英文摘要 |
In this article, I mainly treat the section (§17-§23) in the text “Womit muss der Anfang der Wissenschaft gemacht werden?” by interpreting, analyzing, and finally textually criticizing it based on theoretical tendency. According to my interpretation, Hegel consciously aims to criticize Platonic dialectics of “the upward path” — ex hypothesis to arche anhypothetos, by which the problem of beginning in pure science could be solved. By this dialectics, when it deals with the problem of beginning, it analyzes “the representation of beginning,” and finally we can get “the unity of being and non-being” as the first principle without presuppositions. Though the principle seems to be the same with the view of the Hegel’s dialectics: “Being—Nothing—Becoming”, all analysis is derived from the representation which is related with subjective experience. Accordingly, the principle contains a medium and cannot be the absolute beginning in pure science, so that the whole ontology deduced from it is merely the thoughts of pure concept, not the thoughts that thoughts itself move by itself, which Hegel requires for pure science. If my interpretation is correct, the section can not only explicate Hegel’s critic of antique dialectics, but with next section that Hegel criticizes Fichte’s theory of subjectivity that he uses intellectual intuition as the beginning, both sections can also implicate — Hegelian rhetoric — the whole purpose of Wissenschaft der Logik: to unite the metaphysics of antique idealism and of modern subjectivism and to overcome their own problems. |