I CAN'T TAKE THESE MEMES ANYMORE...

He isn't a pseud, but his works are extremely often used by pseuds that cannot comprehend him.

Hmm, thanks, that makes sense actually. Janitors, you can lock the thread.

CAN SOMEONE WHO THINKS THEY KNOW HEGEL WRITE DOWN IN BULLET POINTS: 5 OR 10 OR 20 OF THEM: THE SEPERATE KEY GENERAL DATAUMS, POINTS, NUGGETS OF INFO, GISTS OF GENERALITIES, SPHERES OF MENTAL IDEATION OF THE DISTILLED ESSENCE OF HEGELS OUTPUT

OP HERE, JUST WANTED EVERYONE TO KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT ME, IT IS MERELY AN IMITATOR, A MOCKING JESTER. DISREGARD HIS EVIL HONEY'D TONGUE.

Thesis + antithesis = synthesis. Turn Hegel upside down and you get Marx. 19th century Prussia is the end of history. Zizek doesn't understand him. Schopenhauer was a brainlet. That's all you need to know.

Hegel is a pseud, yes. (Read popper)

i see the r/AM kids are still at their shilling

Thesis: Hegel is a pseud
Antithesis: Hegel isn't a pseud
Synthesis: ?

>People get smarter over time when given the chance to put their ideas to the test against others

Wow Hegel who would have thought

Easy,
it is both

Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis isn't Hegel, its just a way to help explain him.

reeeingfrog.jpeg

Synthesis: Hegel was kind of pretentious but not in totality

Popper didn't properly understand Hegel.

who is this man milk maiden?

>Kant pressuposed a subject-object difference
>The Absolute is not only subject object identity, but the identy of subject object identity and subject object non idejtity. (In other words, when you look at an object, you and it are fundamentally the same thing, but at the same time, this equality only exists because of the differences between you and the object.
>if you think really hard your brain kind of takes the concepts it has, extrapolates and deconstructs them until you have real knowledge
>Truth expresses itself in many forms, such as art and religion, but Science is true form of truth.
>A thought is the expression of a people.
>History literally finished a couple hundred years ago.

this animu grill is so cute i wish i could bed her

What I want to know is how a country with one of the strongest philosophical traditions managed to burn down itself in 1933-1945. I mean their entire history and philosoohy culminated in action to 1. Gas the kikes 2. Getting raped by Soviets because Germany was too fucking dumb to surrender

Thats what its worth? hundreda of years of thought only to be summarized and come alive in Nazis burning Germany down?

>What I want to know is how a country with one of the strongest philosophical traditions managed to burn down itself in 1933-1945.
As if Weimar wasn't crashing down...

>>History literally finished a couple hundred years ago.
So what the hell are we supposed to do? Jack off to the PoS?

You mean after WW1? Well, yes. But there was still a point of return at that point. Did all of their thoughts just get twisted and misinterpreted or is Weimar-Nazi Germany just logical product of their strong philosophical tradition?

How can it go all so wrong for one nation, one state and one individual that it creates Nazi Germany and burns down with it

Even Heidegger was a complete worse than /pol/ tier Nazi cult member

But just HOW? How wasnt German culture strong enough to live but chose to crash it with no survivors? Modern Germany is barely rhe same coubtry - it is U.S. unincorporated territory and even has U.S. troops in there.

I wish Oswald Spengler had written DECLINE after WW2 and explained all this to me.

-mutual self-consciousness between two subjects, where the object of each is itself another subject, is what Hegel called Geist. The sum of self-consciousnesses as an overarching determinate form, created by the mutual self-consciousness between a plurality of subjects containing common universal categories as cognitive structure, which in turn structure the content of their reality.
--To Hegel the Geist is neither the individual subject of a person, or the collective subject of a social organization, but something in between; the intersubjective mediation, principles of social interaction objectively embodied in constructs like language or law. It exists through the interaction of self-conscious individual subjects within a collective social organization. He brings ‘life’, and even agency to the totality of human interaction, and says it is simply the embodied manifestation of a universal spirit. Geist manifested itself through human activity in three ways, as the subjective Geist of the individual subject, the objective Geist of the collective, and the Absolute Geist of human reflection on the Absolute. Subjective Geist is concerned with individual subjectivity through psychology, physiology and pathology of the mind, represented through an individual subject’s personality. Objective Geist is the interpersonal interactions of multiple human consciousnesses, objectified through law, morality, rights and the state. Absolute Geist is the “purest” expression of Geist, and is the reflection, self-conscious of itself through philosophy, religion and (fine) art. Art as sensuous perception, religion as Vorstellung, presentative conception (of the supersensible) and philosophy as free thought. In a sense this deifies human culture.

>But there was still a point of return at that point.
No. They should have done the same economic policies as Hitler. Democracy is corruption.

