Peak 312 Natural Life

However, there is a small issue. If infinity exists and exists through finite, then it is clear that finite must arise and disappear. It can be said that they are temporary manifestations of infinite life.

Hegel certainly tends to say that Rutgers should understand ideas from the perspective of life, capital life, and active thought. However, thought is objective thought, not subjective thought. It is a continuous life, and existence itself is realized as its underlying system, which is spirit. It is appropriate to view various past appearances as dependent on an internal life on the path of existence, as an internal external being.

So, we can make a guess like this, what Hegel said here is that as the premise of the world and nature, it should be manifested in nature, and that's how it makes sense.

Nature is a whole life, an infinite, life is infinite. We can all explain that as life in the sense of the universe, it is infinite, because without it, we would not talk about anything, and that would be absolute nothingness. He is certainly a complete book, and he is also a concept. Why?

This is relative to our specific limited things, it is conceptual, and ultimately it exists. Existence is actually a prescriptive nature. But he didn't say that. Hegel left many mysteries for us to solve, and I think that only by explaining them in this way can we make sense. And I inserted him into his various texts, and then he made sense.

There exists an absolute infinite totality, not a decision of finite things. The body is not a part and he is an infinite life. In this sense, he is a self actualized spirit, he is in communion, and of course, because he is reality, he is not a God outside of reality. He must exist in the finite and must exist through the finite.

There is no problem with this, there are no finite things, there is no limit to life and death, we cannot say the whole story.

We Chinese think in this way. I think I am not tired of reading Hegel on some key issues, which may benefit from my Chinese background. Indeed, despite the fact that specific things seem to be short-lived from day to day, but the transience has an entire infinity. It is precisely in such a transience that it shows that he is only for infinity. He is different from this transience. He is for infinity.

In Tang poetry, it is said that this month once shone upon the ancients, as if they saw the same moon today. At this time, he represented the entire universe with the moon, which was infinite, while the present and the ancients are finite. For example, the morning dew is more bitter than the last day. However, precisely because of this, I thought that the moon I saw was also when Li Bai looked at the moon in the Tang Dynasty, and only then could you see infinity. Infinity is precisely manifested to us through such a moon.

Therefore, as a Chinese, it is easy to understand, but not impossible.

So, we have every reason to say that Rutgers' expression is manifested in limited things. As far as the absolute spirit itself gradually exists through its own self-development process, we naturally believe that material nature is opposite to him. However, the opposite is not a big deal in Hagel's view. Material nature is a prerequisite for achieving the purpose of the process.

Hegel said in natural philosophy that nature itself is sacred within, but when it exists, it is not consistent with its concept. This sentence is extremely profound.

Nature itself, even as matter, is sacred in the physical sense of nature. However, when it exists, its purpose and concept are not consistent. Its concept means that we do not regard it as a concept, but rather as an object to understand. When it exists, our regulations and concepts of it are not consistent.

In religious language, the idea of nature is sacred in the heart of God, but the objectification of ideas in the existing nature cannot be considered sacred.

Nature itself is sacred, but the objectification of nature cannot be said to be sacred. When he objectifies into a piece of wood, a piece of stone, the wood and the soil themselves are not sacred, but when we abstract them, we say they represent nature. Nature itself is sacred, and the soil itself is sacred. As a concrete object, he is not sacred, but as a concept, he is sacred.

Because in the concept, his finite became infinite, in this sense sacred. Because ideas are manifested in the material world, in things that are least like God, God cannot be appropriately manifested in the world of the material body. In philosophical terms, he can only be defined as spirit, so his most appropriate expressive ability is in the realm of spirit, which is in philosophy. But not in nature.

However, the importance of nature is not important. It is important because nature is a prerequisite for the existence of the spiritual realm. Without matter, there is no spirit. However, it is not spirit itself, it is a prerequisite for spirit, and it is not spirit itself. Although it has spiritual imprints in its rational structure, why do we feel that nature is well-organized? It seems that nature is arranged by a rational person. At this point, in its rational structure, the structure of nature is rational in our eyes. In its rational structure, we see the mark of spirit, but we cannot call it spirit just because we call it.

So, here Hegel goes beyond the ordinary superficial idealists. As an idealist, we can use Schelling's words to say that nature is a sleeping spirit and an invisible spirit, but it is not the spirit itself, not a conscious spirit. What is spirit?

Hegel said, simply put, the spirit is freedom, nature is a necessary realm, not a realm of freedom, and he is also a realm of contingency. In this place, he basically shares the same train of thought as modern philosophy of science. He regards nature as an inevitable field and does not display various distinctions assumed by a purely rational model in any unified and clear way, such as the existence of various monsters in nature that do not clearly conform to any particular type.

The meaning is that there are many exceptions in nature that our current concept or approach to nature cannot fit in, and even some special species, according to Hegel, seem to be due to the dance of the god of wine and the disorder of nature itself, without any rational necessity.

Nature squanders its forms and individual members of species without restraint, making it impossible to logically deduce them. I think Hegel has surpassed the mechanistic natural philosophy of the 17th and 18th centuries in this regard.

On the one hand, although he acknowledges the inevitability of nature, on the other hand, he emphasizes the contingency and particularity of nature, which some natural philosophers before him did not pay much attention to. So, he said that the empirical explanation of any natural object can only be given through physics and causality, but giving an explanation through physical causality is not the same as giving a logical deduction.

Hegel's natural philosophy does not want to provide physical explanations or causal explanations, which is why he is still criticized for not understanding physics because he does not want to explain it in the same way as you.

Nature and the natural world cannot exist without special things. Without a special organism, the internal purpose cannot exist. Commonality only exists in and through special things, but it can be logically deduced from any given individual's special category concept, or any more general concept. This is not a limitation at all, in fact it cannot be deduced. It cannot be deduced by an infinite mind in principle. It is not because our human mind is limited that we cannot deduce it, but because there are many special things in nature that cannot be deduced even in principle.

What does the paradoxical statement mean that chance in nature is inevitable?

From an intellectual perspective, this statement is certainly very passive. What does chance mean? It's bound to be unethical, aren't you lying to the world with your big words?

In fact, Hegel said that there is not much inevitability in nature, and his inevitability is that he is all accidental. He actually wants to talk about this matter, you must say accidental, and his inevitability is accidental. Because without chance, there is no nature. However, chance is real, it is an element of nature, and philosophy cannot cancel it. Although Hegel was very popular, he still gave great recognition to chance, attributing it to the incompetence of nature.

Nature has mixed various special types and produced various intermediate forms, but the key point is still contingency, which is due to the incompetence of nature, rather than the limited spirit's inability to provide pure rational explanations for nature. This is not our human incompetence, which is why he sometimes says that nature is a fall from ideas.

In other words, contingency represents an externality of nature in its relationship with ideas. Hegel repeatedly emphasized that nature cannot be mythologized and that the problems of nature are placed at a relatively low level.

Hegel said that if we consider a natural phenomenon like the celestial body as a creation of the human heart, in the sense of art and the state, we consider natural enemies as a creation of the human heart, like art and the state, or in a higher sense, as works of God.

That is definitely a mistake. He believes that nature is actually a failing thing because he has too many coincidences, and we people simply cannot explain it. It is not a matter of our ability. Although Hegel refused to mythologize any pre-existing nature, you should not present it in an orderly manner, and you should not make it seem like everything he said conforms step by step to irregularity. Some people nowadays understand nature in this way, but he firmly holds the reality of nature. The second insistence is that nature is indispensable to life, and for the conditioning of the spirit, it must be an absolute element in life, because absolute is the whole, and nature should be included in the whole.