Where does this meme that you must start with the Phenomenology of Spirit to read Hegel, come from...

Where does this meme that you must start with the Phenomenology of Spirit to read Hegel, come from? The Shorter Logic is about a hundred times easier to read and actually comprehensible. It seems clear to me that Hegel improved his presentation later in life, and even though he may have initially intended for the Phenomenology to be an "introduction", he seems to have thought less and less of it with time. Which isn't surprising, given that the later works express its ideas much better.
I'm going to propose a radical idea here, and say that you should read the Phenomenology as the last work. The Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Outline, and even Science of Logic, are better reads to get what he's on about.

Attached: hegel.jpg (276x361, 32K)

Other urls found in this thread:

empyreantrail.wordpress.com/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

I've never once heard anybody recommend that

This
Start with the lectures on philosophy of history.

Why read Hegel? As Schopenhauer said, "Hegel, installed from above, by the powers that be, as the certified Great Philosopher, was a flat-headed, insipid, nauseating, illiterate charlatan, who reached the pinnacle of audacity in scribbling together and dishing up the craziest mystifying nonsense. This nonsense has been noisily proclaimed as immortal wisdom by mercenary followers and readily accepted as such by all fools, who thus joined into as perfect a chorus of admiration as had ever been heard before. The extensive field of spiritual influence with which Hegel was furnished by those in power has enabled him to achieve the intellectual corruption of a whole generation."

>Read "The World as Will and Idea" instead.

virgin

>As Schopenhauer said

Attached: virgin.jpg (400x300, 26K)

I'm having the exact same experience as you.

Why do you guys read Hegel? Is it just for fun? Idealism is long dead, and dialectics is just a meme.

If something is dead, surely we must first study its nature and processes to find out how it died, and what we can do about it.
Why is it so hard for you people to understand that people profit from studying some of the most influential minds in history?
You can think that literally everything Plato said was absolute bullshit, without taking away any of his importance and genius.
Do you think nobody should read the Bible in the 21st century?

please see

>"Hegel, installed from above, by the powers that be, as the certified Great Philosopher,

what did he mean by this

He is right. Hegel's whole philosophy is basically an enabling of the world's elite to treat the rest of the population as cattle and make this not only morally ambiguous but inevitable. Wouldn't be surprised if there were some figures behind the curtain pushing his though to the forefront.

Bible is actually true though unlike Plato or Hegel.

Hegel was a shill for the Prussian government.

except schopenhauer is the mystic nonsense expert incarnate. i like him, but his ideas are myth and rubbish.

Hegel BTFO the Prussian Gov't they just never noticed. This is at the end of the preface to Philosophy of Right:
>Only one word more concerning the desire to teach the world what it ought to be. For such a purpose philosophy at least always comes too late.Philosophy, as the thought of the world, does not appear until reality has completed its formative process, and made itself ready. History thus corroborates the teaching of the conception that only in the maturity of reality does the ideal appear as counterpart to the real, apprehends the real world in its substance, and shapes it into an intellectual kingdom. When philosophy paints its grey in grey, one form of life has become old, and by means of grey it cannot be rejuvenated, but only known. The owl of Minerva takes its flight only when the shades of night are gathering.
Makes me kek every time

Oh yeah? Then let's see your Schopenhauer critique you big boy, come on.

What about Philosophy of History? I might read that one first. I've heard it's one of his more accessible books and I'm really interested in the ideas that are supposedly explained in the book

>Hegel continues to cause monumental butthurt in Schopenhauer and his followers centuries after both men are dead

Nobody is willing to say the emporer has no clothes and that Hegel is incoherent garbage because they're continental eurotards and commies who can't part with their false idol.

This sounds pretty Marxist desu.

This. You don't have to agree with Schoppy's philosophy, but you can at least recognise that Schop proposed an actual philosophical system and was coherent. Hegel is a myth to be seen through and laughed at.

Perhaps but at least it is a coherent idea that can be followed. Hegel is a confidence trick.

If he's so obviously nonsense why are you so butthurt at people paying attention to him?

Attached: 1513448306662.jpg (395x373, 33K)

>samefagging brainlet needs a theory of everything and ideas to be followed
Ignoring the fact that Hegel offers both, this is pretty pathetic desu

Hegel is a pathway to communism. Incoherent Enlightenment mytholgies lead to ongoing real world problems. Once you suspend critical thinking to accept the Hegel is anything but drivil, you suspend critical thinking to accept other bad ideas that follow, like dialectical materialism or the surplus theory of value. Nip the mistake in the bud and admit Hegel is a mirage of Continental & Marxist vanity.

I don't know about that but I rather be a communist than a parmanently assblasted virgin like you and Schopenhauer

>when you don't have an argument
is Schopenhauer's philosophy just a big ad hominem?

As someone who likes Schopenhauer I don't endorse the autism directed at Hegel in this thread. Maybe this is why Schopenhauer is often ignored, because autists don't take his polemics against Hegel with a grain of salt and lose there spaghetti

They're people who just like him as le pessmist woman hater who don't have a clue about his ontology and aesthetic philosophy which is his real masterwork

*their

>Schopenhauer
>virgin
lmao

>Dude I was having like so much sex, sex all over the place, right in their vaginas trust me

t. Schopenhauer

Attached: 12441242121.png (866x900, 131K)

Attached: 1429648213398.png (1307x549, 84K)

user, even if you don't believe it, having sex is the norm, not the opposite.

