What do you think?
Rate this book
Encyclopaedia of the Philosophical Sciences Series #2
المنطق وفلسفة الطبيعة
This is a much-needed reissue of the standard English translation of Hegel's Philosophy of Nature, originally published in 1970. The Philosophy of Nature is the second part of Hegel's Encyclopaedia of the Philosophical Sciences, all of which is now available in English from OUP (Part I being his Logic, Part III being his Philosophy of Mind).
Hegel's aim in this work is to interpret the varied phenomena of Nature from the standpoint of a dialectical logic. Those who still think of Hegel as a merely a priori philosopher will here find abundant evidence that he was keenly interested in and very well informed about empirical science. The Philosophy of Nature is integral to his philosophical system and deserves the most serious attention. Students and scholars of Hegel and the history of European philosophy will welcome the availability of this important text, which also includes a translation of Hegel's Zusatze or lecture notes.
323 pages, Paperback
First published April 28, 1970
10 people are currently reading
601 people want to read
About the author
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
2,171 books2,510 followersGeorg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) was a German philosopher and one of the founding figures of German Idealism. Influenced by Kant's transcendental idealism and Rousseau's politics, Hegel formulated an elaborate system of historical development of ethics, government, and religion through the dialectical unfolding of the Absolute. Hegel was one of the most well-known historicist philosopher, and his thought presaged continental philosophy, including postmodernism. His system was inverted into a materialist ideology by Karl Marx, originally a member of the Young Hegelian faction.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
May 12, 2021
Most of this book is completely ridiculous, but to his credit, Hegel vigorously and persistently tries to fit the wealth of nature into his philosophical, dialectical scheme. It does not work very well, of course, and therefore no one reads this stuff anymore. That said, some parts of the book are interesting for scholarly purposes - and a few even for their own sake.
So, some good reflections are scattered throughout the book. In order to be able to get through this mostly outdated (or just never correct) and dry book, I skipped most of the details in the middle of the book to instead focus on the long foreword and introduction, the last chapters of the book, and then the first and last parts of the main chapters. I think these parts contained most of the interesting points - and was enough to gain a pretty good understanding of Hegel's general project with this work.
In essence, nature is the externality of the Idea. First we have the Logic - i.e. the essence of the Notion - and then we have Nature - the Idea externalized - and then we have Spirit - i.e. the return of the notion into itself via humanity's culture and philosophy etc. Therefore, nature is a vital part of the Idea. It is the medium which lets spirit return to itself (this is its telos; spirit is always the implicit goal of Nature). And furthermore, qua negative determination of the Idea it is a part of its infinitude or negative unity (if you don't understand that, there is no reason to read this book). This is basically what he repeats at each and every chance he gets, and so it is the main point of the book.
Starting essentially from Matter, Space, and Time, Hegel attempts to find and track a dialectical, notional development within nature (using all his typical jargon: particularity, singularity, universality, immediacy, reflection, abstractness, externality, sublation, dialectic, notion, etc.). Most of these attempts are completely mistaken and rather irrelevant for anyone who is not a complete Hegel fanboy, so there is no need to get too bogged down on the exact details of every part of the book, although several chapters are quite interesting, especially in the third part of the book, called "Organics" (and of course the introduction and foreword which give an outline of the book).
I would not recommend this to anyone who is not a Hegel fanboy and/or does not need to read it for scholarly purposes.
So, some good reflections are scattered throughout the book. In order to be able to get through this mostly outdated (or just never correct) and dry book, I skipped most of the details in the middle of the book to instead focus on the long foreword and introduction, the last chapters of the book, and then the first and last parts of the main chapters. I think these parts contained most of the interesting points - and was enough to gain a pretty good understanding of Hegel's general project with this work.
In essence, nature is the externality of the Idea. First we have the Logic - i.e. the essence of the Notion - and then we have Nature - the Idea externalized - and then we have Spirit - i.e. the return of the notion into itself via humanity's culture and philosophy etc. Therefore, nature is a vital part of the Idea. It is the medium which lets spirit return to itself (this is its telos; spirit is always the implicit goal of Nature). And furthermore, qua negative determination of the Idea it is a part of its infinitude or negative unity (if you don't understand that, there is no reason to read this book). This is basically what he repeats at each and every chance he gets, and so it is the main point of the book.
