Editing Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (section)

== Legacy ==
Hegel's influence on subsequent philosophical developments has been enormous. In late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century England, a school known as [[British idealism]] propounded a version of [[absolute idealism]] in direct engagement with Hegel's texts. Prominent members included [[J. M. E. McTaggart]], [[R. G. Collingwood]], and [[Geoffrey Reginald Gilchrist Mure|G. R. G. Mure]]. Separately, some philosophers such as [[Marx]], [[John Dewey|Dewey]], [[Derrida]], [[Theodor W. Adorno|Adorno]], and [[Gadamer]] have selectively developed Hegelian ideas into their own philosophical programs. Others have developed their positions in opposition to Hegel's system. These include, for instance, such diverse philosophers as [[Schopenhauer]], [[Kierkegaard]], [[Bertrand Russell|Russell]], [[G. E. Moore]], and [[Michel Foucault|Foucault]]. In theology, Hegel's influence marks the work of [[Karl Barth]] and [[Dietrich Bonhoeffer]]. These names, however, constitute only a small sample of some of the more important figures who have developed their thought in engagement with the philosophy of Hegel.{{sfn|Houlgate|2005|pp=1–2}}{{sfn|Fritzman|2014|loc=chapter 9}}{{sfn|Rockmore|1993|loc=chapter 3}}

=== "Right" vs. "Left" Hegelianism ===
{{See also|Marxist philosophy#Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel}}
[[File:Karl Marx 001.jpg|thumb|upright=0.8|left|[[Karl Marx]] (1818–1883)]]

Some historians present Hegel's early influence in Germanic philosophy as divided into two opposing camps, right and left.{{sfn|Fackenheim|1967|loc=ch. 4, §§2–3}} The [[Right Hegelians]], the allegedly direct disciples of Hegel at the [[Humboldt University of Berlin|Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität]], advocated a [[Protestant]] orthodoxy and the [[political conservatism]] of the post-[[Napoleon I of France|Napoleon]] Restoration period. The Left Hegelians, also known as the [[Young Hegelians]], interpreted Hegel in a [[revolutionary]] sense, leading to an advocation of [[atheism]] in religion and [[liberal democracy]] in politics. Recent studies, however, have questioned this paradigm.{{sfn|Löwith|1964}}

The Right Hegelians "were quickly forgotten" and "today mainly known only to specialists"; the Left Hegelians, by contrast, "included some of the most important thinkers of the period," and "through their emphasis on practice, some of these thinkers have remained exceedingly influential," primarily through the Marxist tradition.{{sfn|Rockmore|2013|p=305}}

Among the first followers to take an expressly critical view of Hegel's system were those in the 19th-century German group known as the [[Young Hegelians]], which included [[Feuerbach]], [[Marx]], [[Engels]], and their followers. The primary thrust of their criticism is concisely expressed in the eleventh of Marx's "[[Theses on Feuerbach]]" from his 1845 ''[[German Ideology]]'': "The philosophers have only ''interpreted'' the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to ''change'' it."{{sfn|Marx|1978|p=145}}{{efn|The literature on this is enormous. [[Herbert Marcuse]]'s ''[[Reason and Revolution]]'', however, is one classic introductory text.{{sfn|Marcuse|1999}}}}

In the twentieth century, a Hegelian-inflected interpretation of Marx was further developed in the work of [[critical theorists]] of the [[Frankfurt School]].{{sfn|Bohman|2021}} This was due to (a) the rediscovery and re-evaluation of Hegel as a possible philosophical progenitor of Marxism by philosophically oriented Marxists; (b) a resurgence of Hegel's historical perspective; and (c) an increasing recognition of the importance of his [[dialectical method]]. [[György Lukács]]' ''[[History and Class Consciousness]]'' (1923), in particular, helped to reintroduce Hegel into the Marxist canon.{{sfn|Stahl|2021}}

