Notes On Reviews of Hegel's Logic (original) (raw)

MacTaggart, Ellis M’Taggart: Studies in the Hegelian Dialectic, Cambridge, 1896
(259 pp.). Review in Zeitschrift für Phi- losophie,[2] Bd. 119 (1902), S. 185— — —,
says that the author is an expert on Hegel’s
philosophy, which he defends against Seth,
Balfour, Lotze, Trendelenburg, etc. (the au-
thor MacTaggart is obviously an arch-idealist).

Emil Hammacher: Die Bedeutung der Philosophie Hegels. (92 SS.) 1911, Leipzig.
Review in Zeitschrift für Philosophie,
Bd. 148 (1912), p. 95. Says that the book
contains rather good observations on “the
reappearance of post Kantian idealism at the
present time,” that Windelband is an agnostic
(p. 96), etc., but that the author completely
failed to understand Hegel’s “absolute ideal-
ism,” as incidentally also Riehl, Dilthey and
and other “stars.” The author is said to have
undertaken a task beyond his powers.

Andrew Seth: The Development from Kant to Hegel with Chapters on the Philosophy of Religion, London, 1882. Review in Zeit- schrift für Philosophie, Bd. 83, S. 145 (1883).
The author is said to defend Hegel against
Kant. (Laudatory in general.)

Stirling: The Secret of Hegel. Review
in the same journal, Bd. 53 (1868), p. 268.
The author is said to be an exceptionally
fervent worshipper of Hegel, whom he in-
terprets for English readers.

Bertrando Spaventa: Da Socrate a He- gel, Bari, 1905. (432 pp. 4,50 lire). Review
ibidem, Bd. 129 (1906)—the book is said
to be a collection of articles, inter alia
about Hegel, of whom Spaventa is a faith-
ful adherent.

Stirling: The Secret of Hegel.

Italian:

Spaventa: Da Socrate a Hegel. Raff. Mariano.

German:

Michelet and Haring. Dialektische Methode Hegels (1888).
Schmitt. Das Geheimnis der Hegel- schen Dialektik (1888).

Regarding recent literature on Hegel.
Neo-Hegelians: Caird, Bradley.
J. B. B a i l l i e: The Origin and Significance of Hegel’s Logic, London, 1901
(375 pp.). A review in Revue Philosophique,[3]
1902, 2, S. 312. Says that he does not merely
repeat Hegelian terminology (like Véra), but tries
to examine and explain historically. Incidentally,
Chapter X: the relation of logic to nature (Hegel
is said not to have achieved his aim). Hegel’s
significance is that he “demonstrated the object- ive character of knowledge.” (p. 314)

William Wallace: Prolegomena to the Study of Hegel’s Philosophy and Especially of his Logic, Oxford and Lon-
don, 1894. Review in Revue Philo- sophique, 1894, 2, p. 538. Second
edition, the first was in 1874. The author
translated Hegel’s Logic.

The writer
of the re-
view[6] notes
in general
“the rebirth
of Hegelian-
ism in the
Anglo-Saxon
countries”

Review in Revue Philosophique, 1904,
Vol. I, p. 430: “In spite of its title, the
work of M. H. is not an interpretative
commentary but rather an almost literal
summary.” The author has compiled some-
thing in the nature of a dictionary of the terms used in Hegel’s Logic. But this, it is
said, is not the essence of the matter: “The
commentators are still in dispute over