No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
External or Intrinsic Purpose—What comes first? On Hegel's Treatment of Teleology
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 January 2023
Abstract
Hegel's philosophy of biology is one of the strongest chapters of Hegel's Philosophy of Nature. It can be argued that Hegel's understanding of organicity underscores the explanatory power of ‘dialectical thinking’, as Hegel himself claims. Hegel's interpretation of organicity is based upon the logical development of categories in his chapter on Objectivity of his Logic. If we compare Hegel's treatment of teleology in the Logic with his interpretation of organicity in his Philosophy of Nature, a mismatch can be found. In the Logic, Hegel introduces the notion of life (Leben) after the chapter on Objectivity, i.e. after elaborating on external teleology. In his Philosophy of Nature, the notion of the inner purposiveness of organicity belongs to the externality of nature. This article compares Hegel's treatment of teleology in his Logic and his Philosophy of Nature, reconstructs possible explanations for mismatches and offers a possible solution to the question whether the notion of life should be regarded as the last part of the chapter on teleology or the first part of the chapter on the Idea.
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Hegel Society of Great Britain
References
Bowman, B. (2013), Hegel and the Metaphysics of Absolute Negativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furlotte, W. (2018), The Problem of Nature in Hegel's Final System . Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Gambarotto, A. (2017), ‘An Unstable Middle Position. The Kantian Account of Teleology and Its Controversial Legacy’, Estudos Kantianos 5:2: 91–104.Google Scholar
Gambarotto, A. and Illetterati, L. (2020), ‘Hegel's Philosophy of Biology? A Programmatic Overview’, Hegel Bulletin 41:3: 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herder, J. G. (1784–91), ‘Ideen zur Philosophie der Geschichte der Menschheit’, in Brummack, J. and Bollacher, M. (eds.), Johann Gottfried Herder. Werke in zehn Bänden, vol. 6. Frankfurt: Deutsche Klassiker.Google Scholar
Hösle, V. (1988), Hegels System: der Idealismus der Subjektivität und das Problem der Intersubjektivität. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.Google Scholar
Houlgate, S. (ed.) (1998), Hegel and the Philosophy of Nature. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Houlgate, S. (2002), ‘Logic and Nature in Hegel's Philosophy. A Response to John W. Burbidge’, The Owl of Minerva 34:1: 107–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingensiep, H.-W. (2004), ‘Organismus und Leben bei Kant’, in Ingensiep, H. W. (ed.), Kant-Reader: Was kann ich wissen? Was soll ich tun? Was darf ich hoffen? Würzburg: Königshausen and Neumann.Google Scholar
Kabeshkin, A. (2022a), ‘Logical and Natural Life in Hegel’, European Journal of Philosophy 30:1: 129–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kabeshkin, A. (2022b), ‘Hegel's Metaphysics of Nature’, European Journal of Philosophy 30:2: 778–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalenberg, T. (1997), Die Befreiung der Natur: Natur und Selbstbewusstsein in der Philosophie Hegels. Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
Kreines, J. (2004), ‘Hegel's Critique of Pure Mechanism and the Philosophical Appeal of the Logic Project’, European Journal of Philosophy 12:1: 38–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreines, J. (2015), Reason in the World. Hegel's Metaphysics and its Philosophical Appeal. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, C. G. (2012), Ontologie der Selbstbestimmung: eine operationale Rekonstruktion von Hegels ‘Wissenschaft der Logik’. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ng, K. (2020), Hegel's Concept of Life: Self-Consciousness, Freedom, Logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, R. J. (2004), The Romantic Conception of Life: Science and Philosophy in the Age of Goethe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sell, A. (2013), Der lebendige Begriff: Leben und Logik bei G. W. F. Hegel. Freiburg: Karl Alber.Google Scholar
Spahn, C. (2007), Lebendiger Begriff, begriffenes Leben: Zur Grundlegung der Philosophie des Organischen bei G. W. F. Hegel. Würzburg: Königshausen and Neumann.Google Scholar
Spahn, C. (2011), ‘Qualia und Moralia: Auf der Suche nach dem Vernünftigen im Organischen und dem Natürlichen in der Vernunft’, in Tewes, C. and Vieweg, K. (eds.), Natur und Geist. Über ihre evolutionäre Verhältnisbestimmung. Berlin: Akademie.Google Scholar
Spahn, C. (2020a), ‘Die Zweckmäßigkeit des Lebendigen bei Kant und Hegel aus heutiger Perspektive’, Hegel-Yeongu 48:2: 123–48.Google Scholar
Stone, A. (2005), Petrified Intelligence: Nature in Hegel's Philosophy. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, E. (2007), Mind in Life: Biology, Phenomenology, and the Sciences of Mind. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wandschneider, D. (1987), ‘Anfänge des Seelischen in der Natur in der Deutung der hegelschen Naturphilosophie und in systemtheoretischer Rekonstruktion’, in Petry, M. J. (ed.), Hegel und die Naturwissenschaften, Stuttgart/Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.Google Scholar
Wandschneider, D. (2000), ‘Hegel und die Evolution’, in Breidbach, O. and Engelhardt, D. v. (eds.), Hegel und die Lebenswissenschaften. Berlin: Verlag für Wissenschaft und Bildung.Google Scholar
Wandschneider, D. (2015), ‘Die Entäußerung der Idee zur Natur bei Hegel und ihre ontologische Bedeutung’, in Neuser, W. and Lange, S. (eds.), Natur zwischen Logik und Geschichte. Beiträge zu Hegels Naturphilosophie. Würzburg: Königshausen and Neumann.Google Scholar
Welsch, W. (2008), ‘Absoluter Idealismus und Evolutionsdenken’, in Welsch, W. and Vieweg, K. (eds.), Hegels Phänomenologie des Geistes. Ein kooperativer Kommentar zu einem Schlüsselwerk der Moderne. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Zammito, J. H. (2007), ‘Teleology Then and Now: The Question of Kant's Relevance for Contemporary Controversies over Function in Biology’, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 37:4: 748–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar