The Hegelian future is neither foreseeable nor hidden but an in-between

Evidence

Why, at the end of this work, do we invoke the concept of reading? The reason is clear. The Hegelian idea of plastic reading confers on the notion of ‘to see (what is) coming’ its real meaning. ‘To see (what is) coming’ denotes at once the visibility and the invisibility of whatever comes. The future is not the absolutely invisible, a subject of pure transcendence objecting to any anticipation at all, to any knowledge, to any speech. Nor is the future the absolutely visible, an object clearly and absolutely foreseen. It frustrates any anticipation by its precipitation, its power to surprise. ‘To see (what is) coming’ thus means to see without seeing – await without awaiting – a future which is neither present to the gaze nor hidden from it. Now isn’t this situation of ‘in-between’ par excellence the situation of reading? — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 1239

Categorization

• QUESTION: This ‘precipitation’ reading of the future — a genuine openness that resists both prediction and transcendence — has implications for how emergence is theorized.
• XREF: Recalls the ‘space between’ and indeterminate future themes across the reader’s silence and listening books. — connects to: Reading Hegel requires a beginning that both foresees and does not foresee what follows — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1240; Hegelian time is dialectically differentiated and never fixed by its moments — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 249

Broader Connections

• Reading Hegel requires a beginning that both foresees and does not foresee what follows #expands (0.90) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 1240
• Hegelian time is dialectically differentiated and never fixed by its moments #corroborates (0.80) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 249