The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast
A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog
Seth, Wes and Dylan re-introduce this episode from ten years ago on G.F.W. Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit, Ch. 4A “Self-Consciousness,” which features guest Tom McDonald.
We’ve removed the “review” section of the old episode (the first half), because it’s duplicative of our recent three-episode run on this book. The old discussion thus picks up in the book right where ep. 277 leaves off.
Continuing on The Phenomenology of Spirit ch. 3, “Force and the Understanding.”
We start off by considering the players in force: the thing exerting the force and the thing receiving. By arguing that these are not so different, Hegel moves to arguing that knowledge and the world are likewise not sharply distinguished.
On The Phenomenology of Spirit ch. 3, “Force and the Understanding.”
What is “force” as physics describes it? And scientific law? Do these terms denote objects in the world, or models for how we describe the world?
Focusing on The Phenomenology of Spirit (1807), ch. 2 “Perception.”
Hegel’s critique of the adequacy of perceptual knowledge has metaphysical aspects: The relation of substance to properties, properties to each other, and things to other things and to the perceiver all create difficulties that call for more active participation by the mind.
On The Phenomenology of Spirit (1807), ch. 1 “Sense Certainty” and ch. 2 “Perception.”
We walk through the first step in considering Hegel’s dialectical analysis of theories of knowledge. Sense-certainty claims that we have direct access to sensory particulars which can act as foundational. But can we really refer or point to a particular thing without bringing some universal concepts to bear, like “this” (which can refer to any number of things), as well as “here”, “now” and even “I”?
Continuing on the Introduction, we get into more detail on Hegel’s goal and his tricky terminology.
On G.W.F. Hegel’s 1807 opus: A series of treatments of various theories in epistemology (among other things), seeing how they’re internally incoherent, which then moves us to more sophisticated theories.
Concluding on Schelling’s System of Transcendental Idealism (1800), Parts 1 and 2.
What sort of self is created in the act of self-consciousness that according to Schelling grounds all knowledge? We further consider this primordial act.
On Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling’s System of Transcendental Idealism (1800), Parts 1 and 2.
What is self-consciousness, and how did Schelling think that it grounds all of knowledge?
Continuing on the introduction of Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling’s System of Transcendental Idealism (1800).
We talk psychologism, the harmony between mind and world, imputing intelligence to nature, natural law vs. teleology, and the aesthetic character of apprehending nature.
On Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling’s System of Transcendental Idealism (1800).
What’s the relationship between mind and world? Schelling thought that our minds produce the world, but also that the perceiver-world dichotomy comes to us as a single piece. “Transcendental philosophy” is an exploration of the internal logic of that revelation.
Concluding on The Vocation of Man (1799).
Our focus here is largely on how ethics fits in with Fichte’s epistemology in a unified theology with humans literally united (in this world or the next) in a shared, divine Will.
Our second full discussion on The Vocation of Man (1799).
What are the ethical implications of believing that the world is all in our minds? You could be a solipsistic nihilist, but Fichte thinks the path of faith is unavoidable for a reasonable person: faith that the world is real and matters, that other people have moral status, and yes, he’s going to argue for God and heaven, though unconventionally.
Continuing from part one on The Vocation of Man (1799), Book II.
In this preview, we clarify whether Fichte is trying to keep the notion of a “real world” beyond our experience or not. It’s part of the progression of the text that while at first he assumes that there must be something real behind this experienced world we as individuals create, he gives up that notion in the middle of Book II. So how does he get to his startling reversal? First he develops the notion of “intuition” as distinct from perception to explain how we perceive space. Really, we just have these point-to-point experiences of color, but we somehow unconsciously synthesize these into perception of a whole covered surface.
On The Vocation of Man (1799), Books I and II. What is reality? Fichte’s armchair journey starts him considering nature and thus himself as determined, but then he backtracks to say that actually, experience doesn’t tell us whether we’re determined or free. In Book II, he argues that since our experience is always of something going on in ourselves, then all of our concepts like causality, the external world, and the self must be really just our own mental creations. So we’re free after all, yet everything is drained of significance! Tune into ep. 272 for the resolution of this drama!
Continuing on God and the World’s Arrangement: Readings from Vedanta and Nyaya Philosophy of Religion after the departure of our guest, Stephen Phillips.
We’re all familiar with the design argument, so why wade through all these unfamiliar schools and archaic formulations? Mark, Seth, and Wes talk more about these readings in the Indian context of liberation, reason vs. revelation, and whether we might want to read anything else like this and under what conditions.
On God and the World’s Arrangement: Readings from Vedanta and Nyaya Philosophy of Religion with one of its translators, Stephen Phillips.
Does nature require an intelligent designer? Śaṅkara (710 CE) and Vācaspati Miśra (960 CE), commenting on the Brahma-sūtra (ca. 200 CE) and Nyāya-sūtra (ca. 200 BCE), argue that it does against atheistic Buddhists, Sāṃkhya believers in a primordial matter that acts on its own, and the Mīmāṃsā conservatives who so venerated scripture that they ruled out a God who created it. But if we’re all Brahman (God), just trying to discover that we are and so escape the cycle of rebirth, then where is there room for a particular deity who created us?
A new limited (?) series is afoot in PEL-land: Mark joins with improvisational comedy instructor Bill Arnett for an exciting encounter between two areas of expertise. Will this week’s lesson in improv or philosophy have the most profound effect? NO TAKING TURNS.
Continuing on “On the Nature of Totalitarianism” and On the Origins of Totalitarianism, ch. 13 (both from around 1953).
We further discuss the logic of totalitarianism and and its relevance for contemporary political movements. Has Arendt captured an authentic, novel danger, or is what she diagnoses more a modern manifestation of an old problem, or was it merely a horrific oddity of her historical period?
On “On the Nature of Totalitarianism” and On the Origins of Totalitarianism ch. 13 (both from 1953).
Is totalitarianism just an especially virulent form of tyranny, or something unique to the modern age? Arendt says that unlike other forms of government, totalitarianism is not animated by an active psychological principle that motivates its participants. Instead terror is designed to make citizens incapable of agency altogether.
