गेऑर्ग विल्हेल्म फ़्रीडरिश हेगल
हेगल के अनुसार, सत्य समग्र है: इतिहास, चिंतन और समाज संघर्षों और उनके समाधान के द्वारा, निरंतर अधिक स्वतंत्रता और आत्म-चेतना की ओर विकसित होते हैं।
पृष्ठभूमि
आत्मा का द्वंद्ववाद: सत्य संपूर्ण है, और विश्व-इतिहास स्वतंत्रता की चेतना में प्रगति है।
मुख्य विचार
- द्वंद्ववाद
- निरपेक्ष आत्मा
- स्वामी और दास
- उत्थान-समाहार (Aufhebung)
शिष्य: लुडविग फ़ॉयरबाख़, मैक्स श्टिर्नर
प्रभाव
जिनसे प्रभावित 11
हेरक्लिटस
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Hegel said there is no proposition of Heraclitus he had not taken into his Logic, where becoming unites being and nothing (Lectures on the History of Philosophy, 1833). G. W. F. Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie, ed. K. L. Michelet (1833); Wissenschaft der Logik (1812)
हेरक्लिटस › लगभग 535–475 ईसा पूर्व
प्लेटो
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Hegel read Plato’s Parmenides and Sophist as the beginning of speculative dialectic and, in the Philosophy of Right (1820), the Republic as an interpretation of Greek ethical life. G. W. F. Hegel, Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1820), Preface; Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie (1833); SEP “Hegel”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
प्लेटो › 428–348 ईसा पूर्व
अरस्तू
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Hegel closed his Encyclopaedia (1830) with Aristotle’s account of the divine thought that thinks itself, quoted in Greek from Book Lambda of the Metaphysics. G. W. F. Hegel, Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften (1830), conclusion; Aristotle, Metaphysics, Book Lambda; SEP “Hegel”
अरस्तू › 384–322 ईसा पूर्व
रने देकार्त
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Hegel made Descartes’ principle of thinking the start of modern philosophy: with him ‘we are at home’ (Lectures on the History of Philosophy, 1833–36). G. W. F. Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie III (ed. K. L. Michelet, 1836), section on Descartes
रने देकार्त › 1596–1650
बारुख़ स्पिनोज़ा
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Hegel held that thinking must begin with Spinoza’s substance, yet in the Phenomenology (1807) demanded that the true be grasped not only as substance but also as subject. G. W. F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes (1807), Preface; Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie (1833), “Spinoza”; SEP “Hegel”
बारुख़ स्पिनोज़ा › 1632–1677
जाँ-जाक रुसो
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Hegel credited Rousseau with making the will the principle of the state, though he faulted the general will as a common will of individuals (Philosophy of Right, 1820). G. W. F. Hegel, Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1820), on the state; SEP “Hegel’s Social and Political Philosophy”
जाँ-जाक रुसो › 1712–1778
सभी दिखाएँ (11)कम दिखाएँ
मोंतेस्क्यू
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
In the Philosophy of Right (1820) Hegel praised Montesquieu for treating laws not in isolation but as part of the whole character of a nation and its age. G. W. F. Hegel, Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1820), Introduction; SEP “Hegel’s Social and Political Philosophy”
मोंतेस्क्यू › 1689–1755
डेनिस दिदरो
जिनसे प्रभावित
In the Phenomenology of Spirit (1807) Hegel used Diderot’s Rameau’s Nephew, known from Goethe’s translation (1805), as the image of the ‘disrupted’ consciousness of culture. G. W. F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes (1807), “Der sich entfremdete Geist; die Bildung”; D. Diderot, Rameaus Neffe, tr. J. W. Goethe (1805)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
डेनिस दिदरो › 1713–1784
एडम फर्ग्यूसन
जिनसे प्रभावित
Hegel drew on Ferguson’s Institutes of Moral Philosophy, read in Garve’s translation, for his concept of civil society (Philosophy of Right, 1820), as N. Waszek showed. N. Waszek, The Scottish Enlightenment and Hegel’s Account of ‘Civil Society’ (1988); A. Ferguson, Grundsätze der Moralphilosophie, tr. C. Garve (1772); G. W. F. Hegel, Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1820)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एडम फर्ग्यूसन › 1723–1816
एडम स्मिथ
जिनसे प्रभावित
Hegel cited Smith’s pin factory on the division of labour in his Jena lectures (1803–04) and named Smith among the political economists in the Philosophy of Right (1820). G. W. F. Hegel, Jenaer Systementwürfe I (1803–04); Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1820); N. Waszek, The Scottish Enlightenment and Hegel’s Account of ‘Civil Society’ (1988)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एडम स्मिथ › 1723–1790
फ़्रीडरिश हेल्डरलिन
जिनसे प्रभावित
In Frankfurt (1797–1800) Hegel took up Hölderlin’s philosophy of unification, which shaped his early concepts of love and life, as D. Henrich has argued. D. Henrich, “Hegel und Hölderlin” (1970), in Hegel im Kontext (1971); G. W. F. Hegel, Der Geist des Christentums und sein Schicksal (1798–1800)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश हेल्डरलिन › 1770–1843
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया 43
विल्हेल्म डिल्थाई
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In Die Jugendgeschichte Hegels (1905) Dilthey opened up Hegel’s early theological manuscripts, and he took over Hegel’s objective spirit, without its metaphysics, for the human sciences (Aufbau, 1910). W. Dilthey, Die Jugendgeschichte Hegels (1905); Der Aufbau der geschichtlichen Welt in den Geisteswissenschaften (1910); SEP “Wilhelm Dilthey”
विल्हेल्म डिल्थाई › 1833–1911
जॉन डुई
