In the Hegel's allegory of the Lord and the Bondsman, Hegel depiction of struggle for recognition of self is works well as an explanation of the development and eventual downfall of the colonial system of oppression.
The allegory begins with two hypothetical people (or consciousnesses) who have never encountered another person before. At first, it is a harmless mirroring of each others movements but it slow escalates into a death struggle as both become dependent on the other for recognition.
The problem I have with the death struggle is that it is in terms of life and death. To me, life and death are biological concepts, so have a lot of theoretical baggage which is not part of the experience of the struggle for self-hood. What would be better here is 'existence' and 'non-existence.' One discovers the unessential or contingency of their existence, meaning that their existence can cease, by recognizing that one is not the only existence, and they recognize what existence is putting it at stake. This is quite true as one doesn't really grasp the nature or the limits of existence without its negation.
The mirroring and subsequent death struggle is analogous to how different cultures interact on first contact. At first, they are surprised another culture exists almost immediately they start fighting, with extinction of one as a possibility. If recognition of self-hood is the cause of these confrontations is highly speculative, but works well as a explanation of how the European explorers reacted when they first contacted strange foreign cultures in the East and New World.
As Hegel stated in the first sentence of the section that self-consciousness can only be achieved through another (178), the two consciousness soon realize that by killing the other, that would leave the survivor without another to recognize his self (188). This gives into a battle for dominance where one becomes lord or master and the other slave or bondsman.
This step corresponds to the period in which one nation is dominated by another nation and the result is colonization. Their national image is then bolstered as they recognize that they are the free ones.
The next step is that the lord makes the bondsman produce things that the lord desires. Because the act of production is a creative process, the bondsman develops a self-consciousness through their relationship with their work. As these creations become more developed because the lord restrains bondsman's desires, a contradiction occurs as the lord becomes dependent on the bondsman. This leads to a new struggle for dominance between the two self-consciousnesses, one between the producer and the consumer, or this is how I interpreted the end of the allegory.
This last part corresponds to the revolution where colonized and enslaved, having developed a power over their lords through the relationship both have to the slave's work, revolt against the colonizer and slaver. This revolt is in the name of becoming independent and is only possible if the enslaved can recognize their power to revolt like they did in many colonies before, during, and after Hegel's time.
The allegory begins with two hypothetical people (or consciousnesses) who have never encountered another person before. At first, it is a harmless mirroring of each others movements but it slow escalates into a death struggle as both become dependent on the other for recognition.
The problem I have with the death struggle is that it is in terms of life and death. To me, life and death are biological concepts, so have a lot of theoretical baggage which is not part of the experience of the struggle for self-hood. What would be better here is 'existence' and 'non-existence.' One discovers the unessential or contingency of their existence, meaning that their existence can cease, by recognizing that one is not the only existence, and they recognize what existence is putting it at stake. This is quite true as one doesn't really grasp the nature or the limits of existence without its negation.
The mirroring and subsequent death struggle is analogous to how different cultures interact on first contact. At first, they are surprised another culture exists almost immediately they start fighting, with extinction of one as a possibility. If recognition of self-hood is the cause of these confrontations is highly speculative, but works well as a explanation of how the European explorers reacted when they first contacted strange foreign cultures in the East and New World.
As Hegel stated in the first sentence of the section that self-consciousness can only be achieved through another (178), the two consciousness soon realize that by killing the other, that would leave the survivor without another to recognize his self (188). This gives into a battle for dominance where one becomes lord or master and the other slave or bondsman.
This step corresponds to the period in which one nation is dominated by another nation and the result is colonization. Their national image is then bolstered as they recognize that they are the free ones.
The next step is that the lord makes the bondsman produce things that the lord desires. Because the act of production is a creative process, the bondsman develops a self-consciousness through their relationship with their work. As these creations become more developed because the lord restrains bondsman's desires, a contradiction occurs as the lord becomes dependent on the bondsman. This leads to a new struggle for dominance between the two self-consciousnesses, one between the producer and the consumer, or this is how I interpreted the end of the allegory.
This last part corresponds to the revolution where colonized and enslaved, having developed a power over their lords through the relationship both have to the slave's work, revolt against the colonizer and slaver. This revolt is in the name of becoming independent and is only possible if the enslaved can recognize their power to revolt like they did in many colonies before, during, and after Hegel's time.
No comments:
Post a Comment