Re-writing an already completed assignment

Ludwin Vasquez

Professor Paul Warren

PHP 4510

January 22, 2021

Study Questions, Set #1

Hegel’s Introduction to the Philosophy of History

(Q1) In chapter 1 of Introduction to the Philosophy of History Hegel introduces a threefold distinction between original, reflective, and philosophic history. How does he characterize original history? What role does the notion of “spirit” play in Hegel’s explanation of original history? (3-6)

Hegel says that original history is written by those who have witnessed history happen, be it in the first person or by reports, the essential aspect of this type of history is that they were written contemporarily, by what the authors thought were important events. Original history is characterized by the spirit of that specific time. Spirit plays a big role, as historians shared the spirit of their time. He gives examples of Caesar’s commentaries and Thucydides who witnessed and even made history.

(Q2) How does Hegel describe “reflective history”? How does it differ from “original history”? Note that, again, the notion of spirit seems to have a role in Hegel’s explanation. (6)

Reflective history is described as history presented in another time and thus, with another spirit. It differs from original history in that reflective history has another perspective, coming from another time and spirit, and has a wider scope. The most essential difference is that it is not within a historian’s lifetime. The spirit of reflective history is different, for example, an American may write of ancient Rome, with the spirit of modernity.

(Q3) What kinds of reflective history are there? (6-9) List them and briefly explain what’s involved in each and how they differ from one another according to Hegel.

a) Universal History: Universal history is history written by a person with their spirit about a wide period, Hegel differentiates this from the spirit in the content itself. The author may also have principles. Examples include Livy’s history of Rome or a history of a people in general.

b) Pragmatic: This type of history tries to bring events from the past and sort of making them more real in order to bring or support an argument or idea by the author. The author tries to “validate his own spirit through the spirit of the time”. An example is a moral lesson by historians.

c) Critical: Critical history is not a type of history that creates new content but as Hegel says, it is a “history of historical writing”. The key distinction here is the evaluation of works of history. However, it must be pointed out that some new things are revealed. An example would be a modern historian criticizing Caesar’s work as biased or propagandistic.

d) Specialized: This type of history is more narrow and focuses on other non-historical concepts per se, this may include the history of religion, art, writing…

(Q4) In a dense passage on the top of p. 10 Hegel seems to make a transition from reflective history to philosophic history. A key notion in this transition seems to be the recognition that “general viewpoints” or “universal viewpoints” need to be grasped not as an “external order” but as the “inner guiding soul of the events and actions.” Try to explain what Hegel is getting at. Consider too what Hegel goes on to say about “the Idea,” which is said to be “truly the guide of the nations of the world” and “Spirit,” which as the Idea’s “rational and necessary will” guides and has guided the course of events in history.” Say also what you find unclear and confusing in the passage.

Hegel is trying to say that history is limited in a way because it only looks at the results, events, and actions, rather than what is actually responsible for it, the spirit. However, it is close in the way that general viewpoints and universal viewpoints are discovered, although only applied as external. Hegel explains that the spirit is what guides history not as an external event but as an internal event within the world itself.

(Q5) In Chapter 2, ‘Reason in History,’ Hegel talks about his approach as centering on the notion that “Reason rules the world.” (12) Don’t worry too much about his somewhat obscure discussion of this conviction in philosophy (12-14) at the start of the chapter. Focus instead on trying to understand the two versions of the “general conviction” that reason rules world history that he discusses starting in the middle on page 14. What’s involved in the first version that Hegel associates with the ancient Greek philosopher Anaxagoras? Why was Socrates dissatisfied with Anaxagoras’ principle? What important distinction does Hegel make in the light of the foregoing discussion? (15)

The first general conviction that Reason rules the world is that the world is governed by laws, physical laws, and they are the reason for its being, this version was brought upon by Anaxagoras. Socrates agreed with him in the concept that reason rules the world, but he pointed out that Anaxagoras failed to explain how concretely. The second general conviction is that providence rules the world, the world is governed by it, events are already planned and laid out, and providence itself will provide proof. The distinction that Hegel makes is the difference between the abstract and the concrete or how does Reason in the abstract comes to rule the world (concrete) and he will answer it.

(Q6) What’s involved in the second version of the conviction that “reason rules the world”? (15) In your answer say what you think Hegel means by the belief in providence (16-17).

Providence, and thus the religious aspect of it is what is involved in the second conviction. I think that what Hegel means by providence is that things have a way of being, or there is a reason why things happen.

(Q7) On p. 18 Hegel describes his philosophical approach to history as a theodicy. What does he mean by this? More specifically, how are the notions of “evil” and “intellectual reconciliation” involved in his approach?

Hegel means that through analyzing the negative, he can attain the positive. Similar to how he said Leibnitz justified God through categorizing evil and reconciling with it. The notions of evil involve the negative aspect, if the positive is understood as Reason rules the world then it is necessary to analyze the unreasonable and disorderly things in the history of the world, only then, with the opposing of these two can reason reconcile and the negative disappear.