Starting essentially from Matter, Space, and Time, Hegel attempts to find and track a dialectical, notional development within nature (using all his typical jargon: particularity, singularity, universality, immediacy, reflection, abstractness, externality, sublation, dialectic, notion, etc.). Most of these attempts are completely mistaken and rather irrelevant for anyone who is not a complete Hegel fanboy, so there is no need to get too bogged down on the exact details of every part of the book, although several chapters are quite interesting, especially in the third part of the book, called "Organics" (and of course the introduction and foreword which give an outline of the book).
I would not recommend this to anyone who is not a Hegel fanboy and/or does not need to read it for scholarly purposes.
January 17, 2016
It's finally happened. I'm burnt out on Hegel. I figured I would be able to get through his Philosophy Of Mind before it would happen, but no such luck.
With this work Hegel attempts to incorporate the physical sciences into his philosophy; and the result is certainly less than stellar. Already he was starting to annoy me when he decided to play the role Schopenhauer played towards him, towards Isaac Newton -complete with ad hominem attacks that are quite a bit less humorous than Schopenhauer's ad hominem attacks on him. Hegel attempts to denigrate Newton while lauding Goethe and Kepler (both German, surprise surprise). Hegel asserts that everything Newton did was done already by Kepler; of course, Hegel is no mathematician, so any scientific critique of Newton without due recourse to his mathematical formulae, is simply laughable. Hegel proceeds to blast Newton's work on spectroscopy, while praising Goethe's work in the same field. I don't know of anyone in modern times that takes Goethe's work all that seriously, and as being anywhere near more reliable than Newton's in spectroscopy; from what I've read, Goethe's work is seen as being largely idealistic, not scientific. Hegel's support of Goethe almost certainly is down to the ubiquitous German ethnocentrism that regularly rears it's ugly head throughout the history of that country. That ethnocentrism was only curtailed when Germany was properly humbled after the Nazis shamed that country on the world stage. It isn't that I'm all that into Newton, it's only that Hegel is out of his league commenting on a discipline he doesn't have the background in. Admittedly, I was far more patient with John Hutchinson's opposition to Newton, for the simple fact that at least Hutchinson's views were novel and interesting. There's not much that is interesting about this work. Hegel is simply trying to co-opt other disciplines in order to make his system more comprehensive, and thus, make his system seem all encompassing. Aside from the obvious fact that 200 years of the physical sciences has made many of the views presented here passe and obsolete, Hegel is at his most arrogant in this very tedious 55 page tract.
My mind was really starting to wander while reading this book. Hegel's dialectic has now exhausted my patience and I am going to have to hold off on reading him for a while. After completing three works that push 700 pages altogether, I have reached the terminus. Since my full dedicated attention was lacking here, I want to be fair and give 3 stars instead of 2.
With this work Hegel attempts to incorporate the physical sciences into his philosophy; and the result is certainly less than stellar. Already he was starting to annoy me when he decided to play the role Schopenhauer played towards him, towards Isaac Newton -complete with ad hominem attacks that are quite a bit less humorous than Schopenhauer's ad hominem attacks on him. Hegel attempts to denigrate Newton while lauding Goethe and Kepler (both German, surprise surprise). Hegel asserts that everything Newton did was done already by Kepler; of course, Hegel is no mathematician, so any scientific critique of Newton without due recourse to his mathematical formulae, is simply laughable. Hegel proceeds to blast Newton's work on spectroscopy, while praising Goethe's work in the same field. I don't know of anyone in modern times that takes Goethe's work all that seriously, and as being anywhere near more reliable than Newton's in spectroscopy; from what I've read, Goethe's work is seen as being largely idealistic, not scientific. Hegel's support of Goethe almost certainly is down to the ubiquitous German ethnocentrism that regularly rears it's ugly head throughout the history of that country. That ethnocentrism was only curtailed when Germany was properly humbled after the Nazis shamed that country on the world stage. It isn't that I'm all that into Newton, it's only that Hegel is out of his league commenting on a discipline he doesn't have the background in. Admittedly, I was far more patient with John Hutchinson's opposition to Newton, for the simple fact that at least Hutchinson's views were novel and interesting. There's not much that is interesting about this work. Hegel is simply trying to co-opt other disciplines in order to make his system more comprehensive, and thus, make his system seem all encompassing. Aside from the obvious fact that 200 years of the physical sciences has made many of the views presented here passe and obsolete, Hegel is at his most arrogant in this very tedious 55 page tract.
