Hegel

Where should I, as a Christian, start with Hegel? I'm reading his "Philosophy of Religion" and really liking it. Are his other works worth reading? I'm kind of shocked that marxists appropriated his works, yet he seems totally opposed to their materialist/atheism and historical reductionism

>...it is by reason of his being Spirit, that man is man; and from man as Spirit proceed all the many developments of the sciences and arts, the interests of political life, and all those conditions which have reference to man’s freedom and will. But all these manifold forms of human relations, activities, and pleasures, and all the ways in which these are intertwined; all that has worth and dignity for man, all wherein he seeks his happiness, his glory, and his pride, finds its ultimate centre in religion, in the thought, the consciousness, and the feeling of God. Thus God is the beginning of all things, and the end of all things. As all things proceed from this point, so all return back to it again. He is the centre which gives life and quickening to all things, and which animates and preserves in existence all the various forms of being. In religion man places himself in a relation to this centre, in which all other relations concentrate themselves, and in so doing he rises up to the highest level of consciousness and to the religion which is free from relation to what is other than itself, to something which is absolutely self-sufficient, the unconditioned, what is free, and is its own object and end.

>Religion, as something which is occupied with this final object and end, is therefore absolutely free, and is its own end; for all other aims converge in this ultimate end, and in presence of it they vanish and cease to have value of their own. No other aim can hold its ground against this, and here alone all find their fulfillment.

Other urls found in this thread:

books.google.co.uk/books?id=dYIfPFM-7IIC&pg=PA30&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
empyreantrail.wordpress.com/2017/03/09/why-self-consciousness-needs-two/
empyreantrail.wordpress.com/2017/01/21/phos-life-desire-and-self-consciousness/
empyreantrail.wordpress.com/2016/11/18/phenomenology-of-spirit-substance-as-subject/
vimeo.com/15786344
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>In the relation where the spirit occupies itself with this end, it unburdens itself of all finiteness, and wills for itself final satisfaction and deliverance; for here the spirit relates itself no longer to something that is other than itself, and that is limited, but to the unlimited and infinite, and this is an infinite relation, a relation of freedom and no longer of dependence. Here its consciousness is absolutely free, and is indeed true consciousness, because it is consciousness of absolute truth. In its character as feeling, this condition of freedom is the sense of satisfaction which we call blessedness, while as activity it has nothing further to do than to manifest the honour of God and to reveal His glory, and in this attitude it is no longer with himself that man is concerned with — his own interests or his empty pride — but with the absolute end. All the various peoples feel that it is in the religious consciousness they possess truth, and they have always regarded religion as constituting their true dignity and the Sabbath of their life. Whatever awakens in us doubt and fear, all sorrow, all care, all the limited interests of finite life, we leave behind on the shores of time; and as from the highest peak of a mountain, far away from all definite view of what is earthly, we look down calmly upon all the limitations of the landscape and of the world, so with the spiritual eye man, lifted out of the hard realities of this actual world, contemplates it as something having only the semblance of existence, which seen from this pure region bathed in the beams of the spiritual still, merely reflects back its shades of colour, its varied tints and lights, softened away into eternal rest. In this region of spirit flow the streams of forgetfulness from which Psyche drinks, and in which she drowns all sorrow, while the dark things of this life are softened away into a dream-like vision, and become transfigured until they are a mere framework for the brightness of the Eternal.

>Christian
>posts qt wearing a mantilla

No better than a muslim desu...

It is not really surprising because Marxism, like all -isms, has a "God." For example, an atheist may be into humanism which has replaced "God" with something else that cannot be proven and is treated as an axiom, this being the belief that humans have a natural tendency towards progress and goodness. All -isms that aren't openly religious are fundamentally pseudo-religious in a sense.

Anyways, I would recommend reading his "The Philosophy of Right."

one of the few upsides of islam is the modest clothing for women

Hegel's relationship with Christianity is complicated. He calls it the perfect religion, but (and I say this myself being a Christian) I find it hard to believe he was a Christian. He has a lot of good things to say about it in general, though.

This. SJWs who whine about the male gaze should be pimping the woman-empowering hijab to high heaven. But no, the lefty simpletons find fault there also.

He was a pantheist heretic, not a Christian. In fact, he's one of the greatest anti-christs of modern times; the seer of modern evolutionary pantheism.
You should read the Church Fathers instead.

