Consciousness as the Protagonist of the Buldingsroman

The more of Hegel I read, the more I am intrigued by the way in which Consciousness seems to assume the role of maturing protagonist of the Buldingsroman form. Breon Mitchell, in fact, speaks about the way in which the Buldingsroman follows a protagonist who is formed and changed by interaction with his milieu and the world. This definition of the process of development harks back to Chris's post two weeks ago, which outlines the milieu of Occupy and the way in which we are moulded by the movement and its ideas.

In his Preface, Hegel describes this process of development beautifully. In the same way that "the bud disappears in the bursting forth of the blossom, and...the former is refuted by the latter" (Hegel 2), so too Consciousness puts forth the bud of Sense-Certainty in an attempt to grasp true knowledge in the world. Finding this process to be unsatisfactory, it uses the defeat encountered in Sense-Certainty as the foundation of a new attempt.

Thus the bud blossoms and applies Perception as a way of finding Truth in the world. Now Consciousness resigns itself to mediation of the Object through itself, and uses Universals as a means of attaining its end. Once again, however, it encounters a problem, and is frustrated. There are two possibilities for Perception: either it encounters an object through the 'Also', that is, a collection of Universals and is indeterminate, or through the 'One', which is determinate and excludes. In this way, then, Consciousness encounters yet another dilemma, for it cannot encounter both a "many" and a "one", an indeterminate and determinate.

And thus Consciousness embarks on the final step of its process of development. It uses 'Force', which Dr. J describes as the Universal which is not sensuous, as the metaphysical lens through which Consciousness encounters the world. That is, the world is encountered as pinned down by physical laws, and in this way Understood.

I would like to offer a different approach to this end point of resolution. Dr. J asserted that, with regard to Perception, Consciousness is also frustrated because every Object stands in relation to another object. In other words, there are essences of other things in every Thing. If one applies an Existentialist approach to this idea, however, surely it is exactly this that allows Understanding. Put differently, looking at things as "ready-to-hand", that is, as connected and related to a web of things around them, allows an understanding of that object. Even if it is a subjective approach, for it requires the perceiving Consciousness to project itself into the Object to a degree, surely it garners understanding. Why would this Existentialist approach be problematic then? Is it unfeasible for Hegel's developing Consciousness to take the path of subjectivity?