In this blog post, we explore whether Hegel’s dialectical system—the core of his philosophy—achieved a true synthesis or remained an unfinished philosophical project.
Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis. This term refers to the logical structure of dialectics. Hegel is undoubtedly the most prominent figure to have conducted philosophical argumentation based on dialectics. Dialectics is not a parallel arrangement of three categories of equal standing; rather, its structural characteristic is a convergent, upward movement in which two opposing categories achieve harmonious unity. This dialectic goes beyond being merely a method of philosophical argumentation; it is deeply ingrained in our way of thinking and our worldview. For Hegel, dialectics transcends being merely a method of argumentation; it is also the very mode of existence of the object of argumentation itself. In other words, since both the internal structure of the “Idea”—the fundamental order of the world—and the way in which the Idea manifests as spatio-temporal reality are dialectical, the Idea and reality form a single system; consequently, the philosophical argument that elucidates the principles of these two dimensions must also possess dialectical systematicity.
Hegel seeks to address aesthetics within a system that is thoroughly structured dialectically. For him, art—the object of aesthetics—is, like religion and philosophy, a form of the “Absolute Spirit.” The Absolute Spirit refers to the realm of the human spirit that recognizes the “Idea,” which is absolute truth. Art, religion, and philosophy share the same content—absolute truth—and are distinguished only by differences in the forms of cognition. The forms corresponding to each of the three forms of the Absolute Spirit are intuition, representation, and thought. “Intuition” is the intellect that sensually perceives a given material object; “representation” is the intellect that conjures up mental images internally, regardless of the existence or nonexistence of a material object; and “thought” is the pure logical intellect that grasps an object through concepts. Accordingly, the three forms are defined as the “intuiting Absolute Spirit,” the “representing Absolute Spirit,” and the “thinking Absolute Spirit,” respectively. According to Hegel, the externality of intuition and the internality of representation are synthesized in thought; accordingly, the objectivity of art and the subjectivity of religion are synthesized in philosophy.
Differences in form give rise to significant differences in the level of understanding of content. For Hegel, absolute truth—the content of the Absolute Spirit—is essentially logical and rational. Since art intuits this content, religion represents it, and philosophy thinks it, a hierarchical order is established among these three forms. In other words, art represents the Absolute Spirit at the elementary stage, religion at the developmental stage, and philosophy at the mature stage. Accordingly, in the progression from art to religion to philosophy, the true Absolute Spirit—in both name and reality—is based solely on the highest intellect, that is, philosophy; art can function as the Absolute Spirit only in the distant past, when humanity’s universal intellect was underdeveloped.
Hegel’s philosophical system does not merely stop at theoretical explanation; it possesses a sophistication akin to that of a work of art in its own right. His philosophy offers deep insights into how the human spirit pursues and recognizes truth at each stage of art, religion, and philosophy. In particular, the process from art to philosophy directly reflects the development of the human spirit, which is closely linked to the development of human history. Hegel understood the development of the human spirit as a historical process, viewing each stage as evolving by overcoming the limitations of the previous stage and achieving a new synthesis.
The appeal of dialectics lies in “synthesis.” The category of synthesis must neither end in the unilateral victory of one of the two opposing categories nor manifest as a state of neutralization in which the unique essential determinations of both categories are extinguished.
The synthesis is established when the essential determinations of both categories achieve organic harmony, giving rise to a supreme category that is qualitatively elevated. This synthesis is the core of dialectics as it advances to a new stage, and through it, philosophical thought continually develops and deepens. This is precisely the excellence of dialectics that Hegel emphasized. Was it not, therefore, his philosophical project to refine a rigorous and coherent academic system optimized for the principles of dialectics? However, can the works he produced truly be evaluated as having fulfilled that project without any flaws? As far as aesthetics is concerned, it would be difficult to answer “yes.”
His strategy of structuring the forms of the intellect in the sequence of intuition–representation–reasoning, and organizing the Absolute Spirit accordingly in the sequence of art–religion–philosophy, appears on the surface to be a typical structure following the dialectical model. However, when examining the substantive content, it becomes clear that in the process from intuition to thought, exteriority is gradually erased while interiority is progressively strengthened and perfected; and in the process from art to philosophy, objectivity is gradually erased while subjectivity is progressively strengthened and perfected—yet a true dialectical synthesis is not achieved. The essence of the external nature of intuition and the objectivity of art lies, above all, in sensory perception; yet this core element is completely eliminated at the stage of synthesis he describes.
To remain faithful to dialectics, Hegel should have added the Absolute Spirit—a stage in which the complete subjectivity achieved in philosophy is re-objectified. Art is a strong candidate to occupy the space “beyond philosophy.” Indeed, aren’t many works of art explained not merely through the medium of “thought”? Moreover, wasn’t Hegel himself—who had a richer artistic experience than anyone else—well aware of this? For this reason, this discrepancy between method and philosophical system is all the more regrettable. The completion of dialectical synthesis is not the end of philosophical thought; rather, it can only be achieved in a new, integrative stage that follows.
Therefore, Hegel’s system remains unfinished, and later scholars who carry on his philosophy must continually expand dialectical thought to resolve this unfinished task. Achieving the complete synthesis of the Absolute Spirit through the interaction of art, religion, and philosophy remains an ongoing philosophical task. In this process, we must move beyond the framework of dialectical thought presented by Hegel and attempt new insights and syntheses. Such attempts will enable not only philosophical development but also a deeper understanding of our lives and the world.
