Shieeet

bump

where do i start with hegel

The Lesser Logic (Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences Part I)
Hyppolite's Genesis and Structure of Hegel's Phenomenology
Gregory Chadler's Half Hour Hegel series

kek

dont bump humor threads ever you unmastered nigger hyena

I am ABSOLUTELY SICK of seeing this half-arsed image, so i finished for you.

Attached: 1520609919053.jpg (647x656, 155K)

neat

Nice work

Great job

doing god's work

can i be you

>improving lazy memes out of spite
inspirational, proud of u user

Attached: 1490356203095.gif (141x141, 481K)

Attached: Tom reads hegel.webm (640x480, 932K)

Yes. Read the prologue of phenomenology of spirit.

he's trying to get you to agree with his Science of Logic, which starts at the immediately contentious point that pure being and nothingness are the same, by starting at the less contentious point that is "we sense things".

ANIME HEGEL TRANNY NIHILIST AUTISTSSS GET OUT REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

IF YOU TAKE AWAY ONE THING FROM PHENOMENOLOGY OF SPIRIT, LET IT BE THIS:

The very attempt to determine the relationship of a philosophical work to other efforts concerning the same subject, introduces an alien and irrelevant interest which obscures precisely that which matters for the recognition of the truth. Opinion considers the opposition of what is true and false quite rigid, and, confronted with a philosophical system, it expects agreement or contradiction. And in an explanation of such a system, opinion still expects to find one or the other. It does not comprehend the difference of the philosophical systems in terms of the progressive development of the truth, but sees only the contradiction in this difference. The bud disappears as the blossom bursts forth, and one could say that the former is refuted by the latter. In the same way, the fruit declares the blossom to be a false existence of the plant. These forms do not only differ, they also displace each other because they are incompatible. Their fluid nature, however, makes them, at the same time, elements of an organic unity in which they not only do not conflict, but in which one is as necessary as the other; and it is only this equal necessity that constitutes the life of the whole.

Attached: 5128111524_c95a8f6d45_b.jpg (1024x637, 439K)

>soundless webms
Does this shithole still not have webms with sound?
Holy shit
>3mb max
The absolute state.

Attached: 00c12db90b52422dde846081cca7a45cd55ff9183cfbe09fd33b1491df660bdb.png (105x255, 5K)

‘Introduction to the reading of Hegel’ Alexandre Kojeve

Was Hegel controlled opposition?

It is pronounced - say it with me - the 'PRE-FACE'.

Attached: 777.png (443x440, 114K)

How people don't consider this to be an immediate sign of stupidity I have no idea.

>The very attempt to determine the relationship of a philosophical work to other efforts concerning the same subject, introduces an alien and irrelevant interest which obscures precisely that which matters for the recognition of the truth.

This is unjustified and the subsequent paragraph basically refutes this. I have no idea how I'm supposed to take this line of though seriously especially considering Hegal's thought is more difficult to deal with in a historical vacuum than most.

Hegel's just saying that people read philosophy jumping from one refuted system to the next. In his time this would be particularly relevant because most people still expected a systematic approach to everything. But in his view, the history of thought is the unfolding and development of concepts as they pass through many stages, and the falsity of one instance of the process is similar to saying that the bud is false compared to a flower.

interestingly enough this is a pretty accurate representation of his metaphysics

Hegel's entire Preface is the primordial shitpost. Claiming you can't define relationships then defining a relationship, claiming there is no royal road to Science and then laying out his road to Science, claiming that his Phenomenology is presuppositionless when it obviously isn't, preempting his opponents arguments as though they're obviously misguided without actually proving them wrong, the proto-typical continental hatred of mathematics, claiming you can't write a Philosophical Preface and then doing just that (you can't, but I can!), and of course the archetypal, inescapable claim that is the mark of so many philosophers with their heads up their asses, that their system is the complete exposition of truth, that they have allowed the ascendance from mere love of knowing to actual knowing - This is Hegel's Preface. It's a work of art.

the original has better balance it should only be fixed to the spine

no this is

Attached: 1516895525110.png (928x933, 1.41M)

>Hegel's just saying that people read philosophy jumping from one refuted system to the next.

Yes, he is saying that, but he's also saying more than that and you're explicitly ignoring what I marked out for criticism and not taking into account its contextual significance.

Hegel starts of his preface, not but outlining how his thought was influenced by others and who he might be responding to as you would expect, which would be a help to both the lay reader and his critics, but instead explicitly excuses himself from doing that. What reasons does he give for this? Why, nothing. He basically just pretends he is above doing this, as if his work is getting at something so pure and fundamental that it would be defiled by an explicit mention of Kant (who he proceeds to bash anyway, but without saying it to his face).

>preempting his opponents arguments as though they're obviously misguided without actually proving them wrong

All this is a strong part of why I find Hegel and his followers (his followers especially) to be so bizarre to deal with. It's like they acknowledge that he is difficult and attempts to take substantial measures to carefully build up his ideas systematically, but shit whizzes past their ears when you point out some specific way he might actually be wrong. When this occurs they go out of their way to find some contingency through which his ideas might make sense, even if there's no fundamental justification for it, since so much of his writing is full of this kind of stuff and so it always seems like there's some escape hatch waiting in lieu of a possible counter-argument. But if you expose that this isn't the case then they seem to legitimately not understand and just stare at you blankly.

anime is for redditors

Go back and stay there

What's the best reading of hegel that does not include the French intellectuals like kojeve and hyppolite ( i have nothing against them however) ? Inb4 the meme philosophy Channel that gets shilled on here all the time

>he says on the anime website

Beiser's stuff in general is probably a good middle ground

I'm with them.

Fuck off with your stupid anime bullshit.

Nobody's forcing you to spend time on an anime website, friendo.

Attached: 1507732755429.gif (540x501, 1.56M)

>Hegel starts of his preface, not but outlining how his thought was influenced by others and who he might be responding to as you would expect, which would be a help to both the lay reader and his critics, but instead explicitly excuses himself from doing that. What reasons does he give for this?
There's always the lectures on the history of philosophy, where he details the progress of philosophy, showing how it eventually lead to his position in excruciating detail. His argument for not bringing that up in PoS is that it doesn't fucking belong there. As a philosophical system Hegels philosophy has to justify (or fail to justify) itself based on its internal logic. By largely ignoring historical considerations you frame the discussion in that way, rather than having people reject your philosophy because they don't agree with the philosophers you cite as your 'influences'.
>as if his work is getting at something so pure and fundamental that it would be defiled by an explicit mention of Kant (who he proceeds to bash anyway, but without saying it to his face).
If that's what you're looking for, every second elaboration in SoL deals with Kant.

i'll bump what i feel like

What did she mean by this?
Can someone give me the low-down and redpill about Hegel, how Marxists see him and how the right see him? Plz 'n' ty.

Attached: ayn-rand-604420.jpg (640x820, 117K)

For Hegel, the only good preface of a philosophical text would be one that would make the reader engage with the text and the philosophy in it. By saying he cant write a preface while doing it, he triggers autists like you to engage with the text in a dialectical way, thus using the preface in a philosophical way and not just being there as decoration
l2meta you pleb

>he was just pretending to be retarded
I had a good chuckle thanks user

Seriously.

Stop. Everyone knows you're a faggot with no taste.

Do you have a minor nervous breakdown every time you see the Veeky Forums logo?

Attached: 4_0217.png (448x240, 49K)

No.

It's because Veeky Forums has nothing to do with anime. The main character, yotsuba, was a fabrication by the site itself.

>Veeky Forums has nothing to do with anime

Attached: 19113519_1771229916237403_929335371633461581_n.jpg (480x320, 16K)

Hegelian metaphysics has a few peculiarities to it. Things are self-same, then the self-same repels from the self-same, and then there is a sublation where the thing becomes its Notion. Furthermore, for Hegelians opposites necessarily exists.

These two concepts create a worldview that simultaneously poses opposites, reconciles them, and finally posits an end state. On the Left, this resulted in Marxism, which took Hegel's method but forgot his focus, i.e. consciousness, and developed dialectical materialism which sees a stateless society without property as the end state of a historical antagonism between classes. On the Right, this resulted in Fascism, who took Hegel as he presented himself, and agreed with his Philosophy of Right.

One classic distinction between Left and Right Hegelians is what their collective of choice is. For Hegel himself, the state was the actualization of the ethical Idea, and the nation-state is a shape of Spirit that is necessary for the development of the Absolute Spirit. Furthermore, these nations have as their purpose the actualization of Spirit, which occurs in 4 world-historical realms: Oriental, Greek, Roman, and Germanic. This categorization is where we find the idea of the fascists conception of racial collectives. For Marxists, they disagreed with Hegel's philosophy of right, and their equivalent of world-historical forms are economic systems.

Both of these ideologies developed out of Hegel, but they also draw from much more than Hegel, so you'll see "fascists" and "communists" who have probably heard of Hegel but who have no idea what he wrote about or why he's important to their movements.

I should also point out that part of the reason people sometimes feel that Fascists and Communists are so similar (horseshoe theory) is because they draw from a similar metaphysics and system of logic, i.e. German idealism. This tension is what drew me to study Hegel at all.

if you dislike anime so much then you can just go on a non-anime website, maybe reddit?

Attached: 1492533880029.jpg (554x439, 106K)

>Yotsuba was a fabrication by the site itself
Fucking what? Leave, you piece of newfag trash,

>actually being retarded
Haha thanks for the giggle

>people actually buy into dialectics

Attached: 1514902866047.png (499x458, 207K)

I've never heard someone claim outright that fascists were directly influenced by Hegel. Where's the proof?

Giovanni Gentile was a Hegelian

t. butthurt member of the analytical school

>everything conceptually involves its opposite

nah

It does tho

>being and nothing are the same guys
>lol how did nobody think of this it's so obvious!
>and that's how my philosophy starts from nothing, cause nothing is the same as being, and I said the beginning of my system of logic is being
>ADMIT IT, I HAVE NO PRESUPPOSITIONS, SAY IT I NEED THIS IN MY LIFE, IM NOTHING WITHOUT RECOGNITION BY ANOTHER

...

we need more people like you

>complains about webm sound and quality
>posts a 5kb pic

In fact, this.
Really makes you think about how the fuck did the fascists like Nietzsche.

So far I'm a fourth of the way through PotS. I legitimately can't tell if I'm a total brainlet or if this book is just word salad.