Big Red Jeff Rubard
2010-02-07 19:08:46 UTC
New Style:
Copyright Terry Pinkard 2008
System
of
Science
By
Ge. Wilh. Fr. Hegel
/Dr. and Professor of Philosophy in Jena, Member of the
Ducal Mineralogical Society, Assessor to the Society and
Member of other learned societies/
_____________
First Part
The
Phenomenology of Spirit
_________________________
Bamberg and Würzburg,
Joseph Anton Goebhardt
1807
[...]
First Part
Science
of the
Experience
of
Consciousness
Preface [*Vorrede*]
1. In the preface to a philosophical work, it
is customary for the author to give an
explanation – namely, an explanation of his
purpose in writing the book, his
motivations behind it, and the relations it
bears to other previous or contemporary
treatments of the same topics – but for a
philosophical work, this seems not only
superfluous but in light of the nature of the
subject matter, even inappropriate and
counterproductive. For whatever it might
be suitable to say about philosophy in a
preface – for instance, to give some
historical instruction about the biases and
the standpoint of the text, or some talk
about the general content and the results
together with a set of scattered assertions
and assurances about the truth – none of
these can count as the way to present
philosophical truth. – Moreover, because
philosophy essentially exists in the element
of universality, which encompasses the
particular within itself, it might seem that
in philosophy, indeed even more so than in
the other sciences, that what is salient
about its subject matter,1 even its perfect
essence, would be expressed in the goal of
the work and in its final results, and that
the way the project is in fact carried out
would be what is inessential. In contrast, if
a person were to have only a general
notion2 of, for example, anatomy, or, to put
it roughly, if he were to have an
acquaintance with the parts of the body
taken in terms of their lifeless existence,
nobody would thereby think that he has
come into full possession of the salient
subject matter of that science, which is to
say, its content.
----
Trans. Rubard:
HATERS GOTTA HATE
LOVERS GOTTA LOVE
I "MUST NEEDS" MUST HAVE
NONE-OF-THE-ABOVE [!!]
I WANT TO /KISS/ ON YOU
"YES" /I/ DO
BUT WHAT I MUST "DO"
Etc.
----
*Seriös*, Folks --- Hegelianism a /prosaic/ "practice" (practice) of
creating an *integrated* [!!!!] national "identitay" and /it never
gonna leave/ --- I didn't even have to use the sophisticated "English"
love maneuver.
IN
COE
PIT
*oder*
"Sa ta day"?
----
PS: VERY EROTETIC. Is "catch-phrase".
PPS: http://web.mac.com/titpaul/Site/Phenomenology_of_Spirit_page.html
PPPS: http://www.last.fm/music/Fela+Kuti/_/Water+No+Get+Enemy
["FEAAAILAAA!!"]
----
Out of the Past:
http://www.rhapsody.com/goto?rcid=tra.31733154
Copyright Terry Pinkard 2008
System
of
Science
By
Ge. Wilh. Fr. Hegel
/Dr. and Professor of Philosophy in Jena, Member of the
Ducal Mineralogical Society, Assessor to the Society and
Member of other learned societies/
_____________
First Part
The
Phenomenology of Spirit
_________________________
Bamberg and Würzburg,
Joseph Anton Goebhardt
1807
[...]
First Part
Science
of the
Experience
of
Consciousness
Preface [*Vorrede*]
1. In the preface to a philosophical work, it
is customary for the author to give an
explanation – namely, an explanation of his
purpose in writing the book, his
motivations behind it, and the relations it
bears to other previous or contemporary
treatments of the same topics – but for a
philosophical work, this seems not only
superfluous but in light of the nature of the
subject matter, even inappropriate and
counterproductive. For whatever it might
be suitable to say about philosophy in a
preface – for instance, to give some
historical instruction about the biases and
the standpoint of the text, or some talk
about the general content and the results
together with a set of scattered assertions
and assurances about the truth – none of
these can count as the way to present
philosophical truth. – Moreover, because
philosophy essentially exists in the element
of universality, which encompasses the
particular within itself, it might seem that
in philosophy, indeed even more so than in
the other sciences, that what is salient
about its subject matter,1 even its perfect
essence, would be expressed in the goal of
the work and in its final results, and that
the way the project is in fact carried out
would be what is inessential. In contrast, if
a person were to have only a general
notion2 of, for example, anatomy, or, to put
it roughly, if he were to have an
acquaintance with the parts of the body
taken in terms of their lifeless existence,
nobody would thereby think that he has
come into full possession of the salient
subject matter of that science, which is to
say, its content.
----
Trans. Rubard:
HATERS GOTTA HATE
LOVERS GOTTA LOVE
I "MUST NEEDS" MUST HAVE
NONE-OF-THE-ABOVE [!!]
I WANT TO /KISS/ ON YOU
"YES" /I/ DO
BUT WHAT I MUST "DO"
Etc.
----
*Seriös*, Folks --- Hegelianism a /prosaic/ "practice" (practice) of
creating an *integrated* [!!!!] national "identitay" and /it never
gonna leave/ --- I didn't even have to use the sophisticated "English"
love maneuver.
IN
COE
PIT
*oder*
"Sa ta day"?
----
PS: VERY EROTETIC. Is "catch-phrase".
PPS: http://web.mac.com/titpaul/Site/Phenomenology_of_Spirit_page.html
PPPS: http://www.last.fm/music/Fela+Kuti/_/Water+No+Get+Enemy
["FEAAAILAAA!!"]
----
Out of the Past:
http://www.rhapsody.com/goto?rcid=tra.31733154