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Dewey began as a Hegelian at Johns Hopkins and recalled in ‘From Absolutism to Experimentalism’ (1930) that Hegel had left a permanent deposit in his thinking. J. Dewey, “From Absolutism to Experimentalism” (1930); SEP “John Dewey”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
जॉन डुई › 1859–1952
ज्यां-पाल सार्त्र
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In Being and Nothingness (1943) Sartre took up Hegel’s struggle for recognition between consciousnesses to describe being-for-others, while denying any reconciling totality. J.-P. Sartre, L’Être et le néant (1943), “L’existence d’autrui”; SEP “Jean-Paul Sartre”
ज्यां-पाल सार्त्र › 1905–1980
मिशेल फूको
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Foucault wrote his diploma thesis on Hegel’s Phenomenology under Hyppolite (1949) and later said that his whole age was trying to escape Hegel (L’ordre du discours, 1971). M. Foucault, La constitution d’un transcendantal historique dans la Phénoménologie de l’esprit de Hegel (mémoire de DES, 1949, unpublished); L’ordre du discours (1971)
मिशेल फूको › 1926–1984
युर्गन हाबरमास
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In ‘Labour and Interaction’ (1967) Habermas drew from Hegel’s Jena philosophy of spirit the distinction between labour and interaction that underlies his theory of communicative action. J. Habermas, “Arbeit und Interaktion. Bemerkungen zu Hegels Jenenser Philosophie des Geistes” (1967), in Technik und Wissenschaft als „Ideologie“ (1968)
युर्गन हाबरमास › 1929–2026
जाक देरिदा
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Derrida read Hegel as the thinker of the Aufhebung, which différance resembles and resists, in ‘Le puits et la pyramide’ (1968) and the Hegel column of Glas (1974). J. Derrida, “Le puits et la pyramide” (1968), in Marges de la philosophie (1972); Glas (1974); SEP “Jacques Derrida”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जाक देरिदा › 1930–2004
सभी दिखाएँ (43)कम दिखाएँ
जे. वी. स्नेलमन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Following Hegel, Snellman held that freedom and personality are realised only in ethical community life, the state embodying a people’s national spirit (The Theory of the State, 1842). J. V. Snellman, Versuch einer speculativen Entwicklung der Idee der Persönlichkeit (1841); Läran om staten (1842)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जे. वी. स्नेलमन › 1806–1881
मैक्स श्टिर्नर जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया ✓
Stirner studied in Berlin from 1826 to 1828 and attended three of Hegel’s lecture series – on the philosophy of religion, the history of philosophy and the philosophy of subjective spirit. Lecture attendance, no closer contact is known. SEP “Max Stirner”; J. H. Mackay, Max Stirner. Sein Leben und sein Werk (1898)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
मैक्स श्टिर्नर › 1806–1856
पिएर जोसेफ प्रूधों
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Proudhon learned of Hegel in Paris from Marx, Bakunin and Karl Grün (1844–45) and built his System of Economic Contradictions (1846) on a dialectic of antinomies. P.-J. Proudhon, Système des contradictions économiques, ou Philosophie de la misère (1846); K. Marx, letter to J. B. Schweitzer (24 Jan. 1865); K. S. Vincent, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and the Rise of French Republican Socialism (1984)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
पिएर जोसेफ प्रूधों › 1809–1865
अलेक्ज़ांडर हर्ज़ेन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Herzen called Hegel’s philosophy ‘the algebra of revolution’ and argued in Dilettantism in Science (1842–43) that scientific thought must pass over into action. A. Herzen, Diletantizm v nauke (1842–43); Byloe i dumy (My Past and Thoughts, 1852–68); A. Walicki, A History of Russian Thought (1979)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
अलेक्ज़ांडर हर्ज़ेन › 1812–1870
मिखाइल बाकूनिन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In ‘The Reaction in Germany’ (1842) Bakunin turned Hegel’s dialectic into a philosophy of negation, ending: ‘the passion for destruction is a creative passion, too’. M. Bakunin (as Jules Elysard), “Die Reaction in Deutschland”, Deutsche Jahrbücher (1842); E. H. Carr, Michael Bakunin (1937)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
मिखाइल बाकूनिन › 1814–1876
आउगुस्त चेशकोव्स्की
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Cieszkowski kept Hegel’s dialectic but extended it to the future: after thought, an epoch of the deed would realise philosophy in practice (Prolegomena to Historiosophy, 1838). A. von Cieszkowski, Prolegomena zur Historiosophie (1838); A. Liebich, Between Ideology and Utopia: The Politics and Philosophy of August Cieszkowski (1979)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
आउगुस्त चेशकोव्स्की › 1814–1894
फ़्रीडरिश एंगल्स
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Engels separated Hegel’s revolutionary method from his conservative system (Ludwig Feuerbach, 1886) and drew from the Logic the laws of dialectics set out in Dialectics of Nature. F. Engels, Ludwig Feuerbach (1886); Dialektik der Natur (written 1873–83, publ. 1925); Anti-Dühring (1878)
फ़्रीडरिश एंगल्स › 1820–1895
ज्यार्जी प्लेखानोव
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In an essay for the sixtieth anniversary of Hegel’s death (Die Neue Zeit, 1891) Plekhanov claimed Hegel’s dialectic for materialism; he is credited with coining ‘dialectical materialism’ there. G. Plekhanov, “Zu Hegels sechzigstem Todestag”, Die Neue Zeit (1891); K voprosu o razvitii monističeskogo vzgljada na istoriju (1895)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ज्यार्जी प्लेखानोव › 1856–1918
जॉर्ज हर्बर्ट मीड
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Mead lectured on Hegel in Movements of Thought in the Nineteenth Century (1936); A. Honneth reads his social self as a naturalised version of Hegel’s recognition (1992). G. H. Mead, Movements of Thought in the Nineteenth Century (1936); A. Honneth, Kampf um Anerkennung (1992); SEP “George Herbert Mead”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जॉर्ज हर्बर्ट मीड › 1863–1931
बेनेदितो क्रोचे
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In What Is Living and What Is Dead of Hegel’s Philosophy (1907) Croce limited the dialectic of opposites, adding a ‘nexus of distincts’ among the forms of spirit. B. Croce, Ciò che è vivo e ciò che è morto della filosofia di Hegel (1907); SEP “Benedetto Croce”
बेनेदितो क्रोचे › 1866–1952
डब्ल्यू. ई. बी. डू बॉइस
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया विवादित
Zamir traced Du Bois’s ‘double consciousness’ (The Souls of Black Folk, 1903) to Hegel’s Phenomenology; others derive it from psychology or Emerson, so the Hegel link is disputed. S. Zamir, Dark Voices: W. E. B. Du Bois and American Thought, 1888–1903 (1995); D. D. Bruce Jr., “W. E. B. Du Bois and the Idea of Double Consciousness”, American Literature 64 (1992); SEP “W. E. B. Du Bois”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
डब्ल्यू. ई. बी. डू बॉइस › 1868–1963
निशिदा कितारो
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Nishida measured his logic of place against Hegel’s dialectic in ‘Hegel’s Dialectic as Seen from My Standpoint’ (1931), later reworking it as the dialectic of absolutely contradictory self-identity. Nishida Kitarō, “Watakushi no tachiba kara mita Hēgeru no benshōhō” (1931), in Mu no jikakuteki gentei (1932); SEP “Nishida Kitarō”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
निशिदा कितारो › 1870–1945
जोवान्नी जेंतीले
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In The Reform of Hegelian Dialectic (1913) Gentile moved the dialectic from Hegel’s concepts into the present act of thinking, which produces subject and object together. G. Gentile, La riforma della dialettica hegeliana (1913); H. S. Harris, The Social Philosophy of Giovanni Gentile (1960)
जोवान्नी जेंतीले › 1875–1944
जॉर्ज लुकाच
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Lukács read Marx through Hegel’s categories of totality and subject–object identity in History and Class Consciousness (1923), later tracing Hegel’s economics in The Young Hegel (1948). G. Lukács, Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923); Der junge Hegel. Über die Beziehungen von Dialektik und Ökonomie (written 1938, publ. 1948); SEP “Georg [György] Lukács”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जॉर्ज लुकाच › 1885–1971
तानाबे हाजिमे
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In Hegel’s Philosophy and Dialectic (1932) Tanabe took up Hegel’s dialectic and turned it into ‘absolute mediation’, which he set against Nishida’s place of nothingness. Tanabe Hajime, Hēgeru tetsugaku to benshōhō (1932); SEP “Tanabe Hajime”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
तानाबे हाजिमे › 1885–1962
अंतोनियो ग्राम्शी
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Norberto Bobbio argued (1967) that Gramsci’s concept of civil society, placed in the superstructure, derives from Hegel rather than Marx; the reading is debated. N. Bobbio, “Gramsci e la concezione della società civile” (1967), in Gramsci e la cultura contemporanea (1969); J. Texier, “Gramsci, théoricien des superstructures” (1968)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
अंतोनियो ग्राम्शी › 1891–1937
मैक्स होर्कहाइमर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In his inaugural lecture as director of the Institute for Social Research (1931) Horkheimer traced social philosophy back to Hegel’s objective spirit, to be renewed through interdisciplinary research. M. Horkheimer, “Die gegenwärtige Lage der Sozialphilosophie und die Aufgaben eines Instituts für Sozialforschung” (1931); SEP “Critical Theory”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मैक्स होर्कहाइमर › 1895–1973
हर्बर्ट मार्कूज़े
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Marcuse interpreted Hegel’s ontology of life (Hegels Ontologie, 1932) and in Reason and Revolution (1941) defended Hegel’s dialectic as critical thought against positivism and fascist readings. H. Marcuse, Hegels Ontologie und die Theorie der Geschichtlichkeit (1932); Reason and Revolution: Hegel and the Rise of Social Theory (1941); SEP “Herbert Marcuse”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
हर्बर्ट मार्कूज़े › 1898–1979
हंस-गेऑर्ग गादामर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Gadamer took Hegel’s concept of experience and his mediation of past and present as models for understanding, while rejecting absolute knowledge (Truth and Method, 1960; Hegels Dialektik, 1971). H.-G. Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode (1960); Hegels Dialektik. Fünf hermeneutische Studien (1971); SEP “Hans-Georg Gadamer”
हंस-गेऑर्ग गादामर › 1900–2002
जाक लाकाँ
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Lacan, who attended Kojève’s Hegel seminar (1933–39), took from the master–slave dialectic that desire is the desire of the other and seeks recognition (‘Subversion du sujet’, 1960). J. Lacan, “Subversion du sujet et dialectique du désir dans l’inconscient freudien” (1960), in Écrits (1966); A. Kojève, Introduction à la lecture de Hegel (1947); SEP “Jacques Lacan”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
