Pages

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Hegel's handling of necessity & contingency is often misunderstood by commentators

First: I would never have seen this comment if it weren't for a random Googling; the Sri Auribendio guy just copy/pastes things he likes from other blogs. I'm rather flattered that I was worth copy/pasting, but it still strikes me as kinda creepy. (This is to say: I will probably not see anything you post here. If by chance you see this and want to respond, it would probably be better to just drag up the old thread at An Und Fur Sich. Or something on my own blog, SOH-Dan.)
I don't read the Petry translations because I can't afford them. Miller has (relatively) cheap paperbacks. Petry has multi-volume sets that run in the hundreds of dollars. Simple as that. I would be happy to end up with a friendlier view of the PoN. I'm not sure why the PoN would be a particularly natural place to find a "safety valve" of contingency, but I agree that Hegel's handling of necessity & contingency is often misunderstood by commentators. Posted by Daniel to Musepaper at 11:54 AM, October 18, 2007

No comments:

Post a Comment