{"id":9469,"date":"2012-10-11T13:11:58","date_gmt":"2012-10-11T18:11:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/?p=9469"},"modified":"2012-10-11T13:11:58","modified_gmt":"2012-10-11T18:11:58","slug":"zizek-hegel-dialectic","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2012\/10\/11\/zizek-hegel-dialectic\/","title":{"rendered":"\u017di\u017eek Hegel dialectic"},"content":{"rendered":"

There are two ways to break out of this \u201cidealism\u201d: either one rejects Hegel\u2019s dialectics as such, dismissing the notion of the subjective \u201cmediation\u201d of all substantial content as irreducibly \u201cidealist,\u201d proposing to replace it with a radically different matrix (Althusser: structural (over)determination; Deleuze: difference and repetition; Derrida: diff\u00e9rance<\/em>; Adorno: negative dialectics with its \u201cpreponderance of the objective\u201d); or<\/em> one rejects such a reading of Hegel (focused on the idea of \u201creconciliation\u201d as the subjective appropriation of the alienated substantial content) as \u201cidealist,\u201d as a misreading which remains blind to the true subversive core of Hegel\u2019s dialectic.<\/span><\/p>\n

This is our position: the Hegel of the absolute Subject swallowing up all objective content is a retroactive fantasy of his critics, starting with late Schelling\u2019s turn to \u201cpositive philosophy.\u201d This \u201cpositivity\u201d is found also in the young Marx, in the guise of the Aristotelian reassertion of positive forces or potentials of Being pre-existing logical or notional mediation.\u00a0 One should thus question the very image of Hegel-the-absolute-idealist presupposed by his critics \u2014 they attack the wrong Hegel, a straw man.<\/p>\n

What are they unable to think? The pure processuality of the subject which emerges as \u201cits own result.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

This is why talk about the subject\u2019s \u201cself-alienation\u201d is deceptive, as if the subject somehow precedes its alienation\u2015what this misses is the way the subject emerges through the \u201cself-alienation\u201d of the substance, not<\/em> of itself<\/span>.\u00a0 […]\u00a0 261<\/p>\n

What if, in its innermost core, Hegel\u2019s dialectic is not a machine for appropriating or mediating all otherness, for sublating all contingency into a subordinated ideal moment of the notional necessity? What if Hegelian \u201creconciliation\u201d already is the acceptance of an irreducible contingency at the very heart of notional necessity? What if it involves, as its culminating moment, the setting-free of objectivity in its otherness?<\/span> 262<\/p>\n

In other words, Adorno does not see how what he is looking for (a break-out from the confines of Identity) is already at work at the very heart of the Hegelian dialectic, so that it is Adorno\u2019s very critique which obliterates the subversive core of Hegel\u2019s thought, retroactively cementing the figure of his dialectic as the pan-logicist monster of the all-consuming Absolute Notion. 262<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

There are two ways to break out of this \u201cidealism\u201d: either one rejects Hegel\u2019s dialectics as such, dismissing the notion of the subjective \u201cmediation\u201d of all substantial content as irreducibly \u201cidealist,\u201d proposing to replace it with a radically different matrix (Althusser: structural (over)determination; Deleuze: difference and repetition; Derrida: diff\u00e9rance; Adorno: negative dialectics with its \u201cpreponderance … Continue reading “\u017di\u017eek Hegel dialectic”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[100,15,20],"tags":[116],"class_list":["post-9469","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-hegel","category-subjectivity","category-zizek","tag-ltn"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9469","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9469"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9469\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9472,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9469\/revisions\/9472"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9469"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9469"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9469"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}