So far,
in Hegel’s expression of what we know as Dialectical thought, he seems to claim
that negative processes leads to a positive result. My understanding is that
this process is essentially a process of elimination in which we throw away
concepts, bits of knowledge, as we come to realize their incapacity to stand up
to the criterion of truth and knowledge. This process is peculiar in that all
options are not made apparent to us. A more accurate account of Hegel’s
Dialectical thought is that we throw away deficient concepts for new ones that
we accept with the full force of truth. This is odd, because according to
Hegel, this new idea is most likely not truth as well. This means that at some
point we will negate it. In fact, Hegel seems to suggest that this pattern
continues indefinitely. It does not seem that there is a positive result in the
process. If by positive he means merely creating and not producing actual
truth, then there has been a positive event in an interval of time. But this
interval comes to an end when the recently new concept is thrown away. It is
possible that I misunderstand the kind of knowledge he is describing, but it
does not seem to me that there is truly a positive result if it will simply be
negated in the future. It might be that
Hegel’s accounts of the whole and combining results and processes could clarify
the issue.
To him who looks upon the world rationally, the world looks rationally back. --G.W.F. Hegel
This is a question I've been struggling with as well. The closest I've come to an answer is that Hegel does not imagine dialectical thinking as the final stage in the process of consciousness' development. To refer to the three stages of thought that we discussed in out first class--understanding, dialectical thinking, and speculative thinking--it seems that Hegel would admit the dialectical process has some draw backs. It can, in fact, become caught up in this process of negation and lead toward skepticism. Speculative thinking, presumably, is a positive movement that reconciles differences and oppositions into a rational unity. Now, I don't consider this much of an answer. I'm not sure how one makes the transition from dialectical thinking to speculative thinking, at it actually seems like Hegel spends most of his time operating in this dialectical stage. Nor can I really imagine how speculative thinking would work--it seems almost mystical, actually.
ReplyDeleteI'm intrigued by what you said here about merely creating, as opposed to producing truth. But admittedly I'm not sure what you mean. What is the distinction you have in mind here?