My mind was really starting to wander while reading this book. Hegel's dialectic has now exhausted my patience and I am going to have to hold off on reading him for a while. After completing three works that push 700 pages altogether, I have reached the terminus. Since my full dedicated attention was lacking here, I want to be fair and give 3 stars instead of 2.
April 27, 2020
I was reading this paper in case of interesting in how Nature reacts upon us and during the time of getting troublesome with the nature ourselves but at the time after reading this paper , I have a great enemy in the Nature and He’s Hegel himself! God Damn it!!
July 31, 2023
The sad thing about Hegel’s Nature is that he and Schopenhauer could have changed all of human thought. They lived at the same time, but never could understand each other. If only Schopenhauer could have understood Hegel’s dispossession of the political paradigm and how it creates all of duality. If only Hegel could have understood Schopenhauer’s well adjusted panpsychism. We’d have had a new scientific paradigm and before even Einstein came along. And yet we’re stuck even today between these two understandings.
From a physics standpoint you have Hegel’s nature which is based on the gravity of essentially homeostasis. Then you have Schopenhauer who lays the groundwork for Einstein’s relativity. But since the two paradigms are fundamentally different from each other, as well as Newton, you get not much forward progress. Hegel dissolving the determinism of Newton all together. Schopenhauer building on Newtons dualism but going one further. So you get Schopenhauer’s angry demeaning of Hegel while he tries to reestablish German credibility.
The same could be said about psychology. These are perhaps two of the greatest psychologists ever, and before Freud. Either Hegel or Schopenhauer could be considered the beginning of psychology in the west. Hegel used the Buddhist concepts of presence and connects it with the western abstract minded projection. He shows how all reductionism and perceptual delusion comes from this. Then If Schopenhauer’s evolutionary psychology could have solidified with Darwin’s research it would have given psychology a more rigid behaviorism from the very beginning. I can picture a future where human psychology is studied perceptually from the inception of its natural selection. To understand the necessity of a science like that you’d need Schopenhauer’s metaphysics.
Why couldn’t these two get along? They disagreed for such arbitrary reasons. Hegel’s avoidance of panpsychism seems out of place with his philosophy. Schopenhauer’s eastern influence and understanding of dualism should have allowed him to see the necessity of Hegel’s political paradigm shifting dissolve of dualism.
From 1810-1830 they should have irrevocably changed the world. Back then people actually would have believed in the shift and followed it considering Germany was where all great thought was taking place in philosophy as well as art. Last century we got Deleuze & Gautarri, and Baudrillard and no one cared. No serious scientists or linguists are listening when you question capitalism. Not even Chomsky.
From a physics standpoint you have Hegel’s nature which is based on the gravity of essentially homeostasis. Then you have Schopenhauer who lays the groundwork for Einstein’s relativity. But since the two paradigms are fundamentally different from each other, as well as Newton, you get not much forward progress. Hegel dissolving the determinism of Newton all together. Schopenhauer building on Newtons dualism but going one further. So you get Schopenhauer’s angry demeaning of Hegel while he tries to reestablish German credibility.
The same could be said about psychology. These are perhaps two of the greatest psychologists ever, and before Freud. Either Hegel or Schopenhauer could be considered the beginning of psychology in the west. Hegel used the Buddhist concepts of presence and connects it with the western abstract minded projection. He shows how all reductionism and perceptual delusion comes from this. Then If Schopenhauer’s evolutionary psychology could have solidified with Darwin’s research it would have given psychology a more rigid behaviorism from the very beginning. I can picture a future where human psychology is studied perceptually from the inception of its natural selection. To understand the necessity of a science like that you’d need Schopenhauer’s metaphysics.
Why couldn’t these two get along? They disagreed for such arbitrary reasons. Hegel’s avoidance of panpsychism seems out of place with his philosophy. Schopenhauer’s eastern influence and understanding of dualism should have allowed him to see the necessity of Hegel’s political paradigm shifting dissolve of dualism.
From 1810-1830 they should have irrevocably changed the world. Back then people actually would have believed in the shift and followed it considering Germany was where all great thought was taking place in philosophy as well as art. Last century we got Deleuze & Gautarri, and Baudrillard and no one cared. No serious scientists or linguists are listening when you question capitalism. Not even Chomsky.
