![]() Concept of Godįurther, this true whole, absolute, infinite naturally corresponds also the traditional concept of God in so far as God is understood as the being that is above all, so including all (and insofar also compatible in that regard to Spinoza’s God). So in that regard, the “absolute” and the (true, qualitatively) infinite are one. In my understanding of Hegel’s terminology, “absolute” is used by him in the sense of not being restricted by anything else. The same could be said about the Absolute. So also in this sense: the whole is the truth, the Truth is the whole. Insofar as this whole no longer contains anything else beside/beyond itself but contains all, it also corresponds to the most comprehensive concept of truth. This is a core concept of Hegelian philosophy, so it is very important to understand it correctly.Į.g. follows from this: the infinite is the whole, the true is the whole In religious language, it is not an abstract God that is just above and beyond all and where all differences disappear. It is therefore not the “abstract” infinity of an “infinite” set containing finite elements, but more the infinite concept containing its particularities. This infinity is therefore self-determining and has its own difference (particularities) in itself. (One can see this from the perspective of the finiteness in such a way that the finite has therefore at part at infinity, is part of infinity). Then logically the only solution that remains is that the finite must therefore be contained in infinity, or, to put it another way, that the infinite includes everything finite. The Finite must also not simply be the same as the Infinite, as they are not seen as same, rather opposite There must be nothing that stands next to infinity on the same level, as otherwise that would be a limit/end and therefore it would not be true infinityĪccordingly, there must be nothing that stands above infinity, otherwise that something above would be the infinite The answer is given, with a little thought about the above paradoxes, through simple logical analysis: Because the solution, when reading it, might seem obvious, so you may only appreciate it when you tried yourself). (if this question is new to you, it might be worthwhile for you in order to participate in this to stop reading here for the time being and read on before to try to solve the paradox for once for yourself. Which leads us to the question: what is the relationship between the finite and the infinity in such a way that the paradox(es) mentioned do not arise? Moreover, an infinity, which itself is limited by something else (here by the finite) is limited, insofar as it is itself limited, so it is not infinite in that sense, but itself finite (this is the same argument after the turned to the other side). And can one then not above this meta-infinity another meta-infinity construct, etc.? This is the idea that is used in mathematics: still a higher meta-level and one above it - only another way to create “bad infinity” on a new level). But if one had to imagine that the Finite on the one side, Infinity on the other side, then there would be something beyond the finite and infinite. On the other hand, it is in its name, after all, defined by the finite differentiated. So it has no end/limit.Īccording to Aristotle, we define terms by mentioning a “higher”/“upper” term in the hierarchy of termns (e.g. furniture) and then delimit within this field what sets the matter apart from the others that are related to it (e.g. a chair a furniture used for sitting) - See the concept tutorial.īut how to do this with the infinite? By definition it is unlimited, so it has no limit, so it has nothing higher above it. If we say “infinity,” there is an “in” (a Latin prefix meaning “not”) in infinity, so a negation. Something finite is something that has an end, a limit, something limited. true infinity: Problem definition:Ī “true” (= corresponding to its concept, self-determining) infinity, would be one that is not negatively affected by finiteness. In a first approximation we could imagine bad infinity as an infinite line, true infinity as a circle (as the circle has its limiting border in itself). The term “bad infinity,” like we see it in mathematics in an “endless” line or the endless row of numbers is mentioned here as a contrast to better understand what Hegel in the following means when he speaks of infinity, in the sense of the below represented good, true, qualitative, “philosophical” Infinity. Hegel defines “bad infinity” the one in which the operation to overcome finiteness always remains the same, repeated (“n+1”) and never comes to its destination (its end - here: reaching infinity).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |