Limits of Cognition

In the Introduction, Hegel describes two ways in which our understanding of cognition alters our perceptions. If cognition is seen as an instrument for attaining an understanding of something, then we accept an inevitable alteration of that something. Or, if cognition is understood as a medium through which we see the ‘light of truth’, then we still do not get the truth ‘as it is in itself’ (46) but an alteration of the truth as it passed through the medium of cognition. Hegel goes on to posit that both these ideas about cognition assume a separation of ourselves from cognition. He describes a standoff between the Absolute and cognition, and their independence from each other.

Another aspect of this writing about cognition is the idea that our cognitions have limits. Hegel recognizes and disputes the necessity of working to understand our limits of cognition before exploring new areas of cognition as stated as necessary in previous philosophical work. What would be the purpose of an awareness of one’s own cognitive limits? Hegel offers a fear of error asking, “if the fear of falling into error sets up a mistrust of Science…it is hard to see why we should not turn round and mistrust this very mistrust” (47).

In Hegel’s discussion about the Absolute, cognition, and mistrust of science, I wonder (and I may just be missing the point) what the risk in “error” actually is? If the ideas about drawing the limits of cognition are created from a fear of failure, what is at steak that would influence this trepidation?