Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Hegel phenomenology of spirit, independence and dependence of self-consciousness: lordship and bondage
Hegel phenomenology of spirit, independence and dependence of self-consciousness: lordship and bondage
Critique of Hegel's phenomenology of spirit
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Hegel phenomenology of spirit, independence and dependence of self-consciousness: lordship and bondage
Social scientists often reference Georg Hegel’s work in Phenomenology of Spirit, as he attempts to develop the notion of self and the limits of its autonomy in society. In it, he describes what is often termed the master-slave dialectic. The master-slave dialectic describes the internal, or if taken more literally, the external struggle of recognition between two figures, the master and the slave. Their relationship is at once both reflective and reflexive, as one begins to understand the other as the antithesis of his or herself, giving an identity not only to the other, but also to his or herself. This dialectic places the figures in conflict with one another, where the historically determined means for resolution is the social defeat of …show more content…
In his autobiography, The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, he begins with a detailed description of life in his homeland. He describes a culture that had a hierarchal, patriarchal system, not unlike that of Pocahontas’ tribe. There is an established government, with chiefs and judges, one of which, is his father. It is important to note that while Equiano states that he was slated to claim the status of “grandeur”, he never reached that point in his narrative before he was kidnapped and sold as but another slave in the Middle Passage. Thus, early life for Equiano, while perhaps better than some of his counterparts, was still of the same class, dictated by the governance of these socially superior figures. Similar to Pocahontas too, Equiano eventually regained a “free” status. But unlike Pocahontas who is still bound by the voyeuristic gaze of the men surrounding her, Equiano’s unfreedom stems from the social stigma and struggle of being non-white European. As he recounted during his time in the Barbados, “as I knew there was little or no law for a free negro here […].” The social intolerance of African people, while different in the Caribbean from in England or America, was still clear. …show more content…
Though to some extent all three may have seemingly lived, for a brief period of time, individualistically, they are still bound to the social, cultural, familial, and political restraints that mitigate their supposed independence. As Hegel suggests in his master-slave dialectic, all people are subjected to this greater social machine, a static dichotomy. Therefore, their tangible enslavement is not a break from their own sovereignty, but rather is an awakening and acceptance to the pervasive unfreedom and social defeat they have always
Equiano was the youngest of his brothers who enjoyed playing outside throwing javelins enjoying the normal life of a small child. At the beginning of the day, the elders would leave their children at home while they went out into the fields to work. While they were gone, some of the children would get together to play but always took precautions of potential kidnappers. Even with all these precautions, people were still seized from their homes and taken away. Equiano was home one day with his little sister tending to the everyday household needs when out of nowhere they were captured by a couple men who had gotten over the walls. They had no time to resist or scream for help before they found themselves bound, gagged, and being taken away. Equiano had no idea where these people were taking him and they didn’t stop once until nightfall where they stayed until dawn. He tells us about how they traveled for many days and nights not having any clue where they were going or when they would get there. Slaves traveled by land and by sea, but Equiano’s journey was by sea. He tells us how he was carried aboard and immediately chained to other African Americans that were already on the ship. Once the ship halted on land, Equiano along with many other slaves were sent to the merchant’s yard where they would be herded together and bought by the
Olaudah Equiano was a freed slave living in London who made it his life person to abolish the British slave trade. His knowledge and training of the English language allowed him to grow into one of the key figures in the movement to abolish the slave trade in England. Although many scholars acknowledge his incredible talent, there has been evidence in the recent years that may question his reliability as a first-hand account. There is evidence to support that Equiano may have been born in South Carolina. This evidence does not make him a valid source of information about the slave trade and leads his audience to question his statements.
"The Life of Olaudah Equiano” is a captivating story in which Equiano, the author, reflects on his life from becoming a slave to a freeman during the 19th century. Through his experiences and writing, Equiano paints a vivid picture of the atrocities and cruelties of European slavery. Ultimately through his narrative, Equiano intends to persuade his audience, the British government, to abolish the Atlantic slave trade as well as alert them of the harsh treatment of slaves. He successfully accomplishes his goal by subtly making arguments through the use of character, action, and setting.
To scrutinize Hegel is simply impossible without attending to his dialectical method resulting in Aufhebung of the oppositions. In the present context this attention should have political and ethical twist - to extract from Hegel's dialectical play some points that are relevant even nowadays (both in political and philosophical terms).
To Hegel, the history of the developing self-conscious mind was the same as the history of philosophy. Through out time, conflicting theories have laid claim to their one exclusive form of truth. Hegel implies that we should not focus on these conflicted ideals but view each as “elements of an organic unity”. This places Hegel as part of a progression of philosophers (Plato, Aristotle, and Kant) who can generally by described as Idealists, whom regarded freedom or self-determination as real and being important for the soul or mind or divinity.
Hegel, although still holds the blemish of a Absolute State's thinker, not democratic, in his work, mainly in what refers to the "Philosophy of the Right", makes possibles the deepening of the investigations for authors like Rawls, who worries about questi...
Marx, as previously mentioned, seem similar in many ways to Hegel. However Marx addressed rights in a more helpful manner for us, than Hegel did. Whereas Hegel said it presented the self as `atomistic`, Marx worked with it directly and fitted it neatly within his thought. Rights, (and by rights he was addressing A) according to Marx is constructed by the owners of the means of production for their benefit. This makes it rather simple to conclude if A is indeed equal to B according to Marx, as long as one can simply justify this statement by Marx. “Good” to Marx have clear resonance from Hegel, and in order to explain what good is I will briefly complete, as Marx did, the framework which we started with Hegel. Marx used the parts of Hegel’s work in which he meant Hegel was true to himself.
According to Hegel, “the self conscious is itself and for itself” meaning that it has to come outside of itself, so that it can do two things. One is to cancel out the other otherness. The second is to try to become recognized. This recognition process is called Master and Servant self-conscious. The conflict between master and servant is one in which the historical themes such as dependence and independence are introduced. It sets up the realization of the self conscious through the recognition of and by another, through mutual recognition.
Hegel’s myth, or “Master-slave dialectic” notions that the fear of losing one’s identity results in a domination over another. This occurs when a being feels the need to be firmly secure within a societal position. In our group we agreed, riots or protest today occur when one obtains an unwanted societal position deemed by another class, or “master.”
In The Phenomenology of Spirit Hegel dives deep into his most sought ought ideology of the master-slave dialectic, which describes the process self-consciousness and need for recognition. This ideology played a particular role in Frantz Fanon’s novel Black Skins White Masks in one of the ending chapters in his critique of Western colonialism. Taking a look into Hegel’s master-slave dialectic and understanding the impact that it had in Fanons relationship to colonial context will provide a differing view of the master-slave dialectic relationship.
Hegel is considered one of the most famous German philosopher’s who wrote and taught during the early 1800’s. Hegel thought that humanity and civilizations was inevitable working towards becoming a free society in hope that this idea and process would spread throughout the world. Many of Hegel’s ideas such as his dialect and triad greatly influenced the 19th century. This movement also translated over into the ideas and findings of people in the new world with liberal and free market democracies who represent the final state of Hegel’s progress. Hegel’s ideas can all be seen as part of a progression and broken down and explained through his teachings and theories, the Hegelian triad, and the legacy that Hegel left behind.
If Hegel considered the absolute idea as the outcoming principle or substantial base of being, then a new phenomenology of spirit must be abstracted from the question stated of the primary and secondary character of the material and ideal in a global plan. But this conception of the materialistic philosophy should be over comprehended, where spiritual is considered as the secondary phenomenon, so as the secondary in comparison with the material side of being. This new phenomenology of the spirit is based on the Hegelian and Marxist traditions’ overcomprehension of the main idea, which takes up the subjective content and spiritual material base — its material-ideal nature. Both a society and an individual possess such qualities and properties that cannot be understood only through the conventional ideology of objective, material being. There exist spiritual phenomena as well, understood here as everything linked to consciousness, psychology, feelings, perception, etc.
The highest level of awareness of consciousness is what is referred as Absolute, in Hegel’s ‘Phenomenology of Spirit’. The phrase might be an adequate hint for the intention behind the title of the article. Nonetheless, my interest in the article will still be to illustrate why Hegel has said that the Absolute is essentially a result.
Hegel's claim that self-consciousness realizes itself in ethical life is set up with the understanding that un-reactive immersion in the social community is no longer possible for modern human beings in his own time. In Hegel's view, ethical life is created within the culture and practices of the social community of an individual. “Ethical life is a system of norms and mores belonging to a social body, made up of spheres of social interaction and interdependence in which all individuals are embedded.” (Philosophy of Right, III: Ethical Life.) More importantly, the individual must follow that ethical life, and therefore contribute to the society himself. Ethical life is a stage of self consciousness towards which the individual of Hegel’s time is seen by Hegel to be living within, and to be constructing throughout his life. Hegel would claim that the moral individual would not try to dissociate from this, for his own benefit. He argues that reason is manifested in the benefit of the individual rather than of the social.
In his Introduction to the Philosophy of History Hegel confronts the reader with a new way of understanding history. According to this infamous philosopher, there are three methods of dealing with history: original, reflective, and philosophic. The approach taken by Hegel is the philosophical approach to history, which is the foundation of his work. In order to understand this approach, Hegel introduces the reader to his understanding of what history is.