The Pragmatic Turn in Philosophy: Contemporary Engagements between Analytic and Continental Thought

3. Pragmatic Aspects of Hegel’s Thought

47 3
ANTJE GIMMLER Pragmatic Aspects of Hegel’s Thought Translated by Reinhild Steingrover-McRae While the analytical philosophical tradition since the turn of the century has generally considered Hegel’s thought to be meaningless and has only regarded selected aspects as interesting for larger connections, it appears that this situation is currently changing. An increase of recent publications that engage Hegel’s philosophy in problem-oriented approaches can be noted.1 Questions regarding future directions focus primarily on the relevance and the pioneering aspects of Hegel’s legacy.2 This currently noticeable Hegel renaissance in continental and Anglo-American Hegel research receives crucial impulses from a philosophical movement that gathers together under the title of neopragmatism such disparate thinkers as Nicolas Rescher, Richard Rorty, Hilary Putnam, Jürgen Habermas, Robert Brandom, and Donald Davidson. It furthermore counts Wittgenstein, Wilfrid Sellars, and Willard van Orman Quine among its members as well. The term “neopragmatism” refers to the contemporary, multifaceted philosophical movement that reconsiders and reutilizes basic themes and elements of classic American pragmatism in the context of the linguistic turn, i.e., in the service of an investigation of language and meaning as dependent on use and practice. It is especially this school of thought that assists Hegel research in defining new approaches and perspectives. 48 Antje Gimmler In order to explain Hegel’s role in neopragmatism we can take as a first indication the reception of Hegel in classic pragmatism. Connections between Hegel’s philosophy and the pragmatism of Charles S. Peirce and William James can be found; but a strong and positive reference to Hegel is most notable in the third party of the triad of classic American pragmatism, John Dewey. Dewey received his philosophical training under the Neo-Hegelian George Sylvester Morris and regarded himself in his early career as a Hegelian. This influence remains visible in his writings until the time of that classic text of pragmatism The Quest for Certainty, in which he describes his position as “a philosophy of experimental idealism.”3 But classic American pragmatism around the turn of the century has also constituted itself through the confrontation with Neo-Hegelian metaphysical conceptions, as represented, for example, by Josiah Royce or Francis H. Bradley. Thus the history of relations between Hegel, Neo-Hegelianism, and classic pragmatism can be characterized by both engagement and confrontation. But more important than this multifaceted history of reception connecting Hegel, classic pragmatism, and neopragmatism—which in turn refers to classic pragmatism—is the actual relationship. Classic pragmatism— especially that of Dewey—already contains not only the explicitly Hegelian rejection of dualistic philosophy, but also an antirepresentationalism whose roots can be traced back to Hegel. This antirepresentationalism becomes central to neopragmatism. Various representatives of neopragmatism refer to Hegel because in Hegel’s idealism the central themes of neopragmatism can already be identified as preconfigured, or at least can be traced to their origins: namely, the problematizing or rejection of a representational theory of epistemology and its related epistemological or ontological presuppositions. In this sense of a positive reference we may understand Sellar’s much-quoted statement regarding Hegel: “that great foe of ‘immediacy.’”4 Such actual commonalties lead to a new consideration of Hegel’s philosophy from a neopragmatic perspective: “Hegel himself was more of a pragmatist than is ordinarily granted.”5 But what is pragmatic about Hegel?6 Is Hegel a genuinely pragmatic thinker? A problematic aspect of a possible answer to this question is that no commonly shared, precise determination of what can be understood by “pragmatism” exists. For heuristic purposes I will first sketch out a typology of pragmatism in order to clarify the meaning of the terms “pragmatic” and “pragmatism” as they are used in current discussions. This typology should make it possible to specify the question of pragmatic aspects of Hegel’s thought. Secondly, I will discuss two neopragmatic interpretations of Hegel. Thirdly, I will present elements of Hegel’s pragmatic antirepresentationalism with reference to his critique of epistemology. The crucial point in this paper will be that the concept of experience, which was already central for classic pragmatism, should be revalidated. Hegel’s concept of experience, a Pragmatic Aspects of Hegel’s Thought 49 nonempiricist one,7 has the potential to lead us out of neopragmatic restrictions because in its antirepresentational conception of experience it regards action in its linguistic as well as poietic expressions. 1. WHICH PRAGMATISM? Various philosophical approaches...