जाक लाकाँ › 1901–1981
सिमोन द बोव्वार
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Beauvoir used Hegel’s master–slave dialectic in The Second Sex (1949), having set a line attributed to Hegel as the motto of She Came to Stay (1943). S. de Beauvoir, L’Invitée (1943); Le Deuxième Sexe (1949); SEP “Simone de Beauvoir”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
सिमोन द बोव्वार › 1908–1986
मोरिस मर्लो-पोंती
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Merleau-Ponty found an existentialism in Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit and placed Hegel at the origin of Marxism, Nietzsche, phenomenology and psychoanalysis (‘L’existentialisme chez Hegel’, 1946). M. Merleau-Ponty, “L’existentialisme chez Hegel” (Les Temps modernes, 1946; Sens et non-sens, 1948)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
मोरिस मर्लो-पोंती › 1908–1961
क्वामे एन्क्रूमाह
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Nkrumah drew on Hegel’s dialectic, via Marx, for ‘philosophical consciencism’, a synthesis of traditional, Islamic and Euro-Christian elements of African society (Consciencism, 1964). K. Nkrumah, Consciencism: Philosophy and Ideology for Decolonization (1964; rev. 1970)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
क्वामे एन्क्रूमाह › 1909–1972
तांग जुनयी
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Tang Junyi’s Life, Existence and the Horizons of Mind (1977) orders nine horizons in a sequence recalling Hegel’s Phenomenology, but as mutually responsive rather than superseded stages. Tang Junyi, Shengming cunzai yu xinling jingjie (1977); IEP “Tang Junyi”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
तांग जुनयी › 1909–1978
मारुयामा मासाओ
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Maruyama took Hegel’s picture of China as an unhistorical, stagnant empire as his starting question, aiming to show that Tokugawa Japan developed modern thought from within (1952). Maruyama Masao, Nihon seiji shisōshi kenkyū (1952), introduction; tr. M. Hane, Studies in the Intellectual History of Tokugawa Japan (1974)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मारुयामा मासाओ › 1914–1996
पाउलो फ्रेइरे
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Freire drew on Hegel’s master–slave dialectic to argue that only the oppressed, by freeing themselves, can also free their oppressors (Pedagogia do oprimido, written 1968). P. Freire, Pedagogia do oprimido (written 1968); G. W. F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes (1807)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
पाउलो फ्रेइरे › 1921–1997
इम्रे लक़तोस
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Lakatos named Hegel’s dialectic, beside Popper and Pólya, among the sources of his account of mathematics as growing through proofs and counterexamples (‘Proofs and Refutations’, 1963–64). I. Lakatos, “Proofs and Refutations”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 14 (1963–64); Proofs and Refutations (ed. J. Worrall and E. Zahar, 1976); SEP “Imre Lakatos”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
इम्रे लक़तोस › 1922–1974
फ़्रांट्ज़ फ़ानों
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Fanon reread Hegel’s dialectic of lord and bondsman for the colonial situation, where the master wants work, not recognition, from the slave (Peau noire, masques blancs, 1952). F. Fanon, Peau noire, masques blancs (1952), “Le Nègre et Hegel”; SEP “Frantz Fanon”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रांट्ज़ फ़ानों › 1925–1961
मार्टिन लूथर किंग
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
King, who studied Hegel in Boston, took from his dialectic that ‘growth comes through struggle’ and sought a synthesis of opposed positions (Stride Toward Freedom, 1958). M. L. King Jr., Stride Toward Freedom (1958), “Pilgrimage to Nonviolence”; C. Carson et al. (eds.), The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr., vol. II (1994)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मार्टिन लूथर किंग › 1929–1968
चार्ल्स टेलर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Taylor read Hegel as joining Enlightenment autonomy with Romantic expressivism (Hegel, 1975) and drew on his theory of recognition for a politics of recognition (1992). C. Taylor, Hegel (1975); Hegel and Modern Society (1979); “The Politics of Recognition”, in A. Gutmann (ed.), Multiculturalism and the Politics of Recognition (1992)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
चार्ल्स टेलर › जन्म 1931
जूलिया क्रिस्टेवा
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Kristeva reinterpreted Hegel’s negativity as the movement of the drives, which she called rejection and found at work in poetic language (La révolution du langage poétique, 1974). J. Kristeva, La révolution du langage poétique (1974)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जूलिया क्रिस्टेवा › जन्म 1941
स्टीव बीको
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In “White Racism and Black Consciousness” (1971) Biko framed Black Consciousness with what he called “the Hegelian theory of dialectic materialism”: white racism is the thesis, a solid Black unity the antithesis, and a true humanity without racism the synthesis. S. Biko, “White Racism and Black Consciousness” (1971), in I Write What I Like (1978)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
स्टीव बीको › 1946–1977
एक्सेल होनेथ
