Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Newell points out that while each of the thinkers surveyed in the book looked to
different representations of ancient Greek culture and politics for inspiration—for
example, while Hegel looked to the Greeks of Periclean and democratic Athens,
Nietzsche and Heidegger both looked to the Homeric age—each recognized that a
straightforward return to classical antiquity was impossible. As Newell notes, these
philosophers shared the belief that the triumph of modern physics, which shattered
the belief in a unified, stable, and permanent cosmos, rendered any return
impossible. In light of the Enlightenment “discovery” that the human mind has no
intrinsic connection with the rest of nature, Waller Newell posits that the theorists of
the Philosophy of Freedom view “the time-bound realm of historical change” as a
new source of unity. By grounding human existence in history these thinkers sought
to re-capture the Greek heritage and tradition of freedom.
In the second chapter, Newell explains the manner by which Hegel resolved this
dualism in Rousseau’s thought by subsuming it within a greater whole of the
“teleological progress of history.” Transposing human happiness and wholeness
from the state of nature to history’s completion, Hegel resolves the dualism of
freedom and nature—as well as the other dualisms that characterize Rousseau’s
thought—through the dialectical progress of history. Newell provides an
illuminating interpretation of the Phenomenology of Spirit that explores Hegel’s
understanding of the intellectual and political situation of his time. He analyzes the
political implications of Hegel’s historical dialectics, explaining how man’s alienation
from nature and his “growing desire to master it through scientific knowledge” is,
through the historical process, reconciled with his sense of “unity with [his] fellow
human beings and nature,” culminating in an “organic communitarianism” premised
on shared liberal rights. At the same time, Newell reminds us that Hegel’s historical
dialectic is “outwardly violent”—indeed, Hegel famously describes history as a
“slaughter-bench” of ambition and domination. On this basis, Newell suggests that
Hegel means to remind us that man’s drive for “absolute freedom” will result in
violence and terror. One is left wondering, therefore, whether Newell views Hegel’s
historical dialectic as culminating in “organic communitarianism” or violence and
terror. Perhaps Hegel’s thought manifests a dualism of its own.
In the remaining two thirds of the book, Newell turns to what he terms the “assaults
on the Hegelian Middle” by Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Martin Heidegger.
Each of these three thinkers believed Hegel’s historical dialecticism brought about a
determinism that stripped human beings of their creative capacity, and each thought
it necessary to “take back man’s creative powers” in different ways. Newell’s
treatment of Marx is, comparatively, the shortest. However, despite its brevity,
Newell’s succinct analysis brings to the fore the relevant themes that identify and
clarify Marx’s contribution to the Philosophy of Freedom. He points out that Marx
emphasized the capacity of human beings to master nature so that they might bring
about “sheer collective freedom.” Through this process, the alienation brought
about by capitalism would give way to a renewed sense of “species-being” or
communality. In short, man’s creative capacity—whether by natural evolutionary
forces or revolution—would bring about a transformation that would see the
“withering away of political authority and inequality.”
The third and fourth chapters of Newell’s book are devoted to Nietzsche and
Heidegger, respectively. In the third chapter, Newell shows that while Nietzsche’s
philosophy is future-oriented, he nevertheless rejects Hegel’s progressiveegH
account of history. In his synopsis and overview of The Birth of Tragedy, On the
Advantages and Disadvantages of History for Life, and Beyond Good and Evil, Newell
provides a vivid account of Nietzsche’s desire for a politics that goes beyond liberal
rationalism to something altogether new. As Newell presents it, Nietzsche saw the
Hegelian belief in the end of history as preventing man from embracing this new
politics. This same theme is extended in Newell’s excellent chapter on Heidegger,
which makes clear the extent to which Heidegger sought to bring man face-to-face
with his temporality, so that he might be open to new (political) possibilities.
Newell makes it clear that Heidegger’s radical philosophic project (particularly his
early work) is inseparable from his politics and his ill-fated involvement with German
National Socialism.