{{clear}}

=== In France ===
It has become commonplace to identify "French Hegel" with the lectures of [[Alexandre Kojève]], who emphasized the [[Lord–bondsman dialectic|master–servant]] [''Herrschaft und Knechtschaft''] dialectic (which he mistranslated as master-slave [''maître et l'esclave'']) and Hegel's philosophy of history. This perspective, however, overlooks over sixty years of French writing on Hegel, according to which Hegelianism was identified with the "system" presented in the ''Encyclopedia''.{{sfn|Baugh|2003|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=k-nZXykvXzsC&pg=PA1&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false 1], [https://books.google.com/books?id=k-nZXykvXzsC&pg=PA9&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false 9–10]}} The later reading, drawing instead upon the ''Phenomenology of Spirit'', was in many ways a reaction against the earlier. After 1945, "this 'dramatic' Hegelianism, which centered on the theme of historical becoming through conflict, [came] to be seen as compatible with existentialism and Marxism."{{sfn|Baugh|2003|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=k-nZXykvXzsC&pg=PA9&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false 9]}}

By confining the dialectic to history, the dominant French readings of [[Jean Wahl]], [[Alexandre Kojève]], and [[Jean Hyppolite]] effectively presented Hegel as providing "a philosophical anthropology instead of a general metaphysics."{{sfn|Baugh|2003|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=k-nZXykvXzsC&pg=PA17&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false 17]}} This reading took the topic of ''desire'' as its focal point of intervention.{{sfn|Butler|1987|p=xxvi}} A major theme was that "a reason that seeks to be all-inclusive falsifies reality by suppressing or repressing its 'other.{{' "}}{{sfn|Baugh|2003|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=k-nZXykvXzsC&pg=PA12&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false 12]}} Although it cannot be attributed entirely to Kojève, this reading of Hegel shaped the thought and interpretations of thinkers such as [[Jean-Paul Sartre]], [[Maurice Merleau-Ponty]], [[Claude Lévi-Strauss]], [[Jacques Lacan]], and [[Georges Bataille]].{{sfn|Baugh|2003|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=k-nZXykvXzsC&pg=PA1&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false 1]}}

Kojève's interpretation of the "master–slave dialectic" as the basic model of historical development also influenced the feminism of [[Simone de Beauvoir]] and the anti-racist and anti-colonial work of [[Frantz Fanon]].{{sfn|Fritzman|2014|pp=148–49}}

=== American pragmatism ===
[[File:Richard J. Bernstein.jpg|thumb|upright=1|left|[[Richard J. Bernstein]] (1932–2022), known for his work on Hegel and American Pragmatism]]
As documented by [[Richard J. Bernstein]], the influence of Hegel on [[American Pragmatism]] can be divided into three moments: the late nineteenth century, the mid-twentieth, and the present.{{sfn|Bernstein|2010|p=89}} The first is to be found in early issues of ''[[The Journal of Speculative Philosophy]]'' (founded 1867).{{sfn|Bernstein|2010|p=89}} The second is evident in the acknowledged influence upon major figures including [[John Dewey]], [[Charles Sanders Peirce|Charles Peirce]], and [[William James]].{{sfn|Bernstein|2010|pp=90–95}}

As Dewey himself describes the attraction, "There were, however, also 'subjective' reasons for the appeal that Hegel's thought made to me; it supplied a demand for unification that was doubtless an intense emotional craving, and yet was a hunger that only an intellectualized subject-matter could satisfy."{{sfn|Dewey|1981|p=7}} Dewey accepted much of Hegel's account of history and society, but rejected his conception of Hegel's account of absolute knowing.{{sfn|Fritzman|2014|p=142}}

Two philosophers, [[John McDowell]] and [[Robert Brandom]] (sometimes referred to as the "[[University of Pittsburgh|Pittsburgh]] Hegelians"), constitute, per Bernstein, the third moment of Hegel's influence on pragmatism.{{sfn|Bernstein|2010|pp=96–105}} However, while openly acknowledging the influence, neither claims to explicate Hegel's views according to his own self-understanding.{{efn|For instance, in the Introduction to his ''A Spirit of Trust'', Brandom repeatedly goes out of his way to emphasize that his interpretation is, e.g., "unusual" and "an admitted anachronism" and that his procedure is "not Hegel's own practice."{{sfn|Brandom|2019|pp=4,8}} }} In addition, each is avowedly influenced by [[Wilfrid Sellars]].{{sfn|Bernstein|2010|pp=96–99}} McDowell is particularly interested in dispelling the "[[myth of the given]]," the dichotomy between concept and intuition, whereas Brandom is concerned mostly to develop Hegel's social account of reason-giving and normative implication.{{sfn|Fritzman|2014|p=144}} These appropriations of Hegel's thought are two among several "non-metaphysical" readings.{{sfn|Beiser|2008|p=4}}