Abstract

That devout Marxists would not cast a kind eye on my The Scottish Enlightenment and Hegel’s Account of “Civil Society” is to be expected, for one of the aims of my study was to free the research into Hegel’s social and economic views from the ideological fetters of the past. However, it was a matter of surprise and regret to me to see that, of all journals, The Owl, the journal of the Hegel Society of America, chose to publish a one-sided “Marxist” account of my book, almost a verbatim copy of what appeared in the 1990–91 issue of Science and Society. The ideological nature of this attack upon my book will have been obvious to the attentive reader, for the only authority quoted at any length was neither Hegel nor Ferguson, Hume, Smith, Steuart, nor any of the other thinkers with whom my book is primarily concerned, but Karl Marx. These must be difficult times for hard-line Marxists and this situation should explain if not excuse the bad temper of the attack. For example, the insulting adjective “daft” was applied to my research. This, I think, is unsuitable for any scholarly discussion. I also hold the opinion that a review should try to give some idea of the content of the book under consideration before plunging into violent polemics. Those who would like to get a less dogmatic and more informative account of my study might turn to Hegel-Studien, 1989 ; American Historical Review, 1990 ; Journal of the History of Philosophy, 1991.