Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit:
150.
ARGUMENT:
this realm of laws is the truth for the Understanding - and the content of the truth is in
the law
this truth is only an initial truth and does not fill out the world of appearance
the law is present in appearance - but it is not the entire appearance
with every change of circumstance the law has a different actuality
thus appearance retains for itself an aspect that is not the inner world
there are indefinitely many laws
but this plurality contradicts the principle of the Understanding for which the True is
the implicitly universal unity
the many laws must collapse into one law
but when laws coincide they lose their specific character -
i.e. the unification of all laws in universal attraction expresses no other content than
just the mere Notion of Law itself - universal attraction merely asserts that everything
has a constant difference in relation to other things
the expression universal attraction is important in so far as it is directed against the
view that everything is contingent
COMMENTARY:
for the understanding truth is always an open question - we decide out of necessity -
but recognize that such a determination of truth is pragmatic
laws are descriptions of proposed regularities - they are formulations of reflective
analysis
the term 'law' has more to do with epistemological naiveté and vanity than anything
else
we understand a so called law holds if it holds at all only within the set of
circumstances it embraces or describes
any decision to use a law will involve the assumption that its content is true
a proposition is held to be true if we decide to proceed with it - that is - utilize it
a false proposition is a useless proposition
clearly a proposition regarded as true in one set of circumstances could be regarded as
false in another
it is true that our descriptions of the world - our proposals for order and regularity
cannot embrace the whole of appearance
however the 'whole of appearance' is nothing more than the unknown that has not
been characterized by consciousness
a law can be seen as the setting up of a domain of knowledge - in the totality of the
unknown
these domains - have currency so long as they effect action
we need to understand that at any time the great body of knowledge of the world is
essentially a proposal - or really a multitude of proposals for dealing with the
unknown
we can say that what is useful is good -
and this turns the light on utility - what is really useful to human beings?
it is clear that there is no universal answer to this question
my own view is that what is useful is what enables us to proceed
and that finally we all proceed or not in the unknown
Hegel thinks the true is the implicitly universal unity
this is rubbish
the true is what is useful
it is clear that this concept of utility implies multiplicity and flexibility
utility is the pure action of consciousness
'true' is the decision to proceed -
the basis of any such decision is another question -
it may be good or not
the decision is made -
the result will determine the wisdom of the action - or at least will be seen to - or held
to - so determine
yes the idea of a universal law - its value - collapses as soon as you come up with a
law of that kind -
any such law is without content
and it is so because by definition it excludes nothing
therefore there cannot be any particular content to it
nevertheless such 'laws' have value as myths - and out of myths come good stories -
and who's not up for a good story?
