Hegelianism

← Encyclopedia

Hegelianism is the philosophy of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831) and the schools of thought that grew from it — a body of work that treats all of reality, mind and nature and history alike, as a single rational process coming to know itself. Where earlier idealists had set thought against the world Hegel denied the division: the real is rational, he argued, and the rational real, and the structure of thinking and the structure of being are at bottom one. The mistake of philosophy had been to assume a gap between the knower and a world sealed off beyond knowing — a thing-in-itself forever out of reach. Remove the gap and a stranger conclusion follows. If thought and being share one structure, then when mind thinks its way through that structure to the end, it is not mapping reality from outside; it is reality, arriving at consciousness of what it has been all along. Hegel named the whole of that self-developing reality Geist — Spirit, or Mind — and held that it reaches full self-consciousness only at the end of a long historical labor, and only through the very beings, human beings among them, in whom it learns to say “I.”

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831), portrait painted in Berlin in 1831 — Jakob Schlesinger, Alte Nationalgalerie, via Wikimedia Commons (public domain)

The dialectic

The motion by which Spirit advances is the dialectic, and it is best understood not as a debating trick but as the way any one-sided position destroys and completes itself under pressure. Take a category as fixed and self-sufficient — being, say, the barest “is” — and think it through rigorously, and it turns out to be empty, indistinguishable from nothing; the determination collapses into its opposite, and the collapse forces a richer category (becoming) that holds both. Each stage thus generates from within the contradiction that overturns it, and the conflict is resolved at a higher level which cancels the earlier position, preserves what was true in it, and lifts it into something fuller. Hegel called this triple action Aufhebung — sublation, a single German word that means at once to abolish, to keep, and to raise up.

The popular shorthand — thesis, antithesis, synthesis — was never Hegel’s. He described his three moments differently: the moment of the understanding, which fixes a determination as stable; the dialectical or negatively rational moment, in which the determination undermines itself; and the speculative or positively rational moment, which grasps the unity that the collapse produces. The thesis–antithesis–synthesis formula descends instead from Johann Gottlieb Fichte and was fastened onto Hegel by the expositor Heinrich Moritz Chalybäus in the 1830s; the historian Gustav Mueller spent a celebrated 1958 essay dismantling what he called the legend. The distinction is not pedantry. Hegel’s dialectic is not a mechanical pendulum swung by an outside hand but the self-movement of the content, each concept driven onward by its own insufficiency, so that the whole chain hangs together as one necessary development rather than a string of clashes patched up after the fact.

The architecture of the system

From this engine Hegel built one of the most comprehensive systems in the history of philosophy — a single deduction running, in principle, from the emptiest abstraction to the fullest concrete reality. The Phenomenology of Spirit of 1807 is its great gateway: a ladder of forms of consciousness, each trying to know its object and discovering, in the trying, that the object was shaped by consciousness all along, until naive sense-certainty has climbed through self-consciousness, reason, and the long history of spirit to absolute knowing. Among its stations is the encounter of two self-consciousnesses in a struggle for recognition that ends in mastery and servitude — each demanding to be acknowledged by the other, the contest pressed to the edge of death, the one who fears death more becoming the slave. The victory hollows itself out: the master is recognized only by a slave whose recognition he despises, and so wins nothing worth having, while the slave, set to labor on the world, learns through that labor to shape and master things, discovers his own mind in what he makes, and inherits the truer freedom. The lesson — that self-consciousness exists only in being recognized, that the self is constituted through the other — radiates through the rest of the system. This master–slave passage would have an afterlife out of all proportion to the few pages it occupies.

