Both are true, and both have the same ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Hegel mostly does not name his opponents. Where he polemicizes \u2014 and he polemicizes often \u2014 one has to infer from the text who is meant. There are exceptions, and they are telling: where he names someone expressly, he is in earnest. Kant in \u00a7 75<\/a>, Savigny in \u00a7 211<\/a>, Carl Ludwig von Haller over several pages in \u00a7 258<\/a>, Fries in the Preface, Adam Smith, Say and Ricardo in \u00a7 189<\/a> \u2014 in the whole book that is a manageable list.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This edition takes part of the work of inference off your hands: where an allusion can be assigned, it is given in the footnotes to the paragraphs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The main text has almost none, and that is deliberate. Hegel wants to develop the matter out of its concept, not to illustrate it by cases; an example would for him already be an application from outside, and application comes after the concept, not before it. In the Remark to \u00a7 31<\/a> he says so unmistakably: the progression does not happen \u201ethrough the assurance that various relations exist<\/em>\u201c, nor through the application of the universal to material taken up from elsewhere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the lecture room. Hegel spoke before students, and there he explained, compared and constructed cases \u2014 the transcripts are full of them. That is precisely why they are placed beneath every paragraph in this edition. Whoever does not understand a passage often finds there, in three sentences, what the main text compresses into a single period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n An example of the example: on the conduct of war the main text says abstractly that war may not be waged against private persons (\u00a7 338<\/a>). The Griesheim transcript then says concretely what is meant: \u201eThe administration of justice, churches, poor-houses, hospitals \u2014 all this is left to go its way, and likewise private life and the trades.\u201c<\/p>\n\n\n\n Literature.<\/strong> Eckart F\u00f6rster, Die 25 Jahre der Philosophie<\/em>, Frankfurt a. M. 2011 (English: The Twenty-Five Years of Philosophy<\/em>, Cambridge, Mass. 2012) \u2013 on the density of the state of research against which Hegel mostly argues without naming names; Michael Inwood, A Hegel Dictionary<\/em>, Oxford 1992.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe examples<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Where the examples are to be found after all<\/h2>\n\n\n\n