Yes

Hegel's dialectic was an attempt to continue Kant's project of critical philosophy, and an attempt to justify his own metaphysics.
The notion that the limits of what can be said was important to Hegel - as we land in trouble when we try to apply our thoughts which are finite in nature to the infinite, as these thoughts are only valid in explaining finite experience.

At this point, Hegel makes an even more radical claim, in that Kant had failed to investigate the inherent logic of concepts themselves by simply classifying them as either subjective or objective.
Further, Kant's claim that we must use a criterion of knowledge prior to actual knowledge was a knowledge claim in itself - we cannot criticize the forms of thinking without already having used them.

Also, it should be noted that Hegel saw metaphysics as having primacy to epistemology, as he felt that to claim epistemology was somehow autonomous and could solve its own problems (the massive issues caused by the noumena/phenomena division) was misguided.

The hallmark of the dialectic was avoidance of a priori principles in forming a criterion of a given thing. That the standards, rules and what have you, of a given thing were the result, and not the starting point of an investigation.
From this, "the concept" - the inner purpose of a thing - is grasped. The dialectic is then what follows from the thing, and is in no way prior.
Method is a posteriori.

In his Encyclopedia, Hegel details three stages of the dialectic (though he often strays from this formula for reasons outlined above), and they are (i) the moment of abstraction, (ii) the negatively rational moment and (iii) the positively rational moment.

(i) The understanding postulates a thing absolute, and attempts to conceive of this thing were it totally independent. Pushing the metaphysical claim that something exists in-itself and independently.

(ii) At this moment, something is found to not in fact be independent, and is only able to be understood by its relation to other things. There is a contradiction in that something absolute was posited, but it can only be understood in terms which relate it to other things - reasons outside itself. The thing is thus conditioned and unconditioned.

(iii) The resolution to this conflict is thus, to grasp the absolute thing as not the thing alone, but the whole of that thing and those others upon which it depends.
This move is Aristotelian, in that we ascend from the things to the view of the whole. These things are parts of the whole, and the relations are within it, self-relations.

The dialectic continues from this point, until we find the absolute whole.

heidegger is even worse and disgusts me

good post, why did he write that whole long book in confusing language if you pretty much covered it all in this post? What 'idea/s' was he reaching toward in the book that are not covered in your post?
didnt read this one yet but might be good too, I will just say, thanks, and that it is good too, because it looks long, and efforted

And of course one faggot out of the whole board has to come in a spoonfeed retard OP.

THATS WHAT YOU GET FOR ACTUALLY READING. HA-HA.

>reality is more process than thing
>self-consciousness arises through history
>the clash of ideas is also the unfolding of history

There is a lot more, Hyppolite's PhoS interpretation in particular has it mirror human history while explaining the movements of consciousness. The first four chapters also go in depth with the mediation of phenomena and a whooole lot of other stuff. His lectures are much better. He wrote a Hegelian interpretation for pretty much any historical, religous, philosophical and artistic event in human history

I still don't fully get what a dialectic is supposed to be. How is not just a fancy systemized way of saying "problem solving" and/or reconciliation? How did Kant/Hegel really invent anything?

>How did Kant/Hegel really invent anything?
The state of this board
You know there is more than Dialectics? A lot more

>How can it go all so wrong for one nation, one state and one individual that it creates Nazi Germany and burns down with it
because germans are fucking autists and overcorrect everything

and they sure weren't gonna hand over the reins to the bolsheviks after 1) seeing how the soviet union turned out and 2) the reds previously attempting to usurp the kaiserreich during wartime

so they figured 'hey why not give this hitler fella a shot, maybe he can give the established parties a good kick in the ar--oh we fucked up again didn't we'

>has to come in a spoonfeed retard
he what now...

Actually >our rich philosophical tradition was part of the reason the Third Reicg happened. If you read up on German schools of thought, you'll find out they're all very quixotic, obsessed with elaborate theoretical constructs and never geared towards effecting tangible change. Hell even Marx never realized his plans, he wrote Das Kapital and then kept NEETing it up. So philosophy and the humanities became a refuge for the bourgeoisie and they essentially isolated themselves from the political landscape (see: the failure of classical liberalism as opposed to other European nations, most notably 1848).

Another reason for Hitler was that Germany had an inferiority complex towards other European powers. Germany wasn't unified until 1871, and it was humiliated in the Thirty Year's War and by Napoleon. So when 1871 finally saw a union of many duchies, kingdoms etc forming Germany, people got carried away with regards to patriotism. Then WW1 happens (partly because of said jingoism) and Germany suffers yet another crushing loss. Weimar worked out meh, and too many demographics weren't satisfied with the end of monarchy at all, while the other end of the spectrum thought the abolition of the Reich wasn't enough and Germany should go full communist. So democracy was suffering attrition from both sides, and eventually the pathologic patriotism part won again. To this day, Germans have a weird attitude towards their own country, it's not patriotism, not woe-is-me-we-suck, it's in-between

t. German with an amateur interest in history

This is a more comprehensible modality of thought than Hegel's entire philosophy

good post

The dialectic is just a way of working backwards from things to their essences. Take anything (e.g. a chair) and you can divide the chair into the physical chair and everything the physical chair isn't. By doing this you can understand the essence of a chair but by repeating this you can understand all essences at the bottom of everything.

>. So when 1871 finally saw a union of many duchies, kingdoms etc forming Germany, people got carried away with regards to patriotism. Then WW1 happen
Skipping the Franco-Prussian war makes me disregard you're already surface level regurgitated opinion

>Actually >our rich philosophical tradition was part of the reason the Third Reicg happened
K, you said this but never actually adressed it.

very good and helpful, thanks a bundle

What European history books would you recommend from Napoleon's rise to WW2 - preferrably large overviews of various aspects ie. Culture, econ, politics, society or a mix of these (in a manner of morphology, Spengler - i really loved his juxtaposition of events)

Or just general history books from that era you love?

Okay feel free to add that mentally. My post still remains accurate without that tidbit though, it's not central to my thesis, the victory over France (and Austria before that ) just exacerbated the feelings of patriotism

German philosophy was very theoretical and not concerned with political change. Germany never had a Voltaire for example, philosophy remained a separate domain from "worldly" manners.

Are you interested in German history specifically or Europe in general?

>study hegel
>realize understanding hegel is complicated and split into many layers and branching paths
>realize that understanding hegel requires not just a sense of any one or even several of these paths and layers, but a decent general sense of the whole
>come to Veeky Forums hegel thread
>"HEGEL IS [bad summation of 150-year old path that no one actually thinks anymore, with a few extra weird idiosyncrasies]"
>"Thanks, that explains everything"

DON'T LISTEN TO THEM

interpretationjournal.com/backissues/Vol_26-3.pdf

Read Leo Strauss' article, p 353

Europe.

Is that a good journal? Lioks very interdasting

Ty. Will read.

t. someone who just spent 7 years getting master degree in Hegelology, and spent $400,000 on a particular publishing of hegel textbooks because they saw over the past few years an increase in interest of Hegel on Veeky Forums, sees the entirety of Hegels thought perfectly summarized in 2 posts: synthesizes into the absolute spirit of assblastedness

This is true, the best part about Hegel is all the secondary scholarship and how different it is. He was trying to explain everything, so there is a lot to it

same with language threads on int
language is so much easier to understand once you have some discipline underneath you and have a better grasp of how you as an individual learn information

every language thread becomes someone whining about how they didn't start as a child

idk man the leg day post really makes sense you know

He isn't wrong, also you could summarize any philosophical thought in a few sentences it doesn't mean you can understand the underlaying idea behind it, hegel himself explained this in the beginning of phenomenology. I don't have a full understanding of hegel either though.

I do legs twice a week, deadlifts in 4 days yay

dang

It all comes down to whether Hegel's dialectics are a valid form a thought.

They're not.

>interpretationjournal.com/backissues/Vol_26-3.pdf

>EVEN FUCKING WAGNER DISREGARDED HIM
Wagner, the composer? He was a racist and an anti-Semite, why do you care about his opinion? In fact, reading Hegel causes racism and anti-Semitism, and when too many Germans read Hegel it led to the founding of the Nazi party. You should just stop reading about Hegel.

The German state was the progeny of Prussian autism more than anything else. The liberal dream in Germany died in 1848 when the Prussian conservative monarchists out maneuvered the liberal parliament. From there you have the unification of Germany "Not through speeches and majority decisions ... —that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849—but by iron and blood" as Bismarck put it. In essence, the idea of German unification always held greater ideological sway than the Liberalization of Germany, and its realisation through force of arms gave legitimacy to force as a political idea. The popular intellectual sentiment from ~1870 - 1914 wasn't defined by the "perpetual peace" of Kant or the Conservative Liberalism of Hegel, but by Meinecke's and more importantly Treitschke's Welt and Machtpolitik (world and power politics), which combined with Hegel's toxic load of historical determinism gave the idea of a combined destiny of the German people on the world stage. This then spiralled into WW1 which inflated nationalism to the extreme, and then into WW2 which harnessed Political Religion to take things even further. anti-Semitism also has long intellectual roots in German thinking.

Why not?

unironically the Treaty of Versailles
The Treaty returned Germany to the status that precolonial Africa had, and the consequent mental incongruity tore the country and its entire cultural output to fucking shreds

Wow it's almost like they lost a war or something lol

There's no necessity behind them

Also too psychological perhaps, or un-psychological at that

What is happening

What do you mean by that? I don't understand.

>I'll take things that never happened for 100