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Honneth reconstructed Hegel’s Jena model of a struggle for recognition (Kampf um Anerkennung, 1992), later reading the Philosophy of Right as a theory of social freedom (2011). A. Honneth, Kampf um Anerkennung (1992); Leiden an Unbestimmtheit (2001); Das Recht der Freiheit (2011); SEP “Recognition”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
एक्सेल होनेथ › जन्म 1949
स्लावोय झ़िझ़ेक
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Žižek read Hegel through Lacan, treating negativity and contradiction as constitutive of the subject and of reality itself (Less Than Nothing, 2012). S. Žižek, Less Than Nothing: Hegel and the Shadow of Dialectical Materialism (2012); Tarrying with the Negative (1993)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
स्लावोय झ़िझ़ेक › जन्म 1949
सेला बेनहबीब
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Benhabib’s Critique, Norm, and Utopia (1986) began from Hegel’s critique of Kant and of natural right to reconstruct the normative foundations of critical theory. S. Benhabib, Critique, Norm, and Utopia: A Study of the Foundations of Critical Theory (1986)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
सेला बेनहबीब › जन्म 1950
जूडिथ बट्लर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Butler’s first book, Subjects of Desire (1987), traced Hegel’s desire for recognition through its French readers; Hegel’s unhappy consciousness returns in The Psychic Life of Power (1997). J. Butler, Subjects of Desire: Hegelian Reflections in Twentieth-Century France (1987); The Psychic Life of Power (1997)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
जूडिथ बट्लर › जन्म 1956
राहेल येगी
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Jaeggi took Hegel’s determinate negation as the model of an immanent critique that judges forms of life by their own crises and contradictions (Kritik von Lebensformen, 2014). R. Jaeggi, Kritik von Lebensformen (2014); G. W. F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes (1807)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
राहेल येगी › जन्म 1966
आलोचना
परस्पर आलोचना 1
फ्रेडरिख शेलिंग ⇄ परस्पर जिनसे प्रभावित
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Hegel defended Schelling’s philosophy of identity against Fichte in the Difference essay (1801) and co-edited with him the Critical Journal of Philosophy (1802–03). G. W. F. Hegel, Differenz des Fichte’schen und Schelling’schen Systems der Philosophie (1801); Kritisches Journal der Philosophie (1802–03); SEP “Hegel”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जिनकी आलोचना की
Hegel’s Preface to the Phenomenology (1807) mocked an absolute of pure identity as ‘the night in which all cows are black’; Schelling took it as aimed at him. G. W. F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes (1807), Preface; Schelling to Hegel, 2 Nov. 1807
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Schelling objected that Hegel’s ‘negative’ philosophy of pure concepts cannot reach actual existence, nor explain why the Idea should release itself into nature (Munich lectures, 1833–34). F. W. J. Schelling, Zur Geschichte der neueren Philosophie (Munich lectures, c. 1833–34; publ. 1856), on Hegel; Berlin lectures 1841–42; SEP “Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ्रेडरिख शेलिंग › 1775–1854
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित 24
लुडविग फ़ॉयरबाख़ जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया ✓
Feuerbach moved to Berlin in 1824, nominally to study theology with Schleiermacher and Neander but in fact drawn by Hegel, whose lectures he heard for two years; in 1828 he sent Hegel his Erlangen dissertation with a covering letter. SEP “Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach”; L. Feuerbach to G. W. F. Hegel, 22 Nov. 1828
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Feuerbach called Hegel’s speculative philosophy the last rational support of theology, inverting subject and predicate by making thought rather than sensuous being primary (Vorläufige Thesen, 1842). L. Feuerbach, Vorläufige Thesen zur Reformation der Philosophie (1842); Zur Kritik der Hegelschen Philosophie (1839); SEP “Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
लुडविग फ़ॉयरबाख़ › 1804–1872
सोरेन किर्केगार्द जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Kierkegaard’s dissertation On the Concept of Irony (1841) drew heavily on Hegel’s reading of Socratic and Romantic irony and argued in Hegelian terms, before turning against the system. S. Kierkegaard, Om Begrebet Ironi (1841); J. Stewart, Kierkegaard’s Relations to Hegel Reconsidered (2003); SEP “Søren Kierkegaard”
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Kierkegaard objected that Hegel’s system forgets the existing individual: a logical system is possible, but a system of existence cannot be (Concluding Unscientific Postscript, 1846). S. Kierkegaard (Johannes Climacus), Afsluttende uvidenskabelig Efterskrift (1846), Part Two; SEP “Søren Kierkegaard”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
सोरेन किर्केगार्द › 1813–1855
कार्ल मार्क्स जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In the Paris Manuscripts (written 1844, printed 1932) Marx credited Hegel’s Phenomenology with grasping the self-creation of humanity as a process and labour as its essence. K. Marx, Ökonomisch-philosophische Manuskripte (written 1844, printed 1932), “Kritik der Hegelschen Dialektik und Philosophie überhaupt”; SEP “Karl Marx”
