This paper responds to Frederick Neuhouser's attempt to make sense of Hegel's social theory, and in particular the conception of freedom that grounds the detailed claims made within that theory, in abstraction from its larger systematic context. I argue that Neuhouser's interpretation, despite its many virtues, could be further improved by increased attention to the importance of absolute spirit for Hegel's account of social freedom, as well as to the logical necessity of the developments within the Philosophy of Right. I (...) conclude by explaining the consequences of these omissions for our understanding of Hegel's conception of freedom and the social theory that arises from it. (shrink)
The primary aim of this paper is to investigate what Hegel means by “reason” and “rationality.” The paper identifies and interprets some of Hegel’s most significant claims concerning the content of these terms, paying particular attention to his claims regarding the relation of the rational and the irrational. The resulting understanding of Hegel’s account of reason is then used to develop an improved interpretation of Hegel’s assertion of the equivalence of the rational and the actual.
This challenging study explores the theme of freedom in the philosophy of Hegel and Nietzsche. In the first half Will Dudley sets Hegel's Philosophy of Right within a larger systematic account and innovatively deploys the Logic to interpret it. The author shows that freedom involves not only the establishment of certain social and political institutions but also the practice of philosophy itself. In the second half, he reveals how Nietzsche's discussions of decadence, nobility and tragedy map on to an analysis (...) of freedom that critiques heteronomous choice and Kantian autonomy, and ultimately issues in a positive conception of liberation. In boldly bringing Hegel and Nietzsche together into a conversation, something that is rarely attempted, Will Dudley has developed a set of original interpretations that will be of considerable importance to students of these philosophers, and more generally to political theorists and historians of ideas. (shrink)
This paper responds to the debate between John Burbidge, Edward Halper, and William Maker about the nature of Hegel’s idealism, and in particular of the relationship between Hegel’s logic and Realphilosophie. I argue that Maker’s position is the one most consistent with both what Hegel says about philosophy and Hegel’s own philosophical practice. I begin by highlighting the essential differences that separate the three interpretations and then turn to Hegel’s texts, to identify the passages that pose difficulties for the readings (...) of Burbidge and Halper. I conclude by considering, and ultimately rejecting, the objections that Burbidge and Halper raise to Maker’s interpretation. (shrink)