Totality in <i>the</i> <i>Science of Logic </i>As An Indispensable Presupposition of Hegel’s <i>Philosophy of Right</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the opening pages of The Philosophy of Right, Hegel marks that what was previously expounded in The Science of Logic is presupposed in this book. This paper elaborates on what this presupposition entails. To explore this, it concentrates on one specific concept, namely, totality. It will be argued that the development in different moments of The Philosophy of Right, would not be possible without the anterior development of the metacategory of totality in The Science of Logic. Although a myriad of works has been published on each of these books, the scholarly works on Hegel misses an elaboration on this presupposition, more so on the role totality plays in the exposition of The Philosophy of Right in relationship with the exposition in The Science of Logic. After giving a general overview of each of these books, this paper traces such a relationship in five specific moments in The Philosophy of Right, namely, Will, Morality, Ethical Life, Civil Society, and State.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".