For me, there isn’t “synthesis” in Hegel, if by that one means “a final and stable unity.” For Hegel, nothing ends, because every end contains a beginning as every beginning contains an end.Ī final opening note of clarification: Hegel’s dialectic is not simply an epistemological tool he brings to his philosophy and topics of investigation, but a movement he finds in things and/or concepts themselves when he tries to understand them without presupposition, without assuming prior categories, etc. Hegel’s dialectic doesn’t end, let alone end in a “synthesis” (by which I mean a “Total Unity”): it’s an eternal tension (or “contradiction,” but by this Hegel doesn’t mean “effacement,” but instead something more like “paradox,” “tension,” etc.). Arguably, Hegel’s dialectic isn’t primarily a method at all, even if it does lend itself into generating a mental model.Īnyway, unfortunately, the second understanding of “dialectics” more so found in Hegel has been almost completely lost to us because of the phrase “thesis, antithesis, and synthesis,” which is well-known as not being readily found in Hegel as a prime triad. Though in this work our points might have an epistemological emphasis, my intent is never to suggest Hegel’s dialectic is just a model for thinking. Yes, this ontology can generate a corresponding epistemology, but we should understand straightaway that Hegel is in the business of ontoepistemology (not just ontology, and not just epistemology). The second kind of dialectic is something akin to what Hegel wrote on, though ultimately we’ll have to understand that Hegel’s dialectic is not merely epistemological but also ontological, a description of how things “are” in themselves. Ultimately, the thesis comes into interaction with the antithesis to allow convention to prevail, leveraging and isolating Edna before she commits suicide.Episode #21: “Hegelian Dialectics” Are Not “Discussion Dialectics”īut this is not the only kind of dialectic, and frankly I often wish the term “dialectic” was never used as a simile for “discussion, debate, etc.,” for that has contributed to confusion. Third, interaction between individuality and convention tips the balance in favor of convention for the following main reasons: Edna's compliance and ambivalence and Robert's wavering and estrangement. Second, individualism is mainly represented by Edna who struggles to put her inner self first, her misogamy, and her extramarital romances. First, convention in the novel is represented by stringent social norms, patriarchy, matrimony, and women's conformity with them. The study has managed to answer its key research questions. Hegel's framework of thesis, antithesis and synthesis is applicable to the analysis of the opposing themes. ![]() It examines the work to discover the vacillations of the heroine between rebellion and conformity and evaluate the outcome. The significance of the study lies in the fact that it fills a gap in knowledge that has not been fully addressed in relation to the theme of individuality and convention using Hegel's dialectics. ![]() This research paper studies the themes of individuality and convention in Kate Chopin's The Awakening from a Hegelian dialectic perspective.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |