Hegel Legitimised the French Revolution but not the Revolutionaries Themselves
Hegel views on the role of the individual can be seen and used to
justify the Revolution. Individual freedom can also be woven into
these ideas and living in a community or society is how Hegel saw the
individual fulfilling their life. Hegel agreed with the ideas of the
classical Greeks in as much that he thought the individual should lead
an ethical life. In this ideal each individual has obligations to the
community in which they live. Hegel rejected Kant’s view of freedom of
the individual as he saw Kantian philosophy as rejecting the rest of
the community and that an individual is a self-contained unit for whom
history starts and finishes in their own lifetime. Hegel looked at
this differently
“Because humans act collectively to promote their freedom, the primary
question of modern political philosophy, on Hegel’s view, is not a
priori what institutions would fulfil these functions, but rather how
and to what extent existing institutions do fulfil these functions.
This is why Hegel analysed the rationality of extent institutions.[1]
Hegel believed that rationality was superior to understanding. He also
believed that the state should be rational in order to allow the
individuals to fully develop and become free. Yet it was not enough
for the individuals in the state to simply feel free. Hegel saw the
freedom being obtained through thinking and not through feeling.
Through his studies of the bible and Kant he saw a self-enslaved
consciousness that acted as an external master on the individual.[2]
Freedom for Hegel was more about freedom of will. Rathe...
... middle of paper ...
....mdx.ac.uk/www/study/xhegel.htm
http://mars.acnet.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/germany/lectures/05revolution.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Beiser, F.C., The Cambridge companion to Hegel, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1993, p. 256
[2] Shklar, J.N., Freedom and Independence, London, Cambridge
University Press, 1976, p.69
[3] Taylor, C., Hegel, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984,
p.373
[4] Taylor, C., Hegel, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984,
p.373
[5] Taylor, C op. cit. p. 375
[6] Pelzynkski Z. A., Hegel’s Political Philosophy, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1971, p.54
[7] Pelzynkski, Z. op. cit. p. 545
[8] Pelzynkski Z. A., Hegel’s Political Philosophy, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1971, p.55
We may think of chocolates as God's gift to humanity as they may soothes all our problems and suffering. But, have you ever wonder that these chocolates – sweet, good and pleasurable as it may, have dark sides?.
The citizens of France, inspired by the enlightenment, desired a government run by the people. Marquis de Lafayette wrote, “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights; social distinctions may be based only upon general usefulness” (de Lafayette 783). The French wanted to bring equality to all classes. The French revolution brought much more social change than the American revolution. Inspired by Lafayette’s declaration that, “no group, no individual may exercise authority not emanating expressly therefrom” (de Lafayette 783), the class system was destroyed. The revolutionaries were open to ending slavery, however women remained marginalized within the social structure of France. Similarly to the American revolution, the enlightenment ideas that drove the French revolution were not applied to society as a
would change became reality. This was a threat to the power of the king. The different
The French and American Revolutions were derived amongst similar motivations to better their governments. However, they differ on other levels based on their actions and outcomes. The American and French revolutions both wanted its citizens to be viewed as equals, just as well as allow them to have some natural rights. Sovereignty however is, viewed differently by the two parties. The core reason for each revolution differs, but they both have the same ending results of a declarations document. Both documents are composed based off enlightenment thinkers John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government and Jean Jacques Rousseau’s Social Contract. The Declaration of Independence was mostly Locke’s theory. While the Declaration of the Rights of Man favored both theories.
During the late 1700's, two great revolutions occurred, the American Revolution and the French Revolution. These two historical events happened at the same time, but had a great number of differences and very little similarity. When French Revolution occurred, it turned into a very violent and bloody event, while the American Revolution was almost nonviolent, aside from the war. In 1774, King Louis XVI made a decision that could have prevented the French Revolution by breathing new life into the French economy: he appointed Physiocrat Robert Turgot as Controller General of Finance.
