Hegel does not view Universal as mere abstraction to be extracted from comparing things, taking their common features and subtracting differences, as we do when we create universal words such as color and animal. In the process of abstraction, for example, we consider a family of things with common predicates; fruits with edible fleshes, kernels, colors etc. and create the concept of the fruit, while in the actual world we don't have fruits to act on.
Despite abstract nouns, which have come to true with the gradual emergence and development of the language, Hegel does not believe that Universal is as old as universal nouns. Hegel draws a fine boundary between what is truly Universal and what is merely the common denominator of other things. He refers to the Social Contract of Rousseau. Hegel says the Social Contract, though is a universal connecting all human beings, may be different from the will of one by one of individuals. A rough analogy may be drawn here with reference to the Marx' interpretation of the mode of production and property relations; while these are products of human beings' activity and their common participation in the production process it stands above and beyond men.
Another point with the Universal is that is not "created". Though it is the product of a mediation process but the process that leads to the emergence of a Notion is its internal movement; some kind of self-specialization. It means that the Notion depends on lower levels of its existence.
No comments:
Post a Comment