System and Certainty Sensitive at Hegel and Bradley
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4294152Keywords:
Hegel, Bradley, system, language, feelingAbstract
Bradley has often been called a Neo-Hegelian, but the points of tangency between the two philosophers are rather thin. The main reference to the German philosopher concerns the figure of the sensible certainty, which opens up the Hegelian system in its phenomenological version. Bradley sees it as the knot of immediate experience on which the form of his system depends. But his interpretation of it differs radically from that of Hegel. Whereas for Bradley the discordance between the singular immediate feeling and the expression of a "this" - which in itself is universal - is a sign of the failure of discursive thought, for Hegel it is less a problem of language than a problem within language. Hegel then tries to remedy within language the problem of subjective instantiation, while Bradley tries to indicate a beyond of language in a normative absolute. From this, one can understand the decidedly different focus of the two systems.
The Hegelian system will try to construct a discourse which, in the universality of the spoken word, reflects the singular aim, which will lead it to envisage the whole no longer through immediate feeling, but through the mediations of culture. The Bradleyan system, which is more sceptical about language, takes a critical perspective. It dramatises the tension between feeling and discursive thought and, by insisting on the inadequacy of these two levels, postulates the idea of an absolute of experience that can only be approached negatively.
References
AGAMBEN G. (1982). Il linguaggio e la morte. Un seminario sul luogo della negatività, Torino: Einaudi.
BODAMMER B. (1969). Hegels Deutung der Sprache: Interpretationen zu Hegels Ausserungen über die Sprache, Hamburg: Meiner.
BOSANQUET B. (1885). Knowledge and Reality. A Criticism of Mr. F.H. Bradley’s Principles of Logic, London: Paul Kegan.
BOURGEOIS B. (2008). « La philosophie du langage dans la Phénoménologie de l’esprit», in BOURGEOIS B. (ed.). Hegel. Bicentenaire de la Phénoménologie de l'esprit, Paris: Vrin.
BRADLEY F. H. (1873-1874). « Relativity of Knowledge », Collected Works of F.H. Bradley. Vol 1 : A Pluralistic Approach to Philosophy, Bristol: Thoemmes Press (1999).
BRADLEY F. H. (1872-1904). Collected works of F. H. Bradley. Vol. 4. Selected Correspondence (1872-1904), Bristol: Thoemmes Press (1999).
BRADLEY F. H. (1883). Principles of Logic, London: Oxford University Press.
BRADLEY F.H. (1897²). Appearance and Reality, London: Swan Sonnenschein.
BRADLEY F.H. (1914). Essays on Truth and Reality, Oxford: Clarendon.
BRADLEY F.H. (1935). Collected Essays, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
FEUERBACH L. (1839). « Contribution à la critique de la philosophie de Hegel », in: Manifestes philosophiques (trad. Althusser L.), Paris: PUF (1960).
FICHTE J.G. (1795). « Von der Sprachfähigkeit und dem Ursprung der Sprache », Gesammelte Werke, Band 1.3, Stuttgart: Bad-Cannstatt: 97-127.
GOLDSCHMIDT G-A. (2009). A l’insu de Babel, Paris: CNRS-éditions.
HEGEL G.W.F. (GW 4). Jenaer kritische Schriften, Hamburg: Meiner (1968).
HEGEL G.W.F. (GW 9). Phänomenologie des Geistes, Hamburg: Meiner (1980).
HEGEL G.W.F. (Werke 10). Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp (1986).
LEJEUNE G. (2013). « Holismus und Atomismus. Die analytische Tradition im Lichte der Hegelschen Philosophie », Hegel-Jahrbuch, Vol. 19.
LEJEUNE G. (2014a). Sens et usage du langage chez Hegel, Paris: Hermann.
LEJEUNE G. (2014b). « Le vouloir dans le dire. Essai sur l’instanciation du discours hégélien », Methodos, Vol. 14.
LEJEUNE G. (2014c). « Reconstruction systématique de la fonction linguistique dans l’esprit objectif de Hegel », Revue Philosophique de Louvain, Vol. 112/1.
LIEBRUCKS B. (1964). Sprache und Bewußtsein, Band 1, Einleitung, Spannweite des Problems : von den undialektischen Gebilden zur dialektischen Bewegung. Frankfurt: Akademie Verlag-Gesellschaft.
LOREAU M. (1987). En quête d’un autre commencement. Bruxelles: Lebeer-Hossmann.
LOTZE R. H. (1843). Logik. Leipzig: Weidmann’sche Buchhandlung.
OAKESHOTT M. (1933). Experience and Its Modes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
QUILLIEN J. (1968). « Langage et esprit objectif », in Actes du Congrès Hegel de Lille, Villeneuve D’Asq : PUL.
ROSAYE J-P. (2012). F.H. Bradley et l’idéalisme britannique. Les années de formation (1865- 1876), Arras: Presses Universitaires d’Artois.
SEBA J-R. (2006). Le partage de l’empirique et du transcendantal, Bruxelles: Ousia.
SIMON S. (1966). Das Problem der Sprache bei Hegel, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
SWIFT J. (1726). Les Voyages de Gulliver (trad. Pons É.), in OEuvres complètes, Paris: Gallimard, La Pléiade(1965).
STEKELER-WEITHOFER P. (1992). Hegels analytische Philosophie. Die Wissenschaft der Logik als kritische Theorie der Bedeutung, Paderborn: Schöningh.
STEKELER P. (2014). Hegels Phänomenologie des Geistes. Ein dialogischer Kommentar, Hamburg: Meiner.
VETÖ M. (2000). « Les métamorphoses de la causalité dans la logique de Hegel », Revue Philosophique de Louvain, Vol. 98/3.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Guillaume Lejeune
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
CC BY-NC-SA: This license allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms.
