Heidegger flattens dialectical time to prove it is flattened

Evidence

Although it cannot be ignored, the reading of Hegel proposed by Heidegger at the end of Being and Time leaves us perplexed on one essential point: when asserting that Hegel brings to its ultimate conclusion the ‘ordinary (or vulgar) understanding of time’ which has dominated the fate of Western metaphysics, doesn’t Heidegger come to practise just what he denounces? Is he not led to level down the time of the dialectic in order to prove that dialectical time is a levelled down time? … The problem posed by this way of reading is that it fails to make explicit the temporality of alienation. Alienation is allowed to operate as an atemporal category, while it is clear that Hegel only uses the concept of Entäußerung to characterize a process intrinsic and unique to the modern epoch of subjectivity. If there is no place in Hegel for the idea of a ‘time in the world’, there is, on the other hand, an idea of the time of the world, a concept that is specifically Christian. One may well complain of Heidegger that he inquires into neither the provenance nor the exact ontological significance of the Hegelian Entäußerung. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 914

Categorization

Category: Contrarian or Surprising Claims

Related

• Heidegger’s charge that Hegel merely formalized ordinary time became the standard view (similarity 0.88)
• Hegelian alienation is an epoch-specific temporal process, not an atemporal category (similarity 0.87)
• Hegel’s alienation is a historically specific, modern-Christian concept, not an eternal one (similarity 0.87)
• Heidegger read Hegelian time as a farewell to time (similarity 0.86)
• Heidegger reads time’s sublation as spirit’s static beatific present. (similarity 0.86)
• Hegelian dialectic has no outside from which to analyze time (similarity 0.85)
• Hegel’s temporalizing plasticity resists Heidegger’s charge of vulgar time (similarity 0.85)
• Heidegger’s own later philosophy reduces time’s transcendental role (similarity 0.83)
• Plasticity, not Heidegger’s account, best captures Hegelian temporality (similarity 0.83)
• Hegel rejects Catholic real presence because its permanence resists the vulgar concept of time (similarity 0.83)
• Hegelian time is dialectically differentiated and never fixed by its moments (similarity 0.83)
• Heidegger gave time two incompatible roles in Sein und Zeit (similarity 0.83)
• Heidegger ignored Hegel’s Kantian revision of Aristotle’s time. (similarity 0.83)
• The excess of time on time may itself be something other than time. (similarity 0.82)
• Divine alienation manifests a new ontological mode of time, not lack (similarity 0.82)