Next, I argue that this needs to be situated in Hegel's broader social philosophy and that we can accomplish this by looking at how the Unrecht passage fits in the Elements of the Philosophy of Right’s dialectical structure. Then, I look at Hegel's treatment of crime and punishment in the section on abstract right to show the role of punishment in Hegel's account. First, I explain the value of revisiting the interpretation of Hegel as a simple retributionist in the contemporary debate. Este nuevo objeto contiene la anulación del primero, es la experiencia hecha sobre él.In this article, I argue that Hegel's complete and mature view of crime and punishment is more robust than many interpretations of the Unrecht passage in the ‘Abstract Right’ section of Hegel's Elements of the Philosophy of Right suggest. Pero con esto el ser para ella de ese en-sí es lo verdadero, lo que significa que es la esencia o su objeto. Lo que pasa, como se ha mostrado antes, es que el primer objeto se altera, deja de ser el en-sí y se convierte para la conciencia en un objeto que sólo es el en-sí para ella. El segundo sólo parece a primera vista la reflexión de la conciencia en sí misma, una representación no de un objeto, sino únicamente de su saber del primer objeto. Ya vemos que ahora la conciencia tiene dos objetos, uno el primer en-sí, otro el ser para-ella de este en-sí. La conciencia sabe algo, este objeto es la esencia o el en-sí pero también es el en-sí para la conciencia con esto surge la ambigüedad de esta verdad. Desde este punto de vista, en el proceso recién descrito todavía hay que destacar un momento que puede arrojar una nueva luz sobre el aspecto científico de la presentación que haremos a continuación. “Este movimiento dialéctico que ejerce la conciencia sobre sí misma, tanto en su saber como en su objeto, en la medida en que de él surge para ella su nuevo y verdadero objeto es propiamente aquello que denominamos experiencia. Taken as a result, it is the determinate negative which emerges out of this movement and is likewise thereby a positive content.” On the other hand, as was formerly pointed out, in comprehensive thinking, the negative belongs to the content itself and is the positive, both as its immanent movement and determination and as the totality of these. Because this reflection does not gain its negativity itself for its content, it is not immersed in the subject matter at all but is always above and beyond it, and thus it imagines that by asserting the void, it is going much further than the insight which was so rich in content. – What this vanity expresses is not only that this content is vain but also that this insight itself is vain, for it is the negative which catches no glimpse of the positive within itself. It is reflection into the empty I, the vanity of its own knowing. Rather, if it is again to have any content, something other from somewhere else has to be found. It says, “This is not the way it is” this insight is the merely negative it is final, and it does not itself go beyond itself to a new content. On the one hand, merely clever argumentation conducts itself negatively towards the content apprehended it knows how to refute it and reduce it to nothing. ![]() “There are two aspects to merely clever argumentation that call for further notice and which are to be contrasted with conceptually comprehending thinking. This new object contains the nothingness of the first the new object is the experience concerning that first object.” Consequently, then, what this real per se is for consciousness is truth: which, however, means that this is the essential reality, or the object which consciousness has. But, as was already indicated, by that very process the first object is altered it ceases to be what is per se, and becomes consciously something which is per se only for consciousness. ![]() an idea not of an object, but solely of its knowledge of that first object. The last object appears at first sight to be merely the reflection of consciousness into itself, i.e. Consciousness, as we see, has now two objects: one is the first per se, the second is the existence for consciousness of this per se. This object, however, is also the per se, the inherent reality, for consciousness. “Consciousness knows something this something is the essence or is per se.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |