Abstract

I would like to comment on your statements regarding the position and nature of immediacy, as you have detailed it in your article [“Dialectic Logic Today” by P. Piccone in Telos, Fall, 1968] and as I have developed it both in my paper [“The Formalization of Hegel's Dialectical Logic,” International Philosophical Quarterly, VI, 4], which you cite, and elsewhere.

You state that your preference is to use Mediation instead of Reflection when it comes to analyzing the dialectics of the immediacy of elements e. I agree with you that this is indeed possible without distortion. I would like to indicate that in my paper [referred to above] I stated, on page 597, that reflection is only initially defined as the “mode of inquiry (questioning) present in a field of conscious activity.”