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Marx held that Hegel mystifies the dialectic by making the Idea the subject of reality; it ‘stands on its head’ and must be inverted (Capital, afterword 1873). K. Marx, Kritik des Hegelschen Staatsrechts (1843); Das Kapital I, Nachwort zur zweiten Auflage (1873); SEP “Karl Marx”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कार्ल मार्क्स › 1818–1883
मार्टिन हाइडेगर
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Heidegger set existential temporality against Hegel’s concept of time, which he found bound to the ordinary idea of time as a sequence of nows (Being and Time, 1927). M. Heidegger, Sein und Zeit (1927), § 82; lectures Hegels Phänomenologie des Geistes (1930/31, GA 32)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मार्टिन हाइडेगर › 1889–1976
थियोडोर डब्ल्यू. एडोर्नो जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In Three Studies on Hegel (1963) Adorno defended the experiential content of Hegel’s dialectic and kept determinate negation as the method of his negative dialectics (1966). T. W. Adorno, Drei Studien zu Hegel (1963), “Erfahrungsgehalt”; Negative Dialektik (1966); SEP “Theodor W. Adorno”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Adorno inverted Hegel’s ‘the true is the whole’ into ‘the whole is the false’ and rejected the identity of concept and object (Minima Moralia §29; Negative Dialectics, 1966). T. W. Adorno, Minima Moralia (1951), §29; Negative Dialektik (1966), Introduction; G. W. F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes (1807), Preface; SEP “Theodor W. Adorno”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
थियोडोर डब्ल्यू. एडोर्नो › 1903–1969
लेओपोल्दो सेया जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Zea modelled his philosophy of Latin American history on Hegel’s dialectic, as a movement from imitation to the ‘assumption’ of its past (Filosofía de la historia americana, 1978). L. Zea, Filosofía de la historia americana (1978); América en la historia (1957)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Zea rejected Hegel’s placing of America outside world history as a land of the future and claimed its own history for America (América en la historia, 1957). L. Zea, América en la historia (1957); G. W. F. Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Weltgeschichte, introduction (“Land der Zukunft”)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
लेओपोल्दो सेया › 1912–2004
सभी दिखाएँ (24)कम दिखाएँ
आर्थर शोपेनहावर
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Schopenhauer derided Hegel’s philosophy as obscure verbiage serving state and church, and denied that history is the rational self-unfolding of spirit (World as Will II, 1844, ch. 38). A. Schopenhauer, Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung II (1844), ch. 38; Die beiden Grundprobleme der Ethik (1841), Preface; “Über die Universitäts-Philosophie”, Parerga I (1851)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
आर्थर शोपेनहावर › 1788–1860
अंतोनियो रोस्मिनी
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Rosmini rejected Hegel’s dialectic of being, nothing and becoming, holding that it introduces contradiction into being itself (Saggio storico-critico sulle categorie e la dialettica, posth. 1883). A. Rosmini, Saggio storico-critico sulle categorie e la dialettica (posth., Turin 1883); C. Palazzolo, “Rosmini’s Criticism of the Hegelian Dialectics”, Rosmini Studies (2019)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
अंतोनियो रोस्मिनी › 1797–1855
फ़्रीडरिश अडोल्फ़ ट्रेंडेलेनबुर्ग
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Trendelenburg’s Logical Investigations (1840) and The Logical Question in Hegel’s System (1843) contested Hegel’s claim to an absolute method. Wikipedia, “Friedrich Adolf Trendelenburg” (read); Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Trendelenburg” (not accessible)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश अडोल्फ़ ट्रेंडेलेनबुर्ग › 1802–1872
याकोब बुर्कहार्ट
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Burckhardt rejected Hegel’s philosophy of history as the rational plan of world spirit, holding that the purposes of eternal wisdom remain hidden from us (lectures 1868–73). J. Burckhardt, Weltgeschichtliche Betrachtungen (publ. 1905), introduction
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
याकोब बुर्कहार्ट › 1818–1897
विलियम जेम्स
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
James rejected Hegel’s monistic absolute, which leaves no room for real plurality and novelty, though he valued Hegel’s vision of dialectical movement (A Pluralistic Universe, 1909). W. James, “On Some Hegelisms” (1882), in The Will to Believe (1897); A Pluralistic Universe (1909), Lecture III; SEP “William James”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
विलियम जेम्स › 1842–1910
बर्टराण्ड रसेल
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Russell rejected Hegel’s doctrine that only the whole is real: if all relations were internal, nothing could be known without knowing everything (History of Western Philosophy, 1945). B. Russell, A History of Western Philosophy (1945), ch. 22; Our Knowledge of the External World (1914), Lecture II
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
बर्टराण्ड रसेल › 1872–1970
जी. ई. मूर
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Moore broke with British Hegelianism and rejected the Hegelian doctrine that parts of an organic whole have no meaning apart from it (Principia Ethica, 1903, § 22). G. E. Moore, Principia Ethica (1903), §§ 18–22; “The Refutation of Idealism” (1903)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जी. ई. मूर › 1873–1958
कार्ल पॉपर
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Popper read Hegel as a historicist apologist of the Prussian state whose dialectic prepared modern totalitarianism (The Open Society and Its Enemies, 1945, vol. 2, ch. 12). K. Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945), vol. 2, ch. 12 “Hegel and the New Tribalism”; critique of this reading: W. Kaufmann, “The Hegel Myth and Its Method”, Philosophical Review 60 (1951)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कार्ल पॉपर › 1902–1994
आइज़ैया बर्लिन
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Berlin held that Hegel’s identification of freedom with understanding rational necessity, embodied in the state, turned positive liberty into a justification of coercion (‘Two Concepts of Liberty’, 1958). I. Berlin, “Two Concepts of Liberty” (1958); Freedom and Its Betrayal (BBC lectures 1952; publ. 2002)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
आइज़ैया बर्लिन › 1909–1997
आल्बेर कामु
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Camus argued in The Rebel (1951) that Hegel made history the sole judge of value, so that his heirs could justify ‘rational terror’ in its name. A. Camus, L’Homme révolté (1951), Part III, “Le terrorisme d’État et la terreur rationnelle”; SEP “Albert Camus”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
आल्बेर कामु › 1913–1960
लुई अल्थुसर
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Althusser denied that Marx merely inverted Hegel’s dialectic, contrasting Hegel’s simple contradiction and expressive totality with an overdetermined, structured whole (‘Contradiction and Overdetermination’, 1962). L. Althusser, “Contradiction et surdétermination” (1962), in Pour Marx (1965); SEP “Louis Althusser”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
लुई अल्थुसर › 1918–1990
ज़ाँ-फ़्रांस्वा ल्योतार
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Lyotard treated Hegel’s speculative unity of knowledge as one of the grand narratives of legitimation that have lost their credibility (The Postmodern Condition, 1979, §§ 9–10). J.-F. Lyotard, La condition postmoderne (1979), §§ 9–10; Le différend (1983)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ज़ाँ-फ़्रांस्वा ल्योतार › 1924–1998
गिल्लेस देलयूज़े
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Deleuze rejected Hegel’s dialectic for subordinating difference to identity and negation, opposing to it a Nietzschean affirmation of difference (Nietzsche and Philosophy, 1962; Difference and Repetition, 1968). G. Deleuze, Nietzsche et la philosophie (1962); Différence et répétition (1968), Introduction and ch. I; SEP “Gilles Deleuze”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
गिल्लेस देलयूज़े › 1925–1995
कार्ला लोन्ज़ी
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Lonzi rejected Hegel’s assignment of women to the family, outside history, arguing that the theories of emancipation were written from a male standpoint (Sputiamo su Hegel, 1970). C. Lonzi, Sputiamo su Hegel (Scritti di Rivolta Femminile, 1970); G. W. F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes (1807), VI.A.a; Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1820), § 166
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कार्ला लोन्ज़ी › 1931–1982
एनरिके दुसेल
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Dussel read Hegel’s lectures on world history, which leave America and Africa outside history, as expressing the Eurocentric myth of modernity (1492: El encubrimiento del otro, 1992). E. Dussel, 1492: El encubrimiento del otro (1992), ch. 1; G. W. F. Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Weltgeschichte, introduction
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एनरिके दुसेल › 1934–2023
पॉल गिलरॉय
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In The Black Atlantic (1993, ch. 2) Gilroy read Frederick Douglass’s fight with the slave-breaker Covey as a revision of Hegel’s master–slave allegory: the slave prefers the possibility of death to continued bondage – a starting point for an account of modernity from the standpoint of the enslaved. P. Gilroy, The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness (1993), ch. 2 “Masters, Mistresses, Slaves and the Antinomies of Modernity”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
पॉल गिलरॉय › जन्म 1956
अशील म्बेम्बे
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In Critique of Black Reason (2013) Mbembe read Hegel’s account of Africa in Reason in History – figures lacking language and self-awareness – as the culmination of a Western race discourse that defined Africa by absence. A. Mbembe, Critique de la raison nègre (2013; English Critique of Black Reason, 2017), ch. 1 “The Subject of Race”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
अशील म्बेम्बे › जन्म 1957
ग्लेन सीन कोल्थर्ड
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In Red Skin, White Masks (2014) Coulthard followed Fanon’s critique of Hegel’s master–slave parable: in colonial settings, recognition granted by the state reproduces domination instead of overcoming it. G. S. Coulthard, Red Skin, White Masks: Rejecting the Colonial Politics of Recognition (2014), ch. 1 and conclusion
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ग्लेन सीन कोल्थर्ड › जन्म 1974
जिनकी आलोचना की 7
कपिल
जिनकी आलोचना की
Hegel discussed Kapila’s Samkhya after Colebrooke’s essays in his Lectures on the History of Philosophy and judged that in Indian philosophy the Idea never becomes objective: the subject is lost in abstract substance instead of reaching freedom. Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie (ed. Michelet 1833), “Indian Philosophy”; H. T. Colebrooke, “On the Philosophy of the Hindus”, Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society 1 (1827)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कपिल › किंवदंतियों से जुड़ा व्यक्तित्व
