All philosophy may be a footnote to Plato but contemporary philosophy is a reaction to Hegel. This is more or less agreed to though the nature of the reaction is problematic. It is customary fare in history of philosophy courses (even the ten-minute kind) to describe Pragmatism, Existentialism, and Marxism as reactions to Hegel.[1] Howard P. Kainz says that "Even if the philosophy of Hegel were of no particular importance in itself, it would still have an historical importance in view of philosophical movements that it has given rise to."[2] While the historical importance of Hegel is recognized there is still a great deal of fight with respect to particulars. Just how much of Dewey is still Hegelian even after Dewey completely rid his philosophy of "Hegelian garb"?[3] Are there grounds for holding that Hegel influenced the theory of meaning as use?[4] Kierkegaard never misses an opportunity to be critical of Hegel but is it possible that he came close to agreeing with much of what Hegel said?[5] Sartre's pour soi and en soi shows he comes to grips with Hegel's fur sich and an sich at least as frequently as he comes to grips with Cartesianism but how much of Being and Nothingness is Hegelian?[6] Marx thought he had turned Hegel upside down (or was it right side up?) but just how much Marxism is Hegelian anyway?
Considering the philosophical reactions to Hegel as adoptions rather than rejections lifts many eyebrows. Possibly, this is because of the success Hegel's "friend" Schelling had in "relegating Hegel's philosophy, along with his own earlier philosophy, to the stage of merely 'negative' philosophy."[7] Schelling's mangled version of Hegel was the Hegel Kierkegaard studied. It is no wonder that the Hegel Kierkegaard ridicules is so difficult to find in Hegel. This mangled version is the version Pragmatism, Existentialism and Marxism largely react against. It influenced Josiah Royce who was really the target of William James' criticisms of Hegel. In fact, Walter Kaufmann claims that:
William James polemicized against Hegel again and again, but hardly knew Hegel and really meant Royce who, ironically, was often less close to Hegel than James was. James's attack against the block universe, though aimed at Hegel, would have found an enthusiastic ally in Hegel. So, of course, would have James's 'pragmatic' insistence that truth should make a difference in our lives, that philosophy is vision, and that the realm of faith and morals must not be severed from the realm of epistemology and metaphysics.[8]
Yet the student who too frequently points to similarities between the written Hegel and philosopher "x" draws the furious response "Hegel said everything!" This attitude cannot simply be the result of Schelling's personal vendetta.
A little non-philosophy is at work here. To those young enough to "remember" World War II without having lived through it, such anti-Hegelian ferociousness only builds curiosity. This group misses the rationale of men such as William Montgomery McGovern who says, "It would, of course, be ridiculous to blame (or praise) Hegel for all the subsequent developments in German political life." And then proceeds to be ridiculous.[9]
On the surface it would appear that little stress is laid upon the classical idealist philosophy, and yet underneath the surface we find that idealism in a new and rather peculiar form is a basic element in Nazi ideology.[10]
...though some features of the official Nazi creed which are apparently in direct opposition to the teachings of metaphysical idealism as expounded by Hegel.[11]
Hitler himself says, "True idealism is nothing but subjecting the individual's interest and life to the community."[12] This attitude is surprisingly Marxian in character and clearly shows a Schellingian version of Hegelianism. But why has Hitler's view that "Idealism alone leads men to voluntary acknowledgment of the privilege of force and strength." Been so accepted by intellectuals?[13] Was Hitler incorrect in thinking that only "the great masses, out of stupidity or simplicity, usually believe everything"?[14] The belief that Hegelianism lies at the root of Nazism (and Fascism) is primarily the reason for the anti-Hegelian ferociousness, even to the present day.
The belief that Hegelianism is fundamental to Nazism (and Fascism) is so pronounced that even Herbert Marcuse's book Reason and Revolution attempts a reinterpretation of Hegel's philosophy because of the rise of Fascism. Marcuse attempts to show "that Hegel's basic concepts are hostile to the tendencies that have led into Fascist theory and practise."[15] However, Marcuse accepts Schelling's depiction of Hegelianism as negative philosophy which puts in doubt the success of his reinterpretation. Nevertheless, Marcuse succeeds in showing that Hegel's philosophy was at odds with Nazi and Fascist authoritarianism. He reaches the conclusion that:
The German idealism that culminated in the Hegelian teaching asserted the conviction that social and political institutions should jibe with a free development of the individual. The authoritarian system, on the other hand, cannot maintain the life of its social order except by forcible conscription of every individual, into the economic process.[16]
How far Hitler was from being idealism incarnate can hardly be overstated. This can be clearly seen by one quotation from Hitler: "Here I stand with my bayonettes, there you stand with your laws. We shall see who prevails." Hitler was an anarchist and no idealist. What order there was to Nazism existed only in Hitler himself. The end of Hitler would have been the end of Nazism.[17]
Even those members of the Nazi party who thought there were dogmas apart from "Leader Worship" are not Hegelians. Martin Bormann says:
If we National Socialists speak of belief in God, we do not understand by God, as the naive Christians and their spiritual camp followers do, a human-type being sitting around somewhere in space. Rather must we open people's eyes to the fact that, apart from our small planet which is very unimportant in the universe, there are an unconceivably large number of other bodies, which like the sun are surrounded by smaller bodies, the moons. The natural force by which all these innumerable planets move in the universe we call "the Almighty" or "God."[18]
The "If" belies Bormann's uncertainty in even this. But even if this were a Nazi belief it is not Hegelian.
So much for our non-philosophical interlude. I present this historical explanation as the only credible reason for the ferociousness of anti-Hegelian attitudes. With this attitude disappearing, the positive Hegelian influences on contemporary philosophy are freed for study. So, not only is it acceptable to point out that Hegel marks an unmistakable turning point in the history of philosophy but, it is also acceptable to point out why.
Hegel marks an unmistakable turning point in the history of philosophy. One might even say the history of philosophy begins with Hegel, since the contemporary concern with the history of philosophy begins with him. At least Kaufmann says, "There is no history of philosophy written since his time that does not bear the stamp of his spirit."[19] Some say it ends with him. It is no mistake to say philosophy has never been the same since Hegel.
Much of what can be shown with respect to Hegel's influence on philosophy, as I've mentioned, is being discussed by others. A number of new translations of his works are being published and articles in the journal, Idealistic Studies, call for more individuals to make use of Hegel's methods.[20] An added dimension of this study is an examination of Hegel's influence on contemporary religion as well. Hegel's influence on contemporary religion has been just as drastic as his influence on philosophy but is hardly acknowledged at all. It is my view that Hegel has had the greatest impact on contemporary life through his influence on religion. Since Hegel's influence on religion is not as widely recognized, it is even more important to examine this aspect of Hegel's influence.
That Hegel's philosophy is intricately woven together with his theology is a point well developed by several authors. Adrien T. B. Peperzak compares the too "theological" interpretation of Hegel by Haering, Asveld and others with the too "Political" or philosophical interpretation of Lukas.[21] Peperzak shows that Hegel did not isolate his religious thinking from his philosophical thinking.[22] Walter Kaufmann does an even more extensive job in showing the interrelationships between the two aspect of Hegel's thought.[23]
Since it is my thesis that in order to understand contemporary life one must come to grips with Hegel, his impact on both philosophy and religion must be examined. It will not be necessary to be "Encyclopedic" in examining contemporary philosophers and theologians. It especially will not be appropriate here because a far more important question concerns why Hegel had such an impact. In order to answer this question we must come to grips with Hegel.
[1] I recognize that these three philosophical movements are broad, especially the first two, but generally speaking, they are distinguishable. I will treat several examples of each in what follows.
[2] Howard P. Kainz, Hegel's Philosophy of Right, with Marx's Commentary: a Handbook for Students (The Hague, 1974) p. 2 Kainz feels that three philosophical movements are "closely related to Hegelianism." These are Existentialism, Marxism, and Phenomenology. P. 2f.
[3] George Dykhuizen, The Life and Mind of John Dewey (Illinois, 1973) p. 83
[4] See p. 50f.
[5] See p. 67f.
[6] Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness (New York, 1956) and see p. 69f.
[7] Kaufmann, op. cit. p. 167
[8] Ibid., p. 287
[9] William Montgomery McGovern, From Luther to Hitler, The History of Nazi-Fascist Political Philosophy (Cambridge, Mass., 1941) p. 264
[10] Ibid., p. 619
[11] Ibid., p. 620
[12] Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf p. 411 and quoted in McGovern, p. 623
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid., Hitler, p. 447 and McGovern, p. 624
[15] Herbert Marcuse, Reason and Revolution, Hegel and the Rise of Social Theory (New York, 1954) p. vii
[16] Ibid., p. 411ff.
[17] Joachim C. Fest, Hitler (trans. By Richard and Clara Winston, New York, 1973)
[18] Jeremy Noakes and Geoffrey Pridham editors, Documents on Nazism 1919-1945 (New York, 1974) p. 373
[19] Kaufmann, op. cit. p. 286
[20] For example: George J. Seidel, O.S.B., "Hegel on Ground" Idealistic Studies 1 1971 pp. 219-226 and Darrel E. Christensen, "Hegel and the Contemporary Crises of Authority" Idealistic Studies 3 1973 pp. 117-132
[21] Adrien T. B. Peperzak, Le Jeune Hegel Et La Vision Morale Du Monde (La Hay, 1969) p. xvii
[22] Ibid., p. xvii
[23] Kaufmann, op. cit. pp. 271-273