Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Hegel's three methods of history
Essays on the role of freedom in morality
Essay on freedom of hegel
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Hegel's three methods of history
In this passage from Hegel he is saying that freedom is terribly misunderstood in it's formal subjective sense, and has been far removed from its essential purpose and goals. People think they should be able to do whatever they want and that is what freedom is, and that anything limiting there desires, impulses , and passions is a limit of there freedom. Hegel is saying this is not true, but these limitations are simply the condition from which they must free themselves from, and that society and the government are where freedom is actualized.
What I believe he means by this is that without limits we would not know what freedom is. If you could always do what you've always wanted the thought of not being able to do something would be so foreign to you that you would not understand what it was to not have freedom, for that matter you would not understand what having freedom was either. That is why it is impossible to have one-hundred percent freedom, because if we ever reached one-hundred percent freedom you would be treading on other peoples freedoms because not everyone wants the same thing. That is what I believe Hegel is trying to say is that freedom is simply the process of freedoms progress, not a tangible goal because as free as you might think you are you still have laws and limitations and thats OK it should be looked at as a reminder of what freedom we do have.
Hegel says that the nature of spirit's direct opposite is matter. And the essence of matter is gravity and the essence of spirit is freedom. Matter is contained outside of itself, but spirit has a self-contained existence.
This self contained knowledge and existence is the essence of self-consciousness thus conciousness itself. The first conscious...
... middle of paper ...
...ing ethics and for any deterioration in those ethics. This responsibility often seems neglected in history, but Hegel warns against pessimistic preachers of haughty ideals that are ill-defined and cannot be maintained. Often, he says, people complain that history has been immoral without choosing moral ideals that are truly universal, rather than simply subjective.
Overall I mostly agree with Hegel's points that he makes. I agree that freedom is misunderstood and that real freedom can never be achieved it is merely gaining the freedom of one limitation at a time. And at the moment I think I'm as free as I can get but in a thousand years people might look back and say I had no freedom. So freedom is a very subjective thing and is really an invention of man. But with society and governments which most think is necessary for men, you must limit some freedoms.
In section 190, Hegel begins with the lord existing in so much to be dependent through another consciousness. Hegel writes, “is a consciousness [lord] existing for itself which is mediated with itself through another consciousness, i.e through a consciousness [bondsman] whose nature it is to be bound up” (Hegel 115). In this passage, Hegel shows why the lord is dependent on the bondsman. The lord exist only “for itself” through his need and mediation through the bondsman. With the bondsman being bounded as an object of desire to the lord, the bondsman has to submit to his lord due to the physical and monetary power he yields.
God has given us as human beings free will. Although if we make choices based on our own free will we must be willing to take the responsibility for the effects that our decisions have on ourselves, on the people around us, and on society itself. Freedom, I believe, is the way in which people live or behave without others annoying or interfering in his or her affairs. People should benefit from freedom, equality and justice. Absolute freedom is sometimes very dangerous and may destroy the basic principles of the society. A lot of people believe that freedom means doing whatever you want, whenever you want.
(7) Hegel, Lectures on the History of Philosophy in three volumes, vol. 2 (Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1995) 97. I made some corrections in the translation of this piece from Hegel.
...ational freedom and is the actualization of freedom as it expands, unfolds, and thus creates history. The means that Spirit uses to realize itself is human life, and as we all know, humans have subjective ideas, interests, passions, and spirit of their own. When these passions combine with universal laws, Spirit unfolds and history happens. The union of an entire culture and government is called State, and this is how Spirit actualizes itself in unique forms. Finally, Spirit constantly changes and reinvents itself through time and historical events. As Spirit actualizes itself in a stable State, the natural process then leads to a change of the status-quo, and breakdown occurs. This constant struggle between self-destruction and self-renewal is the way in which Spirit is re-actualized in a new State. According to Hegel, this is the force behind all of human history.
Following in the path of Kant and Fichte, Hegel has become one of the most influential philosophers in history. His philosophy has influenced important people, such as Karl Marx, and influential schools of thought, such as the Frankfurt School. This influence rides heavily on the chapter, Master and Slave in his book Phenomenology of Spirit. This chapter examines the relationship between two self-consciousnesses, and the process of self-creating. The relationship between the two self-consciousnesses and the eventual path to ‘acknowledgment’ or recognition of the self is outlined in the first line of the chapter: “Self-consciousness exists in itself and for itself, in that, and by the fact that it exists for another self-consciousness; that
First, the Oriental World understood that “one is free,” that individuals are on their own autonomous beings. But, the Oriental World fell short in that they did not realize that while one was free, so was Mankind, or the collection of peoples in a state. Hegel then proceeds to the Classical World, particularly the ancient Greeks. The Greeks and Romans possessed the “consciousness of freedom,” but the fact that they owned and exploited slaves precludes them from being a truly free society and renders their Volksgesit less authentic. The Germanic World, the final stage in Hegel’s evolution of consciousness, reached the intellectual point where, through the influence of Christianity, they were able to “attain the consciousness that Man, as Man, is free…” , making them intellectually prepared for a codified document, like a constitution. To simplify Hegel (and perhaps this is not doing him justice), this evolution in the consciousness of freedom describes the progression from anarchy to the civil society--Man is free in the Oriental World but Mankind is free in the Germanic
Throughout history, western philosophers have vigorously attempted to define the word freedom, to little avail. This is because the word carries so many meanings in many different contexts. The consequences of these philosophers’ claims are immense: as “free” people, we like to rely on the notion of freedom, yet our judicial system relentlessly fights to explain what we can and cannot do. For instance, is screaming “bomb!” on an airplane considered one of our “freedoms?” Martin Luther, in his “Preface to the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans” asserts that people are free when their actions naturally reflect laws and morality to the point that those laws are considered unnecessary. Immanuel Kant, in his “An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?”, articulates a similar view: freedom for Kant is the ability to exercise one’s reasoning without limitation in a public sphere. A deeper reading of these two texts exposes that Kant’s and Luther’s interpretations of freedom are actually more similar than different. Indeed, they are mutually exclusive: one cannot coexist with the other and Kant’s views can even be read as a restating of Luther’s understandings.
