Abstract
Hegel’s views on the family and civil society, the topic of this meeting, attracted participants from more than 20 countries and a total of almost 100 contributions. The activities of this conference were divided into “plenary sessions” that brought together all participants in order to discuss the long papers and “sectorial sessions,” i.e., smaller groups — up to five groups would meet simultaneously — in which the short papers were presented. There were also three evening lectures, a general meeting of the members, and a reception, in other words, an extensive and varied program. The conference was formally opened with addresses from the society’s chairman, the principal of the Erasmus University of Rotterdam, and the mayor of Rotterdam. As the introductory session swiftly moved on to the papers of Rudolf Meyer and Rudolf Siebert, the tributes paid to Hegel in the opening addresses were soon complemented by the more active appreciation that is implied in research work. Rudolf Meyer, one of the executive chairpeople of the society, set the ground for the whole conference by a clear exposition of the relevant sections of the Philosophy of Right, drawing particular attention to the problems of transition in general, and to the implicitly attempted mediation from bourgeois to citoyen in particular. Rudolf Siebert insisted against Ernst Bloch that Hegel has not betrayed the future, but that his philosophy can help modern men and women to comprehend and to act out the options for the future: “To try to mitigate at least Future I, to resist Future II, and to promote as passionately as possible Future III. Rudolf Siebert’s highly topical discussion had a lasting impact on the conference: subsequent references to the future frequently made use of his gripping abbreviations. Leaving the opening session behind, I can only comment on a small selection of papers. As attendance at one “sectorial session” meant absence from the papers read simultaneously, my choice is highly subjective and should not be taken as a value judgment on any of the papers.