HEGEL’S of Spiril theoryfeet iCF @theoryfeet yeah I read Hegel everyday Tweeti çevir HEGEL’S Phenomenology of Spirit PREFACE: ON SCIENTIFIC COGNITION 1. It is customary to preface a work with an explanation of the author’s aim, why he wrote the book, and the relationship in which he believes it to etand to other earlier or contemporary treatises on the same iubject. In the case of a philosophical work, however, such an explanation seems not only superfluous but, in view priate and d aid, really says tht appropriately be natter, even inappro- ame n the Thing itsel a historical statement ng ne said abxut of the main results, a sthe unding. In it, he nd assurances about truth-nonar was g in the law, the way in which to Expound p man hen we look e philosophy moves essentially ipposite That is to say,vhich includes within itself the paonly nota of the otherancels as a complete naelf as the Forces. TEa and the final results, the exccutidiciting an ited Force unessential factor. On the other hare repressed tself; but t natomy, for instance (say, the knity were no mate), we cancelled aga ject-matter which no dife ion exert of yhich a distinetio rtainly . Further, in the case of sach an a n, is again canelled. In the pron has no right to bear the aame of and fro of change which Eut aim and other such generalities rld and present only in the a ne historical and un- comprehene supersensible world itse musdes, etc other hand, this would give rise to the incongruity that along with the empluyment of such a method its inability to grasp the truth would also be demonstrated. omes into cons general content and nce for us, bu cre more than in any ence. This is tself, and even in its etions, an ly rezarded as inani- hat is pres yet possess the suh- would b ce, bat must in addi- B itsedf (these rerves, IS spaa e tali philosophy, on the LATED BY A.V. MILLER TH ANALYSIS OF THE TEXT AND FOREWORD DV 2. Furthermore, the very attempt to define how a nhile sophical work is supposed n

Kaynak