After the Phenomenology the system proper unfolds in three great divisions. The Science of Logic (1812–1816) is not formal logic but the science of the pure categories of thought-and-being, the bare structure of the real worked out before nature and mind appear. The Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences (1817, revised 1827 and 1830) then lays the whole out in three parts: the Logic; the Philosophy of Nature, where the Idea externalizes itself as space, matter, life; and the Philosophy of Spirit, where it returns to itself through the subjective spirit of the individual mind, the objective spirit of law, morality, and the state — elaborated in the Philosophy of Right of 1820 — and finally the absolute spirit that knows itself in art, religion, and philosophy. Across the Lectures on the Philosophy of History, freedom is the plot: the long passage from a world in which one is free, through one in which some are free, to the recognition that all are free, Spirit coming home to itself in time. History advances by what Hegel called the cunning of reason — the passions and private ambitions of individuals, Caesar’s or Napoleon’s, doing the work of the universal without intending it, spent like fuel while the larger aim moves forward over their heads. Art shows the absolute to the senses, religion to feeling and representation, philosophy to thought — the same content, three times, rising to the form adequate to it. At the summit thought thinks itself: the Nous of the old philosophers, the divine self-thinking thought of Aristotle’s God, returns here as the Absolute Idea that has traversed nature and history to know itself as the whole. This is the speculative claim in its strongest form — that the order of being and the order of thought are not two parallel series but one self-articulating reality, so that the logician who completes the deduction is not describing the world from a window but reenacting, in finite consciousness, the process by which the world becomes transparent to itself.

The school his death set loose

When Hegel died in the cholera epidemic of 1831 he left behind not a settled doctrine but a battlefield, and the line of fracture ran through the most sensitive joint of the system: what, exactly, it meant for Christianity. The system claimed that religion and philosophy share one content and differ only in form — religion picturing in image and story what philosophy grasps in concept. Read one way, this vindicates the faith and crowns the existing order; read the other, it dissolves the faith into a truth that philosophy alone now possesses, and leaves the doctrines as discarded scaffolding.

The split became visible with David Friedrich Strauss, whose Life of Jesus, Critically Examined (1835–36) treated the Gospel narratives as myth — the community’s image-making, not history — and detonated the school. Surveying the wreckage, Strauss himself borrowed the seating-plan of a legislature to name the factions: a Right, a Center, and a Left.

Title page of the first volume of David Friedrich Strauss’s Das Leben Jesu, kritisch bearbeitet (The Life of Jesus, Critically Examined), 1835, the book that split the Hegelian school — via Wikimedia Commons (public domain)

The Right, or Old, Hegelians — Karl Göschel, Georg Gabler, Bruno Bauer in his early phase — read the master as the philosophical guardian of Christianity and the rational Prussian state. The Left, or Young, Hegelians turned the dialectic into a weapon, treating theology as something to be seen through and history as something still to be made. Out of that left wing came Ludwig Feuerbach, whose Essence of Christianity (1841) inverted the whole edifice: theology is anthropology, God the projection of humanity’s own species-being thrown onto the sky and worshiped there, so that the task is to take the projected riches back. A young Karl Marx absorbed Feuerbach and pressed further. The dialectic, he wrote, had been standing on its head in Hegel, who made the movement of ideas the demiurge of the real; turned right side up, it became the movement of material and economic life, ideas its reflex. The afterlife of Hegelianism thus runs in two directions at once — toward a conservative theology of the established order and toward a revolutionary materialism that promised to abolish it — both claiming the same method.

Ludwig Feuerbach (1804–1872), Young Hegelian author of The Essence of Christianity (1841) — engraving from Die Gartenlaube (1872), via Wikimedia Commons (public domain)

Karl Marx (1818–1883), who absorbed Feuerbach and turned the dialectic toward material life — photograph by John Jabez Edwin Mayall, 1875, via Wikimedia Commons (public domain)

The system did not stay buried with the quarrel. In Britain a Hegelian revival opened with James Hutchison Stirling’s The Secret of Hegel (1865) and flowered in the idealism of T. H. Green (1836–1882), F. H. Bradley (1846–1924), Bernard Bosanquet (1848–1923), and J. M. E. McTaggart (1866–1925), until the early twentieth century — when Russell and Moore’s revolt against idealism nearly extinguished it in the English-speaking world. In France it returned by a narrower door: Alexandre Kojève’s lectures on the Phenomenology through the 1930s, attended by a generation that would carry his reading into existentialism and beyond, fixed the master–slave struggle as the heart of Hegel and made recognition the master-theme — a line that runs through Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, and Frantz Fanon, and reaches into the present in Axel Honneth’s recognition-based critical theory. The thinker most reactions wished to refute proved unkillable; each age that buried him exhumed a different Hegel.

