The AskPhilosophers logo.

Philosophers

In the Monty Python football sketch, does the line, "Hegel is arguing that the reality is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic ethics" make any sense at all or is it gibberish that would only make sense to Hegel himself? Put more simply, does it mean that reality (which ought to be universal?) is something that can be known without prior the more important dimension of emotive ethical experience?
Accepted:
March 6, 2014

Comments

Andrew Pessin
March 28, 2014 (changed March 28, 2014) Permalink

who KNOWS what would make sense to Hegel ... :-) Personally I appreciate your suggested interpretation of that sentence, though I can't quite see how to get from the Python to your (very reasonable) exegesis ... So I'm going to go with "it is indeed gibberish," but add that (with due credit to hegel) it probably wouldn't make much sense to Hegel either (who also would probably not have been amused by Monty Python....) :-)

best, ap

  • Log in to post comments
Source URL: https://askphilosophers.org/question/5519
© 2005-2025 AskPhilosophers.org