The limits between Hegel and Spinoza: the reconstruction of substance in the Science of Logic

• Grant number: 24/00187-8
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Post-Doctoral
• Start date: October 01, 2024
• End date: September 30, 2026
• Field of knowledge: Humanities - Philosophy - History of Philosophy
• Principal Investigator: Homero Silveira Santiago
• Grantee: Diego Ramos Lanciote
• Host Institution: Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas (FFLCH). Universidade de São Paulo (USP). São Paulo , SP, Brazil

Abstract

Through the methodological circumscription of hybrid zones that combine Hegel and Spinoza, the aim is to articulate persistent problems in the interaction between both and in parallel with the examination of the Science of Logic, with the intention of interpreting the reconstruction of the Spinoza's substance in the doctrine of essence. By delimiting the problematic and reconstructing the specific issues involved in the doctrine of essence, evaluating the tension between Kant and Spinoza in Hegel's text, the hypothesis of a more significant presence or not of Spinozism in the 1832 revision of the Science of Logic and in contrast to current interpretations of the Hegelian reading of Spinoza based on Glauben und Wissen is verified. Furthermore, the hypothesis of the centrality of caeca necessitas as a fundamental distinguishing element between Hegel and Spinoza is examined, establishing its relevance, scope, and limits. Thus, the inadequacies and adequacies of Spinozism in the face of problems arising from the Hegelian theoretical economy can be established, notably regarding the Spinoza's theory of the idea, hypothetically equivalent to subjective logic. The interaction between Spinoza's Ethica and Hegel's theory of effectivity is deepened, presupposing the previously analyzed delimitations and aiming, above all, at the notion of Wechselwirkung as the intelligibility of caeca necessitas. Ultimately, the goal is to delineate the limits of the general problem of becoming and its enunciation between the two investigated authors.