Merge pull request #115 from systemphil/firgrep/existence

existence

.github/workflows/verify_formatting.yaml

@@ -35,4 +35,3 @@ jobs:
       run: |
         echo "Formatting check failed. Please format your code according to the project's Prettier configuration."
         exit 1
-

content/hegel/reference/_annotations/_meta.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+export default {
+    textual: {
+        title: "Textual Notes",
+    },
+};

content/hegel/reference/_annotations/textual.mdx

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+---
+title: Hegel Reference Textual Annotations
+description: Additional textual considerations in Hegel's Science of Logic
+isArticle: true
+authors: Filip Niklas (2024)
+editors:
+contributors:
+---
+
+## Inline Comments
+
+The en dash (–) at the start of a sentence (and _not_ within one) is often
+used by Hegel to insert a quick comment. It serves to swiftly elaborate on a
+logical passage and provide additional guidance. Importantly, in these
+mini-commentaries, Hegel steps out of the logical development to reflect upon
+it. Often, immediately after the en dash Hegel begins to speak about extraneous
+matter to the logical development or uses less precise language, such as in the
+development of [`being`](/articles/hegel/reference/being/development).
+
+> If any determination or content were posited in it as distinct, or if it were
+> posited by this determination or content as distinct from an other, it would
+> thereby fail to hold fast to its purity. It is pure indeterminateness and
+> emptiness. – There is _nothing_ to be intuited in it, if one can speak
+> here of intuiting; or, it is only this pure empty intuiting itself. Just as
+> little is anything to be thought in it, or, it is equally only this empty
+> thinking. Being, the indeterminate immediate is in fact _nothing_, and neither
+> more nor less than nothing (Hegel 2010, 59/21.68-9).
+
+Here "intuiting" and "speaking of" do not seem appropriate for the purely
+logical development. If it is correct that the en dash signals the start of a
+brief commentary here, then it makes sense why Hegel begins to employ intuition
+and vague language like "speaking of", since he is now reflecting upon the
+matter at hand as it has been developed thus far and attempts to help his
+readers to understand an otherwise extremely abstract idea.
+
+If the en dash does not signal the start of a comment and the logical
+development still continues, then that invites interpretation as to the precise
+status of intuition this early in the logic of pure thinking.

content/hegel/reference/_meta.tsx

@@ -17,10 +17,16 @@ export default {
     becoming: {
         title: "Becoming",
     },
+    existence: {
+        title: "Existence",
+    },
     "mechanical-object": {
         title: "Mechanical Object",
     },
     "mechanical-process": {
         title: "Mechanical Process",
     },
+    _annotations: {
+        title: "Annotations",
+    },
 };

content/hegel/reference/being/development.mdx

@@ -78,37 +78,27 @@ already transitioning the logic beyond being, since the focus shifts towards
 indeterminateness and emptiness.
 
 ```md
-– There is _nothing_ to be intuited in it, if one can speak here of
-intuiting; or, it is only this pure empty intuiting itself.
+– There is _nothing_ to be intuited in it, if one can speak here of intuiting;
+or, it is only this pure empty intuiting itself.
 ```
 
-The en dash (–) is often used by Hegel to inline a quick comment. It
-serves to swiftly elaborate on a logical passage and provide additional
-guidance. Importantly, in these mini-commentaries, Hegel steps out of the
-logical development to reflect upon it.Immediately after the en dash Hegel
-begins to speak about intuiting and "speaking of" and that does not seem
-appropriate for a purely logical development. If it is correct that the en dash
-signals the start of a brief commentary here, then it makes sense why Hegel
-begins to employ intuition and vague language like "speaking of", since he is
-now reflecting upon the matter at hand as it has been developed thus far and
-attempts to help his readers to understand an otherwise extremely abstract idea.
-
-If the en dash does not signal the start of a comment and the logical
-development still continues, then that invites interpretation as to the precise
-status of intuition this early in the logic of pure thinking. Discussions on
-this issue will be provided elsewhere. For the remainder of this development,
-the en dash is understood to be the start of a comment.
-
-Intuition is a concept with its own rich history. Spinoza considers it the
+Intuition is a concept with its own rich history.[^1] Spinoza considers it the
 superior form of knowledge as it basically does everything that intellectual
-cognition is capable of except it does it immediately.[^1] With intuitive
+cognition is capable of except it does it immediately.[^2] With intuitive
 knowledge of a matter, one does not pause to think and piece together various
 bits in order to arrive at a conception; one simply grasps the conception
 immediately. For example, one does not need to wait for the pincer maneuver to
 complete in order to see that one's force is becoming surrounded and cut off
 from supplies, but instantly recognize the doomed outcome the moment the pincer
 has been allowed to take shape.
 
+[^1]:
+    This passage begins with an en dash which signals an inline comment. See our
+    [textual notes](/articles/hegel/reference/_annotations/textual#inline-comments).
+
+[^2]:
+    [Spinoza on Intuition from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spinoza-epistemology-mind/#KindCognIIIIntu)
+
 What does intuition signify for Hegel here? Against Spinoza, whose intuitive
 knowledge seems to always be a determinate conception, intuition does not have
 any determinate content here. Indeed, intuition appears to actively fail to
@@ -121,9 +111,6 @@ itself. In intuiting that pure being is nothing—or there is nothing to be
 intuited in pure being—the intuiting activity is itself neither more or
 less than the matter it intuits, namely, pure emptiness.
 
-[^1]:
-    [Spinoza on Intuition from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spinoza-epistemology-mind/#KindCognIIIIntu)
-
 ```md
 Just as little is anything to be thought in it, or, it is equally only this
 empty thinking. Being, the indeterminate immediate is in fact _nothing_, and

content/hegel/reference/existence/_meta.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+export default {
+    overview: "",
+    development: "",
+};