Hegel’s aufheben conflates accepting and rejecting the given, hiding real revolt

Evidence

Hegel has confused these two movements with the ambiguous term “aufheben”; and the whole structure of an optimism which denies failure and death rests on this ambiguity; that is what allows one to regard the future of the world as a continuous and harmonious development; this confusion is the source and also the consequence; it is a perfect epitome of that idealistic and verbose flabbiness with which Marx charged Hegel and to which he opposed a realistic toughness. Revolt is not integrated into the harmonious development of the world; it does not wish to be integrated but rather to explode at the heart of the world and to break its continuity. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity, 87

Categorization

• XREF: The accepting vs. rejecting the given distinction is the typology’s backbone — sub-man and serious man accept, the passionate man and the revolutionary reject. — connects to: Hegel’s system collapsed when the Young Hegelians exposed it as sanctioning oppression — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism: A Marxist…, 266; The Aufhebung has a history within philosophy, not an idiosyncrasy of Hegel — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1008; Hegelian abrogation verbs simultaneously mean abandoning and preserving — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1091 (+1 more)