## Slavoj Žižek (2012). *Hegel versus Heidegger* Author(s): [[Slavoj Žižek]] Zotero Link: [Hegel versus Heidegger](zotero://select/items/@zizek_hegel_2012) Index: - (01) - Hegel’s method approaches reality in its dynamic development, discerning in every determinate form the seeds of its own destruction and self-overcoming, his system endeavors to render the totality of being as an achieved order in which no further development is in view. - this contradiction between the "logical" and the "historical" acquires a deeper radical underpinning: what they try to outline is a more fundamental ontological frame that is both the source of Hegel's dialectical systematizing, and is, simultaneously, betrayed by this systematizing. - Alexandre Koyre describes as the historicity of the human condition oriented towards future. ^[See Alexandre Koyre, “Hegel a Iena,” _Etudes d’histoire de la pensee philosophique_, (Paris: Gallimard, 1971).] The rood of what Hegel calls "negativity" is (our awareness of) future: future is what is not (yet), the power of negativity is ultimately identical to the power of time itself, this force that corrodes every firm identity. - The proper temporarily of a human being is thus not that of the linear time, but that of engaged existence: a man projects his future and then actualises it by way of a detour through past resources. This "existential" root of negativity is obfuscated by Hegel's system that abolishes this primacy of the future and presents its entire content as the past "sublated" in its logical form–==the standpoint adopted here is not that of engaged subjectivity, but of Absolute Knowing.== - 그러므로 인간의 적절한 순간은 선형적인 시간이 아니라 관여된 존재의 순간이다: 인간은 자신의 미래를 투영하고 나서 과거 자원을 통해 우회하는 방법으로 그것을 실현한다. 이 "존재하는" 부정성의 뿌리는 미래의 우위성을 폐지하고 그것의 전체 내용을 그것의 논리적인 형태로 과거로 제시하는 헤겔의 체계에 의해 난독화된다 - 여기서 채택된 관점은 관여된 주관성이 아니라 절대적인 알기에 있다. - (4) - What Heidegger misses in his description of the Hegelian “experience” as the path of despair (Verzweiflung) is the proper abyss of this process: it is not only the natural consciousness that is shattered, but also the transcendental standard, measure, or framing ground against which natural consciousness experiences its inadequacy and failure – as Hegel put it, if what we thought to be true fails the measure of truth, this measure itself has to be abandoned. This is why Heidegger misses the vertiginous abyss of the dialectical process: there is no standard of truth gradually approached through painful experiences; this standard itself is caught in the process, undermined again and again. - 헤겔의 경험(Verzweiflung)을 절망의 길이라고 묘사하면서 하이데거가 놓치고 있는 것은 이 과정의 적절한 심연이다. 헤겔은 우리가 참이라고 생각했던 것이 진리의 척도에 실패하면 이 척도 자체를 버려야 한다고 말한다. 고통스러운 경험을 통해 점차 다가가는 진리의 기준이 없고, 이 기준 자체가 그 과정에서 붙잡히는 것이며 지속적으로 훼손되는 것이다. 그리고 이 것이 하이데거가 변증법적 과정의 아찔한 심연을 놓치는 이유다. ### Related ### Summary: ### Notes: