Reading Hegel requires a beginning that both foresees and does not foresee what follows

Evidence

First and above all, the reader of Hegel. More than any other philosopher, to read Hegel is to see and not to see. The text is in front of our eyes, yet its systematicity initially conceals its meaning because the speculative content at once is something yet to come and already arrived. The tremendous difficulty of reading Hegel’s work is caused by the seeming impossibility of making any headway since from the outset we would need to carve out a beginning allowing us both to foresee and not to see what follows. How then are we to escape from the sheer tautology offered by a paraphrase, and at the same time from the absolute heterology posed by an arbitrary commentary? — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 1240

Categorization

• XREF: The ‘carve out a beginning’ readerly task anticipates her concept of plasticity as the forming of beginnings in living systems — the brain’s own need for a starting point that is not fixed. — connects to: Hegelian predication expresses mutual implication rather than attachment of one thing to another — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1171; Hegel’s System is immanently temporalized through its own double perspective — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 272; The Hegelian future is neither foreseeable nor hidden but an in-between — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1239

Broader Connections

• Hegel’s System is immanently temporalized through its own double perspective #expands (0.82) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 272