From: Annette.Schlemm-at-t-online.de (Annette Schlemm)
Thanks for your mail.
Paul Healey wrote:
That is, would you please tell me after reading it, what it is you find unnecessary about the 'dialectical concept of chance' and my 'concept of probability' in Hegel's 'The Doctrine of Essence' ?
There are several terms of "chance","contingency" in several spheres.
First we have to distinguish "possibility" as abstract other of actuality and the "real possibility" also intermediation of possibility and immediate actuality.
To consider ESSENCE, we have to take into account only a part of the world - a well-defined system. This system is defined by its essential interactions - its "laws" (terms by Herbert Hoerz, GDR). These laws contain a "field of possibilities" for the behaviour of the elements of the system - but the system itself follows its nessesary tendency.(inside a wider system, "our" system is only an element and has a contingent behaviour in relation to its wider system).
Science researches laws, i.e. essential (!) interactions. But in evolution/development there exist interactions between systems. Evolution takes place not in ONE system! Therefore we have to take into account several systems, i.e. several essences...
I assume, this situation is not a part of Hegels dialectics, but nessecary to explain development.
At least we get two situations of "contingency": a) within an essence ("field of possibilities" - may be "possibilities" is not the correct term and "contingencies" would be better). b) between essences.
a) Within an essence the "thing" stays the same, but becomes other qualities. Also quality-jumps merely changes qualities within an essence.
b) Here the "thing" ends his existence, another "thing" emerges... typical for these jumps is: a condition that was unessential before - becomes essential. And there is no "Absolute" that determines which condition from many unessential (before) conditions will become essential. ..
We see that I speak within the sphere of determined being, not in the sphere of essence and notion.
The way of Hegel's dialectics goes from Being (and nothing) to Essence and Notion - determined being would be sublated and is not the destination of Hegel's dialectics.
As such every ESSENCE, forms a part of the whole, which constitutes evolution/development.
Hegel has an "Absolute" to give each determined being (something) its "other". (To explain, that the point is the dialectic to become a line - we must have the "line" before!)
But without the "absolute"- where comes the Other from ??? And: is there ONLY ONE other? (or a "field of contingent others"?).
To quote Hegel again: " The science of this idea must form a system. " ( Hegel's Logic, p19) If there is no system, there can be no ESSENCE.
Yes, see the terms of Hoerz ("system", "essence" and "law" are connected. Each of them is defined by using the others.). And because development goes beyond ONE system, there lie the borders of science (to predict future).
In terms of probability, it is the axioms of formal logic, that give a value to the opposite categories which preside in being. Yet these axioms assume that opposite categories are indistinct ! This implies truth for non-being and being are equivalent, so qualities and quantities exist in ESSENCE as a conjunction. Quality therefore becomes something you can apprehend, so phenomenological laws are made objective. For if distinct processes are given the same combinatorial value in terms of a LINEAR set of possibilities, nothing can be said to be unique about our history. Such a concept of probability, is a measure of ESSENCE and not of chance. Judgments in the dialectics require, that qualities and quantities are in conjunction.
To say, that a mode of thought, such as formal logic is necessary has become part of our culture, in the sense that those who benefit from it would not wish it otherwise. I therefore think, Hegel was only interested in the market (economics ), in that its ESSENCE was not by necessity a reflection of our being, but only a part of our history. In this sense, history and chance are contained in one ESSENCE.
I have problems with formal logic in this sense. Do you suggest to use the formal logic to look at dialectic processes (or evolution/development)?
May be it is essentially to explain our interests: I am interested in the connections between dialectics and self-organisation- and development-concepts. I found that dialectis in the form by Hegel and Engels doesnt contain the above mentioned b) or that I cant see it.
I hope you can understand my bad English... Excuse me. If I had time enough I would write a longer paper in HTML... (in German I had references to this topic etc. but I have no time to translate them...).
Ahoi from Jena Annette S.