NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Hegel's appearance of freedom in Master and Servant The persons freedom and the essence of human relations were discussed in many philosophical theories. Hegel often states deep guesses concerning the real essence of public relations. In the present paper I would like to prove that Hegel's theory of freedom, mainly his work Master and Servant, is really reflected in the history of human relations. The history of mankind is represented by Hegel as a progress in freedom perception which, in his opinion, makes internal human nature. But it is realized by a man only step by step, during centuries-old history and owing to that understanding he becomes really free. According to Hegel, the self conscious is itself and for itself meaning that it has to come outside of itself, so that it can do two things.
One is to cancel out the other otherness. The second is to try to become recognized. This recognition process is called Master and Servant self-conscious. The conflict between master and servant is one in which the historical themes such as dependence and independence are introduced. It sets up the realization of the self conscious through the recognition of and by another, through mutual recognition. (Lilla 2001). Hegel divided all the world history into three basic epochs: east, antique and German.
In the east world a man has not yet realized that freedom makes his essence, therefore here, according to Hegel, all the people are slaves. In the antique world (the Ancient Greece and Rome) some people have already realized that freedom forms their essence: they also are free unlike those who havent realized it and consequently remained slaves. As an idealist Hegel actually ignores the connection of slavery to the certain economic conditions. He moves slavery out of the consciousness of people. At the heart of slavery there is the slavish consciousness, hence, the real attitude is put here head first, objective reality is moved out of consciousness. Only in German, or Christian world everybody, in Hegel's opinion, understands the spiritual essence and consequently here all the people are free.
The relation between the self and the otherness is necessary to define human awareness and more importantly desire. This desire is part of the primordial human experience. The problem is that, the consciousness responds to the otherness as a threat whereas truly it is not. If the otherness is destroyed, then essentially the consciousness is destroying itself. So the original consciousness decides to overcome the challenge of the otherness by absorbing it into itself, causing a battle for recognition between the now two consciousnesses. (Hodgson 2005) For Hegel historical formative process is not cleanly theoretical, occurring, so to say, "inside a head ." Hegel's theory of Master and Servant shows, how he particularly imagined this historical process of self-development. When two persons are in front of each other there is intensity between them because each of them wants another to recognize him as a master of situation.
According to this model, Hegel explains historical process as follows. In this struggle for the recognition one will be subordinated to another. As a result there is a situation in which there is a dominating, "master", and governable, "slave." This idea is very clear and helpful. These consciousnesses supposedly battle until one surrenders out of fear of elimination.
One becomes the master and the other becomes the servant. The one who proves to be the master asserts its dominance through willing to risk its life by not giving up or surrendering during the struggle. It announces its freedom over the servant because it believes itself to be independent and in control during the struggle to be recognized. The master does not progress or evolve because that is not its will. It simply wants to be in control and be seen over the new servant consciousness. (Reyburn 1921) Master compels the servant to work for him. As a result we have mutual development at which the person (servant) cultivates the nature and the cultivated nature, in turn, changes the person.
During processing of a field by the servant, material surplus, which provides a basis for occurrence of more effective methods of work and the best instruments, is created. And it conducts to the further cultivation of the nature, etc. We come to dialectic formative process developed between the person (subject) and the nature (object). In this process "servant" is more close to the truth and, hence, learns more ("servant", in Hegel's opinion, becomes a scientist) whereas "master" acts as the necessary catalyst. I found this idea unhelpful because I cant believe that it always happens.
History very often showed the opposite when the servants remained without any knowledge. Hegel believes that thus he overcomes the static distinction of the subject and object at which the subject never comprehends object. The master-servant relations are simultaneously a dialectic communication that means that between these two objects there is an internal dynamic interaction. A master is a master only because the servant (and master himself) recognizes him as a master. Accordingly, the servant is a servant, because a master (and the servant) recognizes him as a slave. So, when the white person argues about the inferior "nature of a black man" he can be considered to be a "master" in original game master-servant.
The servant, however, is truly Hegel's main focal point because the servant is really where the meat of the self conscious lies. It lives in fear of the master, working in servitude to produce many things. First, the servant wants to please the master with ideas and inventions so that it can be recognized also. It endures some of this torment out of fear, but also so that it can be recognized.
The servant produces these inventions, and over time, realizes itself because it can produce. It becomes aware through suffering. The servant is really the powerhouse of the self consciousness, although the balance of master and servant is still even. (Zizek 1993) The white man, first, defines himself as a superior, and the black man as an inferior, and, secondly, makes the black person to accept these definitions. Thus the white person hides the fact, that, insisting on naturalness of the statement about the inferior nature of the black man and forcing the last to believe in it, he makes the determinative step in this social game. Liberation should pass the same two steps.
A black man should personally learn to see, that it is a question of social definition, not of his nature. Then, he should learn to redefine the own point of view on himself and on a white man. At last, a black man should force a white man to accept this redefinition. A black man cannot restore feeling of self-esteem if this feeling is not shared by other person. It is easy to imagine, how this game master-slave is played at various levels of a modern society. The theory of Master and a Servant shows, how abstractly thinking philosopher Hegel specifies concrete political problems.
Besides this theory shows, how Hegel refuses to consider the individual as self-sufficient. The essence of a man is substantially defined by other people and other groups. Hegel looked at the French revolution as on extremely important event. For clearing of his point of view it is possible to use the theory of Master and Servant. Before the revolution the prodigal and parasitic class played the role of a master.
And active, but politically deprived of civil rights bourgeoisie was the servant. During revolution the slave, that is bourgeoisie in a role of an active class, defined the game rules in a new fashion. After revolution with its slogans (freedom, equality and a brotherhood) mutual, but the unequal recognition (master and servant) was overcome in favour of the mutual recognition based on equality (free and reasonable equal parties). So, in a civil society the principle of equality realizes an ideal of autonomy of an individual that was put forward by Enlightenment. I think the historical consequences here are immense because Hegel wants to show that, being that master does not always mean being the best. An important idea or feeling might not spring from the top thinker, it could appear from anywhere.
The servant self conscious acts to satisfy the master but in turn acts to satisfy himself, which in essence is the body of having a spirit or the ability to be free per say. The servant struggles to get what it wants, as most people do. It begins a domino effect for the human mind to become one again and work in the agreement. Works Cited Caird, Edward. Hegel. Philadelphia: J.
B. Lippincott, 1883. Carroll, James B. , and Karen E. Either. "Servant, Master, Double-Edged Sword: Metaphors Teachers Use to Discuss Technology. " Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 10. 2 (2002): 235 +. Hodgson, Peter C.
Hegel and Christian Theology: A Reading of the Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005... Lilla, Mark. "Hegel and the Political Theology of Reconciliation. " The Review of Metaphysics 54. 4 (2001): 859 +. >. Reyburn, Hugh A. The Ethical Theory of Hegel: A Study of the Philosophy of Right.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1921. Zizek, Slave. Tarrying with the Negative: Kant, Hegel, and the Critique of Ideology. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1993.
Free research essays on topics related to: human relations, white man, white person, point of view, black man
Research essay sample on Point Of View Black Man
