of the specific features defining the scientific standpoint, and of its relation with actuality and the history of spirit whose comprehension it constitutes. The method according to which this study will develop will thus be the following one: I will analyze the concluding chapter of the Phenomenology in its                                                                                                                 4 See the letter to Schelling (May 1st, 1807) in Briefe von und an Hegel, hg. von J. Hoffmeister, Meiner, Hamburg 1952, pp. 161 and ff. (Hegel: The Letters, Indiana University Press, Bloomington 1984). For an exhaustive account of the composition history of the Phenomenology and the relevant debate, see O. Pöggeler, Die Komposition der Phänomenologie des Geistes, in H. F. Fulda, D. Henrich (hg.), Materialien zu Hegels “Phänomenologie des Geistes”, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a. M. 1973, pp. 329-90.   9 On Hegel’s Idea of Absolute Knowing unfolding and I will deepen, one by one, the major themes that will emerge in the course of the chapter. This way of proceeding will be carried out by referring to some fundamental questions to which this study will try to answer. The first question concerns, in a pretty simple way, the nature of absolute knowing (what is absolute knowing? What kind of knowing is it?) and its role in the context of the work and the system, that is, the way in which the path leading to it and its conceptual structure relate to each other, or the kind of “look” that philosophy is able to cast on actuality when it becomes system. The second question, then, concerns the absoluteness of absolute knowing: that is, what makes absolute knowing absolute? What does it mean for it to be absolute? How does it differ from the simple gathering and result of the preceding moments? As I mentioned above, the literature on the Phenomenology and absolute knowing is extremely rich, and all major commentators have dealt with this issue. The aim of my work, however, is not to provide an account of everything that has been written in the last two hundred years on this text, since this task has been carried out by several excellent interpreters of Hegel’s thought5. My aim, rather, is to go through Hegel’s text in depth in order to understand its dynamics and to loosen some complex nodes. The existing literature, given this aim, will constitute a precious support both to the formation of the background that is necessary in addressing such an issue, and to the building of my interpretation and reading of this central moment in Hegel’s thought. I will immediately give an example of my approach: in this introduction, indeed, I deem especially appropriate to refer to a very provocative interpretive stance that has been expressed by William Maker, in order to show – albeit negatively – what is my stance and my approach to absolute knowing. Maker starts from the identification of the project of the Phenomenology, which “as Hegel’s declared introduction to science, is meant to indicate how consciousness can overcome its merely perspectival and imbedded character and how, thereby, a standpoint of autonomous objective reason – the standpoint of science – can be                                                                                                                 5 The work of Henry S. Harris, in this respect, is exemplary and certainly not reducible to a simple account of the existing literature on the matter. In his Hegel’s Ladder, Harris analyzes in great depth the path and the thematic nodes of the Phenomenology, providing an extremely useful and accurate examination of the literature on the work as a whole and the single topics discussed in it. 10 Introduction attained”6. Maker assumes the Science of Logic, and especially Hegel’s statements at the beginning of the Logic on its relation to the Phenomenology as introduction to science, as a reference point for the evaluation of the concept and role of absolute knowing. Regardless of the (questionable) appropriateness of the evaluation of one text on the ground of another text, and the specific question regarding the relationship between the two works, what matters to me are Maker’s conclusions with respect to absolute knowing. He claims, in fact, that for the most part the interpreters did not properly understand the project of the Phenomenology as introduction to science: according to what he calls the “received view”, absolute knowing is for Hegel an “absolutely true, actual and scientific knowing and as such constitutes for him the concept of science”7. According to Maker this interpretation is wrong, for if one considers Hegel’s statements at the beginning of the Logic, the Phenomenology and absolute knowing as the deduced concept of science can only be interpreted in a negative sense: absolute knowing, indeed, “does constitute the beginning point of science” but is “not a true or actual knowing and not a determinate structure or methodological principle for the constitution of science”8. Maker’s argument is that, if logic is not to begin with any presuppositions, then it cannot begin with any knowing or form of knowing, and according to him Hegel is unequivocal on this point. “Not only does the absolute or pure knowing which the Phenomenology results in cease in and of itself to be a knowing. Further, this self-cessation, what that absolute knowing was as a determinate describable structure – the structure of consciousness – also ceases to be, is eliminated or aufgehoben”9. My aim with the present study is to refute every such interpretation, and to show that Hegel’s text and theory on absolute knowing are consistently structured and give rise to a positively determined knowing, which does not imply any elimination of consciousness and of the relation to a content, but constitutes, through the superseding of consciousness’s opposition, the necessary foundation of science on the ground of the identity between being and thought.                                                                                                                 6 W. Maker, Hegel’s Phenomenology as Introduction to Science, «Clio» 10 (1984), n. 4, pp. 381- 97, here p. 381. 7 Ibid., p. 384. 8 Ibid., p. 385. 9 Ibid., p. 387.   11 On Hegel’s Idea of Absolute Knowing The dissertation is articulated in two parts, the first of which is devoted to the phenomenological premises of absolute knowing, that is, to the moments that immediately precede such knowing, and the role they play for the constitution of the scientific standpoint. More specifically, Hegel defines absolute knowing as the reconciliation of consciousness and self-consciousness, and in the first pages of the chapter he claims that such reconciliation has already been attained in two different ways, that is, in moral consciousness and religion, respectively designated as the reconciliation “in the form of being in itself” and the reconciliation “in the form of being for self”10. Absolute knowing constitutes the unification of these two forms. The first chapter, therefore, is devoted to moral consciousness and the conceptual structure it exemplifies, in an examination that, on the ground of the relevant indications given in the chapter on absolute knowing, will resume the discussion of moral consciousness and especially of the beautiful soul in Chapter VI of the Phenomenology. More specifically, I will first analyze the postulates of the moral worldview and the contradictions deriving from it in the shape of the Verstellung (distortion), in which it will be possible to observe the consequences of the universal’s separation from the realm of Dasein (being there, existence). I will then focus on the shape of the beautiful soul, that in the chapter on absolute knowing is pointed at as the one providing the form of the concept, since it is able to remain in its concept. On the other hand, this shape is also representative of the individual consciousness’s tendency to isolate itself, to remain closed within itself: it lacks, indeed, the capacity to concretize its essence in the existence, and therefore the capacity not only to remain by itself in its other, but also to find itself in it. And this is precisely the aspect which, albeit negatively, the beautiful soul alludes to, that is, the side of the unification of which it is the bearer with respect to absolute knowing. As I will try to highlight, therefore, the beautiful soul provides the side of the concept’s form, that still lacks, however, the concrete fulfillment, the content. The latter is provided by religion, whose role in the definition of absolute knowing’s essence is the object of the second chapter. In this section of my study, which will proceed in a way similar to the first chapter, I will entwine the references to this shape in the last                                                                                                                 10 PhG, p. 425 (§ 794). 12