(Q8) In Chapter 3, “Freedom, the Individual, and the State” Hegel tries to work out his philosophy of history in more depth and detail. The notion of Spirit (Geist) is central to his account. What, according to Hegel, is the “nature of Spirit”? (20-23) What role do the notions of “development” and “final goal” play in his account of Spirit?

The nature of the spirit to Hegel is unity and more importantly, freedom. Hegel mentions that development is important because we want to reach the goal, freedom. Hegel makes an analogy of spirit being the seed that guides history.

(Q9) In Hegel’s discussion of the “means” by which freedom develops in the world, he compares history to a “slaughter-bench.” (23-24) What’s the point of this image? What question arises? How does he address it?

The point of the image of history as a slaughter-bench is to demonstrate that sacrifices have been made towards the end goal of history. A person may think that history is driven by men with passions and desires such as Caesar and Napoleon, but Hegel thinks there is an ultimate goal that makes those sacrifices (wars, pestilences, and tragedies) worthy of a cause. The question is then what was the purpose of such sacrifices? Which Hegel answers with the end goal of history.

(Q10) What is the “second element” or “second essential element” that is required for actualization of Spirit? (25-27) Hint: Hegel also calls this the “subjective aspect.” (28)

The first element is the end goal and for the first element to come about then the second element actualization of the spirit is necessary, that is human activity or the will.

(Q11) What are “world-historical individuals”? What examples does he discuss? (32-35)

The world-historical individuals are important individuals that drive history and embody the spirit or idea (geist). He discusses Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Alexander of Macedon.

(Q12) In conjunction with his discussion of world-historical individuals, Hegel introduces the notion of the “Cunning of Reason.” What does he have in mind? (35)

The cunning of Reason is a concept that says that Reason works behind, sort of a puppeteer which pays its existence in the blood of men, it tricks men into aligning their will to that which Reason wants them to do to achieve its ultimate end.

(Q13) In the last section of Chapter 3 Hegel turns to a discussion of the State as a kind of ethical totality within which true freedom for individuals is to be found. He states: “...the State is the realization of freedom” (41). How does Hegel seem to understand the notion of freedom? In trying to answer this question consider the contrast Hegel draws with the concept of ‘negative freedom’ and also his discussion of the idea that “Only the will that is obedient to the law is free...” (42)

Hegel sees the state in fulfilling freedom, not in the negative sense such as limiting the subjective or individual freedom. Hegel has a more positive view of freedom, viewing the state as fulfilling freedom, individual and universal freedom. The union of the universal will and subjective will are found in the state for Hegel. To Hegel, the state is the objectification of the spirit and freedom, and it is composed of laws, therefore, the person who obeys laws is free.

(Q14) What is the gist of Hegel’s critique of the theory of the “state of nature”? (43-44)

Hegel’s critique of the “state of nature” theory lies in the fact that it views the state as limiting freedom rather than supporting it. He also criticizes the theory as unrealistic in the sense that freedom as an ideal is not found in the state of nature. He thinks that such a barbaric world of the state of nature is filled with violence and unfree in the sense that there is no morality or law. Overall, Hegel rejects the individualistic view of freedom.

(Q15) Hegel thinks of the State as a kind of “historical totality” (48-49) or “organic whole” whose people share an animating spirit (German: Volksgeist). Try to explain this conception in your own words. Consider also Hegel’s summary on p. 55.

Hegel views the state as a unity of spirit, the individual and universal wills. A person is part of the whole state, it is shaped by it, and the state is shaped by them. The unity of individual and universal is the idea or spirit (geist). Even if the state is separated from other aspects, it constitutes a unique unity. For example, France and Spain may both be European democracies but they have a different spirit, their people even if they may look the same sometimes are different, they have a different culture, even if they share the same liberal principles. They are also organic, France influences the French people and its people influence their state.

(Q16) In the chapter "The Division of History" (92-98) Hegel identifies four stages of world history. What are they? Briefly explain how Hegel characterizes each stage and the progress that he sees in history's development. 

a) The first stage of history for Hegel is the oriental, meaning a patriarchal rule. It is an age in which only one person is free, and all others are subject to such person’s will. The state is embodied in one person. Hegel gives the example of China.

b) The second stage of history is the Greek world, it is an era in which some people were free, meaning the citizens of a city-state. An example would be Athens and how few citizens lived off a lot of slaves.

c) The third state is the Roman period, he says it is characterized by abstract universality. He says that the man works for the common good, the shared life. People don’t enjoy life per se but they through hard work attain abstract universality.

d) The last stage is the Germanic period. This period infers the end of the western Roman Empire and the rise of the modern Germanic European states, such as how the kingdom of the Franks evolved into France, etc. Hegel mentions that at first, the church was more powerful than the state, but now the state has gained more power and even spirituality with the spirit. The Spirit now has the means from which to attain its goal. In the early pages, Hegel said that in the Germanic period all people are free.