This rich study explores the elements of Hegel's social and political thought that are most relevant to our society today. Combating the prevailing post-World War II stereotype of Hegel as a proto-fascist, Charles Taylor argues that Hegel aimed not to deny the rights of individuality but to synthesise them with the intrinsic good of community membership. Hegel's goal of a society of free individuals whose social activity is expressive of who they are seems an even more distant goal now, and Taylor's discussion has renewed relevance for our increasingly globalised and industrialised society. This classic work is presented in a fresh series livery for the twenty-first century with a specially commissioned new preface written by Frederick Neuhouser.

Hegel and Modern Society.

Dialogue has become a central theoretical concept in human and social sciences as well as in professions such as education, health, and psychotherapy. This 'dialogical turn' emphasises the importance of social relations and interaction to our behaviour and how we make sense of the world; hence the dialogical mind is the mind in interaction with others - with individuals, groups, institutions, and cultures in historical perspectives. Through a combination of rigorous theoretical work and empirical investigation, Markova presents an ethics of dialogicality as an alternative to the narrow perspective of individualism and cognitivism that has traditionally dominated the field of social psychology. The dialogical perspective, which focuses on interdependencies among the self and others, offers a powerful theoretical basis to comprehend, analyse, and discuss complex social issues. Markova considers the implications of dialogical epistemology both in daily life and in professional practices involving problems of communication, care, and therapy.

The Dialogical Mind: Common Sense and Ethics

THE PROVINCE OF CONCEPTUAL REASON: HEGEL’S POST-KANTIAN RATIONALISM W. Clark Wolf, B.S., M.A. Marquette University, 2019 In this dissertation, I seek to explain G.W.F. Hegel’s view that human accessible conceptual content can provide knowledge about the nature or essence of things. I call this view “Conceptual Transparency.” It finds its historical antecedent in the views of eighteenth century German rationalists, which were strongly criticized by Immanuel Kant. I argue that Hegel explains Conceptual Transparency in such a way that preserves many implications of German rationalism, but in a form that is largely compatible with Kant’s criticisms of the original rationalist version. After providing background on Hegel’s relationship to the traditional rationalist theory of concepts and Kant’s challenge to it, I claim that Hegel’s central task is to provide a theory of conceptual content that allows a relationship to the objective world without being dependent on the specifically sensory aspect of the world, which Kant’s theory of concepts required. Since many interpreters deny that Hegel’s use of the term “concept” is comparable to other historical philosophers (or our own), I first show that Hegel’s critique of standard conceptions of concepts presupposes an agreement of subject matter. I then show how Hegel’s account of the “formal concept” provides the skeleton for a view of conceptual content that relies on negative relations between terms, rather than a relation to sensibility, to provide content. Hegel’s account of conceptual content is completed when he shows how a universal term is further specified so that it can determine singular objects. This occurs in its adequate form in a teleological process. I argue that Hegel’s account of teleology in the Science of Logic is an attempt to explain how and where Conceptual Transparency obtains. A teleological process is one in which a concept constitutes an object, and this means that a concept is perfectly adequate to express that thing’s nature and not merely to represent it. However, in the final chapter, I show that Hegel’s concept of teleology is meant paradigmatically to illuminate how human purposive processes have constituted a social world that is conceptually accessible to us. In this way, the primary “province” of Hegel’s rationalism is the human constructed world.

/pdf/the-province-of-conceptual-reason-hegel-s-post-kantian-2shrejuhu5.pdf

The Province of Conceptual Reason: Hegel's Post-Kantian Rationalism

This article offers a realist constructivist account of armed conflict, based on the work of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel has received relatively little attention in mainstream IR theory. When he has been read, four readings have predominated: realist, liberal, critical, and normative. Instead, we link his thought to both realism and constructivism. For Hegel, a persistent struggle for recognition and identity between individuals and groups drives much of human interaction. In his account of the causes of war in Philosophy of Right, Hegel relates international violence not only to realist international-structural pressures, but also to nationalism, and to the internal socioeconomic imperfections of the modern state. The result is broadly realist constructivist, linking a major international phenomenon — armed conflict — to interactions between power and ideas. Previous readings of Hegel in IR have deemphasised some or all of these features. Recovering them furnishes realist constructivism with theoretical tools for explaining the processes linking ideas and power politics — tools it has lacked thus far — in the context of a substantive phenomenon: armed conflict.

A Hegelian realist constructivist account of war, identity, and state formation

The thesis is an attempt to apply complex systems thinking to the problem of meaning. It is in two parts. Part 1, Chapter 1 introduces the research agenda and overviews the thesis. Chapter 2 establishes the value of adopting a systems approach to the problem of meaning. The next chapter introduces key concepts of complex systems theory as they apply to sociocultural phenomena, and the last chapter in Part 1 reviews three theories of complex meaning systems (Donald Campbell, Jay Lemke, and Paul Cilliers) from which a preliminary model and agenda for theorising complex meaning systems is proposed. Part 2 of the thesis investigates the phenomena of management fads, applying the models of complex meaning systems formulated in Part 1. No primary empirical work is attempted; rather an analytical engagement is conducted using secondary literature on what we know about such fads. The literature, both primary and secondary, is reviewed and critiqued. The final chapters exemplify the problem of meaning using the theory building and agenda setting from Part 1. The concluding chapter reflects on the adequacy of a complex systems approach to meaning, critiques the process of the thesis and comments upon its contribution.

/pdf/conceptualizing-complex-meaning-systems-the-case-of-2djkeb5wkg.pdf

Otto F. Kraushaar

Papers

An Introduction to Hegel

Kierkegaard in English. II