Revisitando as críticas de Kierkegaard à ciência da lógica de Hegel: Alguns problemas lógicos ainda não suficientemente considerados

Abstract

This Master’s dissertation aims to investigate Kierkegaard's criticisms of the Hegel's Science of Logic contained in his Postscript. In regard to the Kierkegaard-Hegel relationship, two perspectives have been differentiated from it: the first one is that which relates to the psychological point of view, that is, whether Kierkegaard was against Hegel, if he wrote his books for the purpose of attacking Hegel; and the second one, in turn, is concerned with the relationship from a philosophical or theoretical point of view, that is, it focuses on whether Kierkegaard's criticisms fit Hegel's philosophy, without pretending to know whether this author was the true Kierkegaardian target. To reach its objectives, this research had adopted the second perspective. This dissertation also analyzed the position of Niels Thulstrup and Jon Stewart on this relationship. Attention was focused on the second of them, considered as the status quæstionis on the investigated relation – resulting, in the positioning before him, a secondary objective for this research. In order to offer another interpretation to a small part of his overview and also to a specific interpretation of the Kierkegaard-Hegel relationship, this dissertation investigated the philosophical relationship between Kierkegaard and Trendelenburg. The results of the research are that there are important aspects of Hegel's Science of Logic contained in Kierkegaard's Postscript and criticized there – making the Kierkegaard-Hegel relationship also theoretical and critical, not just passive or non-existent about logic; item on the general view of Stewart – that Kierkegaard and Hegel do not have the same position regarding the beginning of logic – an item relating to a specific interpretation of Stewart – and that the conditions put by Kierkegaard in "(a) a logical system can be given" has a Trendelenburgian's influence and thus are incompatible with principles defended by Hegel.