Hegel does leave room for contingency within necessity itself

Evidence

It is the convention of this all too-well-received idea, in this interpretative scene, in this historical perspective which is finally taken on by Malabou in her book. To say, so easily and all too simply, that there is no contingence or no ‘pure accident’ for Hegel, and hence – I translate – that a ‘perhaps’ has no place and no philosophical dignity, is an error: ‘Such a reading is erroneous.’ … But Malabou entices this necessity into its own abyss, the abyss where it loses itself, that is to say, into its own necessity, the necessity of necessity, which would be a fact or a Faktum, the fact of a necessity which remains as a fact, in itself, not necessary, and in any case not comprehensible as the necessity which he founds by depriving it of its own foundation. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 127

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the ‘point of sheer randomness’ and the ‘fact of necessity’ — the core of Malabou’s plasticity reading of Hegel.
• QUESTION: Worth chasing: how exactly does ‘the necessity of necessity’ remain a non-necessary fact — this seems the hinge of the whole plasticity concept.
• XREF: Connects to the reader’s brain work — contingency at the heart of determination parallels neural plasticity’s openness within structure. — connects to: Individual experience regained its epistemic authority after Hegel’s era — Theodor W. Adorno, Minima Moralia: Reflections from…, 12; Hegel remains a thinker of the future against current philosophical suspicion; The body is necessary to the for-itself yet manifests its contingency — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 839 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• The body is necessary to the for-itself yet manifests its contingency #corroborates (0.82) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 839