Hegel elaborated a pantheistic, pan-logical and historicist, absolute idealism where we find an absolute humanism that generates absolute atheism: man is the immanent foundation of reality itself. He sought to rationally found reality understood as a logical construction of the world. The object of Hegelian philosophy is the rational comprehension of the world and of history. History is characterized by splits between being and non-being, good and evil, the infinite and finite, and God and the world. Knowledge of this reality engenders an unhappy conscience in man who desires to free himself from contradictions. In his work Phenomenology of the Spirit, Hegel examines in a scientific way the various manifestations of the spirit in its historical dimension. The fundamental principles of the Hegelian system are two: in the logical sphere, that of the identity of the ideal and that of the real; in the ontological sphere, the principle is the absolute in which being is its becoming. Hegel’s method is the dialectic: the sole adequate method for the study of reality is that of speculative logic (or the dialectic). It is made up of three moments: thesis (the moment of being-in-itself), antithesis (the moment of being-outside-itself), and synthesis (the moment of reunion). Reality is structured by an immense triangular pyramid that explodes from the absolute and develops in an infinite number of triads. The fundamental triad is given by: idea, nature, and Spirit, and the three principal parts are, correspondingly: logic, philosophy of nature, and philosophy of the Spirit. History is the study of the manifestations of the objective spirit. It is the progressive manifestation of the absolute; in it all that happens has a rational character. Evil is only a moment in the dialectic of reason. To manifest itself in history the spirit makes use of the State and of Nation.

A critique of Hegel’s philosophy. As was said Hegel was a pantheist. His Absolute is not the transcendent Supreme and Almighty God of Christianity but rather, “this Absolute is immanent in the cosmos, and now specifically in the human consciousness that makes up the human world of history, with its institutions, social entities and movements, and especially its organization into political states. The Absolute is not prior to this world of men or above it; it is not the creating source whence earthly reality derives, nor is it distinct from it. Thus the Absolute is not a ‘substance,’ meaning an existing and already achieved Being or Reality, but rather a ‘subject,’ that is, a process of development in and of and through the earthly human social reality.”

Hegel was also the father of modern dictatorships, both of the fascist and communist types. “In his Philosophy of Law (1821) Hegel teaches that the political state is the moving progress of God in the world, to be honored as a reality at once human and divine. ‘Progess’ is the operating word in this concept : it denotes the presence of the dialectic, the dynamic process or mechanism by which political states are constituted as the embodiment of social movement in human history. From the viewpoint of the present study it is clear that the fundamental metaphysics of pantheism is leading directly to the divinization of the state as the supreme manifestation of the World Spirit moving in historical time." “When Hegel presents the German world as the goal of the dialectic of the World spirit across six thousand years of human culture, he has explicitly in mind the Prussian state of his own day. For him this is the final embodiment of the World Spirit and the final aim of its progression, a concept to which one now must turn in order to understand fully what Hegel has in mind with the application of his dialectic in the Philosophy of History. ‘The principles of the successive phases of Spirit’, he writes, ‘that animate the nations in a necessitated gradation are themselves only steps in the development of the one universal Spirit… This necessarily implies that the present form of Spirit comprehends within it all earlier steps…The life of the ever-present Spirit is a circle of progressive embodiments.’ With this concept of the embodiment of the World Spirit in the succession of political entities across time, the student of Hegel stands before his work The Philosophy of Law, which may well be called the rationale of the totalitarian state, and which reveals how truly it has been said that Marx can be understood only in the light of Hegel’s philosophy but in an application that Hegel himself did not forsee. Hegel writes: ‘The state is the Spirit that lives in the world and there consciously realizes itself…The state is the march of God through the world…The state is the world that the Spirit has made for itself…We must therefore worship the state as the manifestation of the Divine on earth.’”

At the foundations of Hegel’s pantheism lie his panlogicism (his identification of the real order of being with the logical order resulting in his failure to distinguish between the ontological concept of God as the Being a se, and the logical concept of universal being) and his denial of the objective validity of the principle of non-contradiction, resulting in pan-fieri and monism. There is indeed a distinction between the metaphysical concept of God as the Ens a se and the logical concept of universal being. Bittle writes that “a comparison of the two concepts will bring our their radical difference. The concept of God is that of a concrete being; the concept of universal being is abstract. The absolute being of ‘God’ has the fullest ‘comprehension,’ because He comprises within Himself the plenitude of being in an infinite manner; but the concept of God is the smallest in ‘extension,’ because He is only one in number. The reverse is true of the abstract, logical entity of the concept of ‘universal being.’ From the standpoint of its ‘comprehension,’ it is the most meager of all concepts, because it consists of the single item of being in general and as such is next to ‘nothing’; from the standpoint of its ‘extension,’ it is the widest of all concepts, since it can be predicated of every sort of actual and possible being, of substances and accidents and modes. Furthermore, ‘God’ and ‘universal being’ differ altogether in regard to the manner of their origin. The concept of ‘God’ is the result of reasoning, acquired through the process of applying the principles of reason to the data of experience. On the other hand, the concept of ‘universal being’ is formed through the logical process of abstraction, by ignoring the manifold differences existing in the actual realities. Again ‘God’ and ‘universal being’ differ completely in their mode of existence. ‘God’ exists as an individual being, independent of any creatural mind. ‘Universal being’ exists formally only in the abstracting mind and as such has only a mental existence; in actuality, individual beings alone exist, and ‘universal being’ does not exist as a real being anywhere in nature. Finally, ‘God’ and ‘universal being’ are totally different in their properties. Both are simple; but this ‘simplicity’ is predicated of them in radically diverse meanings. ‘God’ is said to be ‘simple’ in the sense that He is infinitely perfect; He possesses ontological indivisibility in the fullness of His being. ‘Universal being,’ however, is said to be ‘simple’ only because of its indeterminateness, logical incompositeness, and poverty of content.”

The Hegelian claim is that the beings that we find in the world are but modes or modifications of the divine substance through a necessary process of historical becoming. Such modes or modifications are but thought modes or thought modifications of the divine being in the process of historical becoming. But this is a manifest error for creatural beings (substances in their own right) are not modes or modifications (accidents) of any substantial being. The things that we observe in the world around us “are complete substances in themselves, really distinct from God numerically and essentially, and really distinct from one another numerically and, in numberless cases, specifically and also generically. What is more, unless we wish to admit that our cognitive faculties are utterly and absolutely untrustworthy, we must admit that we ourselves and the rest of the creatures in the world are not mere thought-modifications of any being, but have an existence in the physical world, an existence, namely, really distinct from, and outside of, the intellect or thought of any being, even God. To insist that the world is a mere illusion of God’s intellect or of our intellects is intellectual suicide. To attempt to live practically in accord with such a theory is impossible. Even the idealists themselves admit this.”

See also, bottom of page 35 - page 41:
books.google.co.uk/books?id=dYIfPFM-7IIC&pg=PA30&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false

That's a good thing desu, not full burka but veils are welcome

Depends. If you want to start with Hegel, you would do well to start with the Phenomenology.

Along the way of religion, despite calling himself a Lutheran, Hegel denies major Christian doctrines -
he does not believe in heaven and denied salvation, thinks that viewing ourselves as pilgrims upon this world (qua Augustine) is unethical, denies the transcendence and personality of God, denies the reality of miracles and also Christian love ethics. He also thought theology was generally wrong-headed, as it presupposed God in its subject matter (though, he of course believed in God).

Hegel was more interested in Christianity, as it was immanent, real and actual expression of feeling with the Absolute. He initially flirted with Paganism, but found worship to be dead
and stagnant waters. Luther, he thought, provided the greatest expression of this feeling through his conception of Mass - though Hegel ultimately countered nearly everything aside from
this form of Divine expression.

Hegel saw truth in human institutions insofar as they were the development of the Divine Idea.

Hegel thought he could eventually replace faith with rationality, and treated Christianity in accordance to how he conceived of this design. A rather controversial point Hegel made was this,
while religion and philosophy treated essentially the same subject matter, but do so in different manners - the feeling and intuition of religion (representations), but in the end, he thought they
must be replaced by the categories and thoughts of philosophy (concepts). He subscribed to the hotly-debated thesis that feeling could eventually be made discursive.
The representations of religion, as Hegel considered them, were inchoate and unorganized thoughts, in the same sense that nature is from the point of organization less developed than
spirit. In the end, there is only one sort of thinking, with varying degrees of organization and explicitness.