March 18, 2016
من افضل الكتب عن فلسفة هيجل شرحا وتبسيطا مع العمق
April 14, 2023
As someone who once looked up to Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel as a key role model, I approached his book "Philosophy of Nature" with great anticipation and excitement. However, after delving into the text, I must admit that I was left with mixed feelings.
On the one hand, I found Hegel's eclectic style of constructing ideas and concepts to be quite intriguing. He weaves together a diverse array of philosophical, scientific, and theological sources to create a rich tapestry of thought that is at times dazzling in its complexity.
However, I also found myself struggling to follow the thread of his argument at times. While his ideas are undoubtedly profound and thought-provoking, they are often presented in such an abstract and esoteric manner that it can be difficult to discern their practical implications.
Furthermore, I couldn't help but feel that Hegel's approach to the philosophy of nature was somewhat outdated. While his emphasis on the interconnection of all things is certainly a valuable insight, his reliance on outdated scientific models and metaphysical concepts felt somewhat limiting.
Overall, I would say that "Philosophy of Nature" is a challenging and at times frustrating to read, but one that is ultimately worth the effort for those who are willing to put in the time and effort to engage with Hegel's ideas on a deep level. As a former devotee of his philosophy, I still hold a great deal of respect and admiration for his work, even as I find myself questioning some of his assumptions and conclusions.
On the one hand, I found Hegel's eclectic style of constructing ideas and concepts to be quite intriguing. He weaves together a diverse array of philosophical, scientific, and theological sources to create a rich tapestry of thought that is at times dazzling in its complexity.
However, I also found myself struggling to follow the thread of his argument at times. While his ideas are undoubtedly profound and thought-provoking, they are often presented in such an abstract and esoteric manner that it can be difficult to discern their practical implications.
Furthermore, I couldn't help but feel that Hegel's approach to the philosophy of nature was somewhat outdated. While his emphasis on the interconnection of all things is certainly a valuable insight, his reliance on outdated scientific models and metaphysical concepts felt somewhat limiting.
Overall, I would say that "Philosophy of Nature" is a challenging and at times frustrating to read, but one that is ultimately worth the effort for those who are willing to put in the time and effort to engage with Hegel's ideas on a deep level. As a former devotee of his philosophy, I still hold a great deal of respect and admiration for his work, even as I find myself questioning some of his assumptions and conclusions.
January 5, 2025
Had to ignore 80% of what is written here, but the core seems to be:
Nature as Externality
- The Idea's self-alienation into space and time
- The necessary moment of "otherness" in Spirit's development
- Where concept exists in dispersed, external form
Three Major Divisions:
1. Mechanics
- Space, time, matter, and gravity
- Most external form of nature
- Pure quantitative relationships
2. Physics
- Light, elements, chemical processes
- Qualitative determinations
- Beginning of particularity
3. Organics
- Geological nature
- Vegetative nature
- Animal organism
- Progressive movement toward subjectivity
Key Principles:
- Each stage represents increasing internalization
- Movement from external determination to self-relation
- Nature strives toward but never fully achieves perfect unity
- Contains both necessity (laws) and contingency (accidents)
- Cyclical rather than linear development
Final Purpose:
- The emergence of Spirit through natural development
- Animal organism as highest natural form pointing beyond nature
- Nature finding its truth in conscious Spirit
Nature as Externality
- The Idea's self-alienation into space and time
- The necessary moment of "otherness" in Spirit's development
- Where concept exists in dispersed, external form
Three Major Divisions:
1. Mechanics
- Space, time, matter, and gravity
- Most external form of nature
- Pure quantitative relationships
2. Physics
- Light, elements, chemical processes
- Qualitative determinations
- Beginning of particularity
3. Organics
- Geological nature
- Vegetative nature
- Animal organism
- Progressive movement toward subjectivity
Key Principles:
- Each stage represents increasing internalization
- Movement from external determination to self-relation
- Nature strives toward but never fully achieves perfect unity
- Contains both necessity (laws) and contingency (accidents)
- Cyclical rather than linear development
Final Purpose:
- The emergence of Spirit through natural development
- Animal organism as highest natural form pointing beyond nature
- Nature finding its truth in conscious Spirit
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews