An Introduction

I think it’s time I wrote something about Hegel (1770-1831), the philosopher who is behind a lot of the things I write about. He is a kindred spirit. Many of the ideas I think about he thought about. We both see the world in holistic terms, speak of a determinism in History and share a dialectic approach. One of my main points of interest is globalizations. He sensed globalization. He confirmed my belief that there is rhyme and reason to human existence.

It wasn’t an accident I came across Hegel. I was destined to come across him because of the questions I was asking about the world, why it functions the way it does. I knew if I wanted to find out I had to read what others said on the subject. First I read history but found it inconclusive in telling me about the ways of the world. Then I realized what I was searching for. It was the metaphysical nature of the world I was after, something only philosophy can anawer. Hence my reading philosophy and meeting Hegel.

There are a lot of things to say about Hegel and what he means to me. It’s difficult to know where to start with him. So I’ll start with an anecdote. On his death bed Hegel said “that there was only one man who had understood him - and he had misunderstood him”. That’s funny. Nevertheless, it means something to me because it says something about his philosophy and philosophy in general. The way I see it philosophers are put on earth for a purpose, to figure things out for the rest of us and to help facilitate life. Philosophers observe life and then come to conclusions. They then put their ideas out for public consumption and scrutiny. Once those ideas are out there they are part of the public domain. They belong to the world which interprets and manipulates them to suit its needs. Remember, philosophers are working for us and if their ideas are misinterpreted by us that’s part of it. This is one reason Hegel felt misunderstood, because his ideas were used by others in ways he couldn’t have imagined. His ideas also dealt with the future which hadn’t happened yet, so no wonder the misunderstanding and misinterpretation of them.

I just had to get that idea out, about Hegel being misunderstood. However, it occurred to me that he may have been deliberately contrary with what he said. You see, contradiction is one of his subjects. He believed that it is through contradictory ideas and the reconciling of them that we develop epistemologically. He believed this happens incrementally, by way of a process called the dialectic. The dialectic process is composed of three parts, theory, antithesis and synthesis. The synthesis is the product of the theory and its antithesis clashing. In turn the synthesis becomes the new theory which then attracts another antithesis or contradictory idea, and so goes the process. Can you see the upward spiral? I’m thinking, maybe by being contrary on his death bed Hegel may have been leaving a parting shot, to confuse and make a listener think. And if that person gained anything from it he or she would be a bit smarter. It might be a stretch but I think it’s worth contemplating.

At the center of Hegel’s thinking is the idea of change. You may have noticed that change is a central theme in my writing. Hegel realized that change is the one constant of the universe, whether it is generated by nature or by humans. During Hegel’s time, for idiosyncratic reason, it was fashionable to devise theories about what determines human history. Most theories were based on a static world. Hegel, however, was more astute. He noticed that static theories went up in smoke as soon as they were made because the world changed. Also, most of the static theories were illegitimate since they didn’t reflect all of humankind because they were based on ideology and bias, like religion, politics or race. As a holistic thinker Hegel tried to avoid ideology and bias in constructing his ideas. Change certainly isn’t ideologically or bias based. That’s why I feel comfortable in choosing it as my chief determinant of History. There are some of the connections I have with Hegel.