To illustrate, for Hegel there is the object of (1) sensation (concrete, particular object and unsystematic), of (2) representation (particular object, universal in formal qualities, though not fully related as in a system) and
of (3) thinking (universal and related in a system). More or less, while religion is consideration in a certain sense, it is by and large implicit.

Generally speaking, most rejected Hegel's metaphysics though appropriated other thoughts such as the dialectic. Such is true of Marxists (of certain stripes) and even Kierkegaard.

Hegel was a hegelian, not Christian. Also stop posting 5 consecutive pages. Paraphrase what you want to say or link it.

>) representation (particular object, universal in formal qualities, though not fully related as in a system) and
>of (3) thinking (universal and related in a system)
Is the link between plurality of minds just universal categories of cognition? Does Hegel say to what extent they relate other than that? I get that Objective and Absolute Spirit are it's wordly manifestation, but how does he explain an overrarching system that has it's own goals? And does the physical "in itself" lie outside of universal cognition and is just affected by it for representation? Hope that makes sense

holy shit who knew Hegel was so based

>pan-fieri
all things are Diners, Drive-Ins, and Dives

He has been described as "egregiously misogynistic" by "feminist scholars."

Godamn, imagine being a woman into philsophy and getting constantly btfo'd by the greatest thinkers. Actually just imagine a woman being into philosophy lol

>no better than a muslim
Nonsense, it's really only expected to be worn in a church. Muslims expect their women to be covered all the time, if a Christian girl is doing it then it's far more likely it's something voluntary. Now you might say many Muslims cover voluntarily, but they are really voluntarily submitting to an obligation that would be imposed on them whether they like it or not. Christians do not have any such obligation, at least outside of church services.

imagine a modern female "philosopher" was sent back in time to the 17th or 18th centuries and try to argue with real philosophers.

The plurality of minds is based on the structure of self-conscious minds, see section on recognition before struggle to the death and this: empyreantrail.wordpress.com/2017/03/09/why-self-consciousness-needs-two/

To the merely conscious being the only mind is it, and all other things are objects to be negated in consumption by it. See the section on Desire and Life: empyreantrail.wordpress.com/2017/01/21/phos-life-desire-and-self-consciousness/

The system that has its own goals is the system explained by the concept of life. See the section in the link right above. Life as genus posits its individual existent parts as its unity, and their individual life maintains the universal genus in their individual freedom. See Substance as Subject, it goes over Hegel's quick identification of reason and purpose as substantive and self-determining: empyreantrail.wordpress.com/2016/11/18/phenomenology-of-spirit-substance-as-subject/

Nature is something externally ideal, it is not a representation or cognition of ours, but is its own self-standing structure against the metaphysical structures enabling it (logic), and the mind which can move inwardly and pull outer existence into it and make its ideal structure explicit and apparent for itself (spirit).

vimeo.com/15786344

Hegel destroys Islam and Judaism.
Christianity is the Absolute and Fullness of true Religion.

Just the thought of it makes me cringe

Read Eric Voegelin's "Hegel: a Study in Sorcery" and his other writings on Hegel.

this and check out Hegel and The Hermetic Tradition

Hegel is cool, even if he was into weird German delusions (illuminati and hermeticism)

MUH ATOMISM>SOCIAL COHERENCE I LOVE SOY PRAISE GNON

This is from The Philosophy Of Hegel by G. R. G. Mure

>hegelianism
>Christian
pick one and only one

protip : pick Christianity and read Aquinas

Haha also imagine being an adult man and posting little cartoon girls on a circlejerk incel-community site

at any point you deem your own religion not proper of facts, you can leave but fucking fast because people will want to kill you for it.

Religion and Hegel are incompatible.

Thanks man

Imagine not being able to appreciate the transcendent beauty of artistic portrayal. Imagine not grasping the concept of Ideal form contrasted with that everyday object sensibility. Imagine valuing the latter over concerted manifestations of pure subject in the malleable form of art.

This is actually a great source, who's the speaker?

>Christians do not have any such obligation, at least outside of church services.
Christian youth have a massive familial obligation to certain traditions especially when following or reacting to religious mores become habitual, obsessive or psychically embedded.

it was always awkward in philosophy courses when we got to a passage in Aristotle or Aquinas when they said that women are slaves and the professor would have to rationalize it even though deep down he probably agrees

Are there any societies other than isolated tribes that are a counterexamples? Seems like an anthropological inevitability, wonder what that means for the modern anomaly...