The Hermetic-reception debate

One strand of recent scholarship reads Hegel against a background the textbooks rarely name. The historian of philosophy Glenn Alexander Magee, in Hegel and the Hermetic Tradition (2001), argues that the system owes a deeper debt than the standard account allows to the Hermetic and theosophic current — the lineage running from the Corpus Hermeticum and Hermes Trismegistus through the Renaissance magus and, above all, through Jacob Boehme and the Christian theosophy that descended from him. The central charge is precise: that Hegel takes over the essential Hermetic teaching that God comes to self-knowledge through humanity’s knowledge of God — that the divine is not a finished perfection contemplating itself in advance but a process that needs the world, and the human mind within it, to complete its own self-consciousness. Magee finds Boehmian motifs in the Preface to the Phenomenology, Kabbalistic structures in the doctrine of objective spirit, alchemical imagery in the Philosophy of Right, and a lifelong Hegelian interest in alchemy and the marginal sciences.

Jakob Böhme (1575–1624), the theosophist Hegel called der erste deutsche Philosoph*, the “first German philosopher” — engraved portrait, Rijksmuseum, via Wikimedia Commons (public domain)*

The reading does not arrive without foundation in Hegel’s own text. In the Lectures on the History of Philosophy, edited from his manuscripts and student notes by Karl Ludwig Michelet and published in 1836, Hegel devotes to Boehme more space than to many canonical figures and calls him der erste deutsche Philosoph — the first German philosopher — praising the depth of his vision of God’s inner life of self-division and reconciliation while wincing at the rudimentary, almost barbaric vocabulary in which the shoemaker of Görlitz cast it. The scholar Cecilia Muratori has traced this engagement in detail, across Hegel’s published work and his manuscripts, in a study that takes its very title from the phrase. That Hegel read Boehme closely, and admired him, is not in dispute.

What is in dispute is how much it explains. Against the Hermetic reading stands a long-dominant alternative that grounds the system entirely within the German idealist movement: Hegel as the heir who completes the unfinished project of Immanuel Kant, pushing past the unknowable thing-in-itself by way of Fichte’s self-positing ego and the philosophy of nature of F. W. J. Schelling — with whom Hegel shared rooms, a seminary, and a youthful journal before they broke. On this reading the Boehmian echoes are present but secondary, the gleanings of a systematic thinker who absorbed everything and was decisively shaped by his immediate predecessors. The question is genuinely undecided among specialists, and turns on a hard methodological problem: a structural resemblance — the shape of a divine mind that estranges itself in the world and returns home enriched — recurs across the procession-and-return of Neoplatonism, the emanation schemes of late antiquity, the exile-and- restoration arc of eschatology, the gnostic drama of a fallen and recovered spark, and the Boehmean cosmogony alike, so that finding the shape in Hegel proves only that he inherited a very old pattern, not which channel carried it to him. (The “theosophy” at issue here is the Boehmean Christian current, distinct in both source and sense from the later Theosophy of Blavatsky’s society and from the Sadrian transcendent theosophy of Islamic philosophy, which share the English word and nothing of the lineage.)

A philosophy that locates the truth of a thing not in its origin but in the whole arc of its development can hardly demand a single clean pedigree for itself. By its own logic Hegelianism is the sum of what it became — the right-wing apologetics and the left-wing inversion, the British idealist revival and the French recovery of the master and slave, the Hermetic genealogy and the Kantian, the system as its author left it in 1831 and the system a long line of readers remade by quarreling over it. The dialectic Hegel turned on every fixed position turns at last on his own, and that is no failure of the system but its fulfillment: a Spirit that comes to itself only through history was always bound to come to itself through the history of its reception, the contradictions in the school no less its life than the contradictions inside the Logic.

→ Related: Neoplatonism · Nous · Gnosis · Eschatology · Hermes Trismegistus · G W F Hegel · Spirit · Christianity · Ludwig Feuerbach · Corpus Hermeticum · Jacob Boehme · Christian Theosophy Boehmean · Immanuel Kant · F W J Schelling · Emanation · Theosophy