Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
For Hegel, truth is the whole: history, thought and society develop through conflicts and their resolution, toward ever greater freedom and self-awareness.
Placement
Dialectic of Spirit: the true is the whole, and world history is progress in the consciousness of freedom.
Key ideas
- Dialectic
- Absolute Spirit
- Master and slave
- Sublation (Aufhebung)
Students: Ludwig Feuerbach, Max Stirner
Influence
Influenced by 11
Heraclitus
influenced by ✓
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)
Heraclitus › c. 535–475 BCE
Plato
influenced by ✓
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”
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Plato › 428–348 BCE
Aristotle
influenced by ✓
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”
Aristotle › 384–322 BCE
René Descartes
influenced by ✓
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
René Descartes › 1596–1650
Baruch de Spinoza
influenced by ✓
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”
Baruch de Spinoza › 1632–1677
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
influenced by ✓
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”
Jean-Jacques Rousseau › 1712–1778
Show all (11)Show fewer
Montesquieu
influenced by ✓
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”
Montesquieu › 1689–1755
Denis Diderot
influenced by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Denis Diderot › 1713–1784
Adam Ferguson
influenced by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Adam Ferguson › 1723–1816
Adam Smith
influenced by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Adam Smith › 1723–1790
Friedrich Hölderlin
influenced by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Friedrich Hölderlin › 1770–1843
Influenced 43
Wilhelm Dilthey
influenced ✓
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”
Wilhelm Dilthey › 1833–1911
John Dewey
influenced
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”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
John Dewey › 1859–1952
Jean-Paul Sartre
influenced ✓
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”
Jean-Paul Sartre › 1905–1980
Michel Foucault
influenced ✓
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)
Michel Foucault › 1926–1984
Jürgen Habermas
influenced ✓
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)
Jürgen Habermas › 1929–2026
Jacques Derrida
influenced ✓
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”
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Jacques Derrida › 1930–2004
Show all (43)Show fewer
J. V. Snellman
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
J. V. Snellman › 1806–1881
Max Stirner taught
taught ✓
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)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Max Stirner › 1806–1856
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
influenced ✓
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)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon › 1809–1865
Alexander Herzen
influenced
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)
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Alexander Herzen › 1812–1870
Mikhail Bakunin
influenced ✓
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)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Mikhail Bakunin › 1814–1876
August Cieszkowski
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
August Cieszkowski › 1814–1894
Friedrich Engels
influenced ✓
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)
Friedrich Engels › 1820–1895
Georgi Plekhanov
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Georgi Plekhanov › 1856–1918
George Herbert Mead
influenced
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”
Evidence: AI draft
George Herbert Mead › 1863–1931
Benedetto Croce
influenced ✓
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”
Benedetto Croce › 1866–1952
W. E. B. Du Bois
influenced disputed
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”
Evidence: AI draft
W. E. B. Du Bois › 1868–1963
Nishida Kitarō
influenced
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Nishida Kitarō › 1870–1945
Giovanni Gentile
influenced ✓
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)
Giovanni Gentile › 1875–1944
Georg Lukács
influenced
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Georg Lukács › 1885–1971
Tanabe Hajime
influenced
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Tanabe Hajime › 1885–1962
Antonio Gramsci
influenced ✓
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)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Antonio Gramsci › 1891–1937
Max Horkheimer
influenced
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Max Horkheimer › 1895–1973
Herbert Marcuse
influenced
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”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Herbert Marcuse › 1898–1979
Hans-Georg Gadamer
influenced ✓
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”
Hans-Georg Gadamer › 1900–2002
Jacques Lacan
influenced
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”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Jacques Lacan › 1901–1981
Simone de Beauvoir
influenced
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”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Simone de Beauvoir › 1908–1986
Maurice Merleau-Ponty
influenced
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)
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Maurice Merleau-Ponty › 1908–1961
Kwame Nkrumah
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Kwame Nkrumah › 1909–1972
Tang Junyi
influenced
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Tang Junyi › 1909–1978
Maruyama Masao
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Maruyama Masao › 1914–1996
Paulo Freire
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Paulo Freire › 1921–1997
Imre Lakatos
influenced
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Imre Lakatos › 1922–1974
Frantz Fanon
influenced
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Frantz Fanon › 1925–1961
Martin Luther King Jr.
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Martin Luther King Jr. › 1929–1968
Charles Taylor
influenced
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)
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Charles Taylor › b. 1931
Julia Kristeva
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Julia Kristeva › b. 1941
Steve Biko
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Steve Biko › 1946–1977
Axel Honneth
influenced ✓
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”
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Axel Honneth › b. 1949
Slavoj Žižek
influenced ✓
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)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Slavoj Žižek › b. 1949
Seyla Benhabib
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Seyla Benhabib › b. 1950
Judith Butler
influenced
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)
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Judith Butler › b. 1956
Rahel Jaeggi
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Rahel Jaeggi › b. 1966
Criticism
Mutual critique 1
Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling ⇄ mutual influenced by
influenced by ✓
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”
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
criticised
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
Evidence: AI draft
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling › 1775–1854
Criticized by 24
Ludwig Feuerbach taught
taught ✓
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
Evidence: AI draft
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Ludwig Feuerbach › 1804–1872
Søren Kierkegaard influenced
influenced ✓
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”
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Søren Kierkegaard › 1813–1855
Karl Marx influenced
influenced ✓
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”
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Karl Marx › 1818–1883
Martin Heidegger
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Martin Heidegger › 1889–1976
Theodor W. Adorno influenced
influenced ✓
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”
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Theodor W. Adorno › 1903–1969
Leopoldo Zea influenced
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
criticised by
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”)
Evidence: AI draft
Leopoldo Zea › 1912–2004
Show all (24)Show fewer
Arthur Schopenhauer
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Arthur Schopenhauer › 1788–1860
Antonio Rosmini
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Antonio Rosmini › 1797–1855
Friedrich Adolf Trendelenburg
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Friedrich Adolf Trendelenburg › 1802–1872
Jacob Burckhardt
criticised by
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
Evidence: AI draft
Jacob Burckhardt › 1818–1897
William James
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
William James › 1842–1910
Bertrand Russell
criticised by
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
Evidence: AI draft
Bertrand Russell › 1872–1970
G. E. Moore
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
G. E. Moore › 1873–1958
Karl Popper
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Karl Popper › 1902–1994
Isaiah Berlin
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Isaiah Berlin › 1909–1997
Albert Camus
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Albert Camus › 1913–1960
Louis Althusser
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Louis Althusser › 1918–1990
Jean-François Lyotard
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Jean-François Lyotard › 1924–1998
Gilles Deleuze
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Gilles Deleuze › 1925–1995
Carla Lonzi
criticised by
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
Evidence: AI draft
Carla Lonzi › 1931–1982
Enrique Dussel
criticised by
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
Evidence: AI draft
Enrique Dussel › 1934–2023
Paul Gilroy
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Paul Gilroy › b. 1956
Achille Mbembe
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Achille Mbembe › b. 1957
Glen Sean Coulthard
criticised by
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
Evidence: AI draft
Glen Sean Coulthard › b. 1974
Criticizes 7
Kapila
criticised
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Kapila › legendary figure
Confucius
criticised
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Confucius › traditionally 551–479 BCE
Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha)
criticised
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha) › c. 480–400 BCE · conventionally dated 563–483 BCE
Immanuel Kant influenced by
influenced by ✓
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”
criticised
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Immanuel Kant › 1724–1804
Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi
criticised
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
Evidence: AI draft
Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi › 1743–1819
Johann Gottlieb Fichte influenced by
influenced by ✓
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”
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
criticised
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Johann Gottlieb Fichte › 1762–1814
Friedrich Schleiermacher
criticised
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Friedrich Schleiermacher › 1768–1834
Works
The formative journey of consciousness to absolute knowing – with master and slave.
- 1812Science of Logic
Being, nothing, becoming: the self-movement of concepts.
Family, civil society, state – what is actual is rational.
Position
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.
Life & context
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.
Further main works
- Encyclopaedia of the Philosophical Sciences (1817)
Appears in
- Journey ‘Hegel’s Heirs’ · Stop 1 of 10
As of November 2026 · Sources · Improve this page · How Agora is made