कन्फ्यूशियस
जिनकी आलोचना की
In his Lectures on the History of Philosophy Hegel judged Confucius’ teaching a merely popular, practical morality without speculative philosophy – Cicero’s De officiis, he said, was better than all the books of Confucius. Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie (lectures 1819–31, ed. Michelet 1833), Introduction, “Chinese Philosophy”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कन्फ्यूशियस › परंपरागत रूप से 551–479 ईसा पूर्व
गौतम बुद्ध
जिनकी आलोचना की
In his Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion Hegel treated Buddhism as the “religion of being-within-self”, whose principle is nothingness – a stage of spirit he placed below the religions of freedom. Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion (1824, 1827), Part II, “Die Religion des Insichseins”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
गौतम बुद्ध › लगभग 480–400 ईसा पूर्व · प्रचलित तिथि 563–483 ईसा पूर्व
इमानुएल कांट जिनसे प्रभावित
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Hegel took from Kant’s antinomies the insight that contradiction belongs to reason itself, and from the unity of apperception his concept of the concept (Science of Logic, 1812–16). G. W. F. Hegel, Wissenschaft der Logik (1812–16), “Vom Begriff im Allgemeinen”; SEP “Hegel”
जिनकी आलोचना की
Hegel likened Kant’s critique of knowledge to learning to swim before entering the water and called his moral law empty formalism (Encyclopaedia §10; Philosophy of Right §135). G. W. F. Hegel, Enzyklopädie (1830), §10; Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1820), §135; SEP “Hegel”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
इमानुएल कांट › 1724–1804
फ़्रीडरिश हाइनरिष याकोबी
जिनकी आलोचना की
Hegel judged Jacobi’s immediate knowledge through faith a philosophy of subjectivity that renounces conceptual knowledge of the absolute (Faith and Knowledge, 1802; Encyclopaedia, §§61–78). G. W. F. Hegel, Glauben und Wissen (1802), B; Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften (1830), §§61–78
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश हाइनरिष याकोबी › 1743–1819
योहान गॉटलीब फ़िशटे जिनसे प्रभावित
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Hegel took over the concept of recognition introduced in Fichte’s Foundations of Natural Right (1796) and made it central to his Jena writings and the Phenomenology (1807). J. G. Fichte, Grundlage des Naturrechts (1796); G. W. F. Hegel, Phänomenologie des Geistes (1807); L. Siep, Anerkennung als Prinzip der praktischen Philosophie (1979); SEP “Hegel”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जिनकी आलोचना की
Hegel argued that Fichte’s identity of I and not-I remains a mere ought, a ‘subjective subject-object’ without Schelling’s objective side (Difference between Fichte’s and Schelling’s System, 1801). G. W. F. Hegel, Differenz des Fichte’schen und Schelling’schen Systems der Philosophie (1801); Glauben und Wissen (1802), C; SEP “Hegel”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
योहान गॉटलीब फ़िशटे › 1762–1814
फ़्रीडरिश श्लाइअरमाखर
जिनकी आलोचना की
Hegel objected that if religion were the feeling of absolute dependence, a dog would be the best Christian (Foreword to Hinrichs, 1822), aiming at Schleiermacher’s Christian Faith. G. W. F. Hegel, Foreword to H. F. W. Hinrichs, Die Religion im inneren Verhältnisse zur Wissenschaft (1822); F. Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (1821–22)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश श्लाइअरमाखर › 1768–1834
कृतियाँ
निरपेक्ष ज्ञान तक चेतना की निर्माणकारी यात्रा – स्वामी और दास सहित।
सत्ता, अ-सत्, बनना: अवधारणाओं की स्व-गति।
परिवार, नागरिक समाज, राज्य – जो वास्तविक है वही तर्कसंगत है।
मत
Hegel’s great idea is that reality is not a fixed set of things but a process of development in which contradictions drive thought and history forward. In this dialectic each position reveals its one-sidedness, is negated, and is “sublated” (aufgehoben) – cancelled, preserved and raised to a higher level. The Phenomenology traces consciousness from mere sense-certainty through the struggle of master and slave to absolute knowing; the Logic unfolds the categories themselves. History, for Hegel, is the progress of the consciousness of freedom, realised in the rational institutions of family, civil society and state. Marx, existentialism, the Frankfurt School and much of modern philosophy define themselves with or against him. His lectures on the philosophy of history placed Europe at the summit and said of Africa that “it is no historical part of the World” (in J. Sibree’s translation); postcolonial critics see here a template of Eurocentrism.
जीवन और संदर्भ
Hegel studied at the Tübingen seminary with Hölderlin and Schelling, worked as a house tutor, and finished the Phenomenology in Jena as Napoleon’s army arrived in 1806. After posts as newspaper editor in Bamberg and headmaster in Nuremberg he taught in Heidelberg and from 1818 in Berlin, where he became the dominant philosopher of his age. He died there in a cholera epidemic.
अन्य प्रमुख कृतियाँ
- Phenomenology of Spirit (1807)
- Science of Logic (1812–1816)
- Encyclopaedia of the Philosophical Sciences (1817)
- Elements of the Philosophy of Right (1820)
इनमें आता है
- यात्रा ‘हेगल के उत्तराधिकारी’ · 10 में से पड़ाव 1
नवंबर 2026 तक · स्रोत · इस पृष्ठ को बेहतर बनाएँ · Agora कैसे बना है