Question

I am attempting to write a paper on Hegel's critique of Spinoza. As far as I comprehend, Hegel's principal objection to Spinoza's ontology lies in its denial of the actuality (not sure if that's the right word) of determinate things. For instance, a cup of coffee ontologically depends on Spinoza's Substance, as does everything else we encounter in life. This kind of ontological dependence results in everything being reduced to Substance, creating a static, lifeless universe where change is deemed impossible, not entirely dissimilar to Parmenides' universe. While Spinoza's system successfully avoided Cartesian dualism by unifying thought and extension into one higher category of thing, Substance, it failed to make room for the possibility of change. Consequently, Hegel's task appears to be retaining the unification of thought and extension achieved in Spinoza while allowing for change. This is where I become perplexed. I know it has something to do with negation, but I cannot comprehend how Hegel overcomes this problem. The root cause of the problem, to me, seems to be that Substance, encompassing the entire cosmos, cannot be negated by anything else on the same ontological playing field. However, doesn't Hegel's Absolute, analogous to Spinoza's Substance as far as I can tell, encounter the same issue? I would appreciate any help with this because I'm a little stumped. Please correct any misunderstandings in my interpretation; I'm sure there are many. What is Hegel's main criticism of Spinoza's ontology?

A. Lack of unification of thought and extension
B. Denial of the actuality of determinate things
C. Emphasis on Cartesian dualism
D. Overemphasis on change and flux

Answer 1

Hegel's primary critique of Spinoza centers on the denial of the actuality of determinate things, leading to a static universe. Hegel's dialectics, involving negation and becoming, allow for change and individuality within the Absolute, diverging from Spinoza's static Substance. The correct option is B. Denial of the actuality of determinate things

Step-by-step explanation:

Hegel's main criticism of Spinoza's ontology is the B. Denial of the actuality of determinate things. Hegel believed that Spinoza's conception of Substance led to a view where change and individuality are denied, rendering the universe static and devoid of dynamism.

While Spinoza resolved Cartesian dualism with his double-aspect theory, he created a system where Substance encompassed all, allowing no room for the negation necessary for change. Hegel, on the other hand, introduced the concept of dialectic, in which negation and 'becoming' are crucial for the development and differentiation of the Absolute.

This approach allowed Hegel to account for change and individuality, addressing the issue he found in Spinoza's system. In Hegel’s view, reality is not a static unity but rather a dynamic process where contradictions are pivotal for growth and evolution, a perspective that contrasts with the perceived static nature of Spinoza’s Substance. The correct option is B. Denial of the actuality of determinate things