Kierkegaard suggests that Hegel, at his core, does not understand that the nature of man, or at the very least the nature of faith, which is in a constant state of moral uncertainty. He illustrates the state of man with various analogies on Abraham's sacrifice of Issac in “Fear and Trembling,” suggesting that Abraham should either be considered a murder because he would have killed his son, or a man of faith because of he obeyed God unwaveringly. Kierkegaard wirtes, “I return, however, to Abraham. Before the result, either Abraham was every minute a murderer, or we are confronted by a paradox which is higher than all mediation” (Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, 51). He makes the claim that while the ethical is universal, the individual who has a personal relationship with God takes on a higher importance than one would with Gies...
An important precondition for Hegel's examination of the sensual is his caveat that sense-certainty must not use complex concepts of any kind to express that which it knows. In this sense, Hegel treats sense-certainty as the realm whose truth is expressed as pure being or ISNESS, as opposed to mediated forms that understand ISNESS in a wider context of meaning (Hegel, 91). By insisting on this limitation, Hegel treats sense-certainty as stripped down to bare assertions of sensual experience, allowing the phenomenologist to examine the sensual based solely on what it is capable of showing us on its own. Indeed, it is this litmus test of self-sufficient communication that sets the stage for Hegel to return sensuality to the universal conceptual framework that supports it once it has been seen to fail in its own right.
Kung, Hans. The Incarnation of God: An Introduction to Hegel's Theological Thought As Prolegomena to a Future Christology. T&T Clark, 2001. hard cover.
According to Hegel, the conscious has certain knowledge of itself. It is certain of its own existence. This form of knowledge is immediate and intuitive to the spirit. The conscious spirit is aware of its moral duty. However, it still needs to be convinced of its duty which needs to be universalized and recognized. Moreover, it’s immediate knowing and willing need to be certified and or validated. This validation is only possible in the context of a community of other selves: other moral agents.
According to the Collins Dictionary, “freedom” is defined as “the state of being allowed to do what you want to do”(“freedom”). The definition of freedom is simple, but make yourself free is not easy. Concerning about some common cases which will take away your freedom, such as a time-cost high education attainment. In this essay, I shall persuade that everyone should try his or her best to insist on pursuing freedom. For the individual, it appears that only if you have your personal freedom, can you have a dream; for a country, it seems that only if the country is free, can the country develop; for mankind, it looks like that only if people has their own pursuit of freedom, can their thoughts evolve.
One of them main critiques of Hegel in regards to the liberalism view of freedom is that the view of liberalism is only a partial view of freedom. By referring to liberalism as a partial freedom, Hegel is referring to its subjectivity. To Hegel, liberal freedom is a subjective freedom. In other words, it is a negative freedom, it is a system of rights. To Hegel, freedom is the “the worthiest and the holiest thing in humanity”, where the core of freedom lies in free will (Par. 215). According to Hegel, without free will, individuals do not possess freedom. This is why Hegel refers to freedom as an abstract concept, as freedom by itself, is just an abstract right. As a result, when an individual think to himself “I will”, that is just the abstract thought, it
However, he did realize that no religion would be able to survive just based on the supposed experiences and ‘revelations’ of other people, which is what led him to understanding that it must be based on peoples understanding and personal interpretations of reality (Handout #1). Even though he did feel as though he was indebted to the Enlightenment, Hegel opposed many of its basic concepts even while protecting a lot of the developments that were brought by the Enlightenment (Handout #1). The views of religion that are offered by Hegel lean more positively to Christianity and religion in general since he does agree with the belief of God and he was Lutheran which is a sect of Christianity and also supports his acceptance of religion (Handout #1). He also frequently utilizes Christian terms in his writings, especially those of the Trinity which actually supports religion in general even though he thought that religion should be transformed into philosophy which proves that Hegel inspected and researched religion more as a philosophy which is more harmful to it since philosophies have never been proven. However, Hegel opposes a portion of orthodoxy because he believes that Evil was created by God and that humanity is nothing without the contrast between good and evil. Some of his views are also more harmful for Christianity because he
To better understand the concepts of freedom, in one of the essays from Isaiah Berlin, “Two Concepts of Liberty, 1958”, he explains the distinction between negative and positive freedom. The great contrast between the two concepts is asking “Who governs me?... and How far does government interfere with me” (126). These two questions are logically distinct from one another since one is about thinking it from an internal side, and one is thinking about how the external forces influences the one itself. Individual liberty is concerned due to the interference of others. First of all he argues that negative freedom restricts the options available to people. Instead of looking at the good side, Berlin’s metaphor of negative freedom is about losing an opportunity, and the amount of options. And negative freedom can