In 1806, nearly two hundred years before Fukuyama’s audacious historical stance, George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel declared the end of history. Hegel bases his claim in that the Napoleonic Code, a preliminary, yet revolutionary replacement of previous feudal laws, was being promulgated and slowly implemented throughout Napoleon’s empire . Hegel believes, however, that the adoption of a particular code or set of standards for a civil society, like the Napoleonic Code or the Constitution of the United States, is stipulated on the rational evolution or progression of peoples towards the realization that they are free or equal. In short, a constitution that guarantees your freedom means nothing to those who do not possess the self-consciousness
On Revolution, a book Hannah Arendt published in 1963, after Eichmann’s trial. The book didn’t gain a lot of popularity at first due to the remarkable Eichmann in Jerusalem notability. On Revolution is a work of dichotomies. Arendt compared and differentiated between the French and the American Revolution. How one was successful and how the other was less successful according to her perspectives. To begin with, Arendt defines revolution as a new beginning, a novelty, an irresistible force, something that is unprecedented that cannot be controlled. She also stressed further more on this point that a revolution should have the ability to create something new that would result in more space of freedom. Arendt does not favor the liberal view of freedom, as it is the case in the American model: “pursuit of happiness”. Freedom, according to Arendt, is the freedom of participating in the political life, being an active member in politics instead of being partially active during the elections only. Arendt observed these revolutions and wanted to know what they signify. On Revolution is a narrative of the French and the American revolutions. The book received criticism and Arendt’s historical account came under-attack by historians and experts from the both side. The fact that she referred to the American Revolution as a revolution instead of calling it the war of independence stunned many. Hence not only her views and claims were problematic to some but also the title. In this paper, I’m going to argue and point out the differences between the French Revolution and the American Revolution in line with Arendt’s theory of revolution.
While the problems within civil society may differ for these two thinkers it is uncanny how similar their concepts of freedom are, sometimes even working as a logical expansion of one another. Even in their differences they shed light onto new problems and possible solutions, almost working in tandem to create a freer world. Rousseau may not introduce any process to achieve complete freedom but his theorization of the general will laid the groundwork for much of Marx’s work; similarly Marx’s call for revolution not only strengthens his own argument but also Rousseau’s.
As presented in the Phenomenology of Spirit, the aim of Life is to free itself from confinement "in-itself" and to become "for-itself." Not only does Hegel place this unfolding of Life at the very beginning of the dialectical development of self-consciousness, but he characterizes self-consciousness itself as a form of Life and points to the advancement of self-consciousness in the Master/Slave dialectic as the development of Life becoming "for-itself." This paper seeks to delineate this often overlooked thread of dialectical insight as it unfolds in the Master/Slave dialectic. Hegel articulates a vision of the place of human self-consciousness in the process of Life as a whole and throws light on the role of death as an essential ingredient in the epic drama of life's struggle and Spirit's birth.
“Society was cut in two: those who had nothing united in common envy; those who had anything united in common terror.” The French Revolution was a painful era that molded the lives of every citizen living in France and changed their ways of life forever. Beginning in 1789 and lasting ten years until 1799, the people of France lived in a monarch society under King Louis XVI’s rule. He was a very harsh ruler and had many restrictions placed on his people. They eventually overthrow him and become a monarch society. Among his deceptive ways, the people also experienced “The Reign of Terror,” which was a period where many lives were taken by the guillotine. Other revolutionary events included rebellions, constitutions, and groups. One of the popular groups that contributed greatly to the French Revolution were the Jacobins who were led by Maximilien Robespierre.
The French Revolution was a period of upheaval in France, during which the French governmental structure and Catholic clergy underwent a large change due to Enlightenment ideas. The commoners of France began to revolt after hearing the ideas of famous philosophes like Voltaire. Voltaire was a deist who believed that the Catholic Church and its doctrines were not to be trusted since they used propoganda to get followers rather than the actual religion. He believed it was unfair that there wasn’t any religious freedom since you were expected to be a Catholic. He spoke openly about this, which of course got him into a lot of trouble. Nevertheless, the French commoners took his word into thought and decided to act upon what he said by revolting against the church. Voltaire’s ideas also critized royal absolutism because they had, in his opinion, too much power. He favored an elightened absolutist, which is an absolutist who adopts Enlightenment ideas. Once again, the French commoners took this to heart and agreed with Voltaire that the French government was too ...
Human beings have been struggling to learn the meaning of life since the first day. Ideologies are born as human’s interpretation of the world and belief system, also an endeavor to seek the truth of human nature. Ideologies emerge throughout the periods of great changes: the Enlightenment, the English “Glorious” Revolution, the American Revolution, etc. They have become the motivations, the standards, and the roots to modern political systems. Their roots are the philosophies developed by famous philosophers throughout the time. However, as each ideology is developed, its own contradiction also grows, takes place in the realm of actions. This, in turn, shows contradiction as human nature.
The French Revolution represents a period in history that brought about a major change in not only Europe but the entire world. The French revolution spanned from 1789 to 1799. It brought about several key changes in not only the economic state of France but also the perception of the Christian church, specifically the Catholic church in France. Its impacts both economically and religiously are still felt to this day. The French Revolution may have temporarily destroyed Christianity in France, however, it acted as a savior for the future of Christianity.
One of the most fundamental concerns throughout mankind have been the subject of a fully free emancipated humankind. Throughout history, philosophers have been in constant discussion in figuring out a way to respect human rights, while at the same time, preserve a well-ordered society. One of the schools of thought that demonstrate this type of society is liberalism. Liberalism is defined as “a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties” (Dictionary, 2017). Although most
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.