Terry Pinkard's new translation seems really good guys

You read Hegel to understand all the insults in Fear and Trembling

>schopenhauer theory of everything
> muh fourtold root of sufficient reason and muh will

damn really makes you think

>reading hegel for fun

Attached: 1317302878867.jpg (360x360, 71K)

You've got that from Zizek, didn't you?

>Hegel is a pathway to communism.
Nah, as long as you just stick to idealist Hegelianism instead of materialist Hegelianism you'll be fine. You'll end up with fascism but whatever.

Now this I can get into. Is it like when Hegel talks smack about pure Reason, as though it's just a trifling moment in the dialectic? God I hope so. I gave up reading philosophy for anything but banter a while ago. If I ever write a philosophical work, it's gonna have a Preface that will put Hegel's to shame

Kek

CHALLANGE
Write about Hegel's ideas without referring to the history of the idea or other philosophers.

>write about Hegel without referring to the history of ideas
>write about the phenomenology but ignore the parts where Hegel talks about Stoicism, Skepticism, pure Reason, the Thing-In-Itself, the Enlightenment, Christianity, Islam, Byronic Romanticism, the French Revolution, etc.

Damn this shit is beautiful

The point was made before Zizek, it was a common interpretation of the Young Hegelians

I mean in his book Hegel basically says the Prussian government (constitutional monarchy) isn't the end of his philosophy of right, but it's definitely closer to the end than, say, a stateless society in which the concepts of property and capital do not have an essential role

but

>by determining the relation which a philosophical work professes to have to other treatises on the same subject, an extraneous interest is introduced, and obscurity is thrown over the point at issue in the knowledge of the truth.

I have never seen a proper defense of this lunacy.

Hey man I agree, I'm only studying Hegel because I was curious why both literal Fascists and Communists cite him as an influence

Need more clarification. How are these ideas dead?

This.

But I already did that over almost 100 pages worth of text now. In fact, it's pretty much all I do when it comes to Hegel (and this makes other Hegel nerds rage for some reason).

empyreantrail.wordpress.com/

>why both literal Fascists and Communists
Mussolini was a commie with a hard-on for nationalism
Modern day fascists are retarded untermenschen

>tfw finally starting to understand him
you guys weren't kidding, this is amazing
my mind is so blown right now

Attached: Hegelwhoa.jpg (647x656, 126K)

What's so mindblowing about it?

Not for ugly bald incel.

Following self-consciousness in its progression, through contradictions, into new articulations of social reason, it's great
It's really hard to summarise, probably the best basic overview I've seen is Pinkard's intro in his translation, but you just have to read it, it's a dialectical argument.

What isn't?
>Death, as we may call that unreality, is the most terrible thing, and to keep and hold fast what is dead demands the greatest force of all. Beauty, powerless and helpless, hates understanding, because the latter exacts from it what it cannot perform. But the life of mind is not one that shuns death, and keeps clear of destruction; it endures death and in death maintains its being. It only wins to its truth when it finds itself utterly torn asunder. It is this mighty power, not by being a positive which turns away from the negative, as when we say of anything it is nothing or it is false, and, being then done with it, pass off to something else: on the contrary, mind is this power only by looking the negative in the face, and dwelling with it. This dwelling beside it is the magic power that converts the negative into being. That power is just what we spoke of above as subject, which by giving determinateness a place in its substance, cancels abstract immediacy, i.e. immediacy which merely is, and, by so doing, becomes the true substance, becomes being or immediacy that does not have mediation outside it, but is this mediation itself.

Attached: hegel_by_mitchellnolte-d8l17eg-e1491455087946.jpg (2000x1200, 1.15M)

>But the life of mind is not one that shuns death, and keeps clear of destruction; it endures death and in death maintains its being.
But the mind stops existing when you die. What does this sentence mean?

mind (geist) isn't just one individual mind, it's a greater whole, working itself out through individual minds like you and I. We are geist coming to know itself through itself. Even though each of us dies, our minds ends, but Mind doesn't, and ideas like Hegel's endure death a million times over. It still exists to Mind, even though his mind is long gone.

What a load of nonsense.

t. Bertrand Russel

seriously though, what profound insight do you think this really offers?

The only thing bertrand got right was keeping hegel as a footnote in his history of philosophy.

Is there anything on Earth you consider to be a profound insight?

Absolutely. The reason I love reading is because you encounter them very often in good books. I would like to know what you found to be insightful in that Hegel extract.

agrred. His "dialectic" is pathetic crap
/thread

You didn't answer my question. What do you consider a profound insight?

no response

>my consciousness has two parts, the changeable and the unchangeable, which are actually the same consciousness
>identify with the changeable
>never able to grasp the unchangeable
>look out into the world and view it as unchangeable
>view all of my abilities to work and thus change the world as gifts from the unchangeable, which thereby keeps its unchanging status
>in order to gain certainty of myself, I must prove my inessential nature as the changeable
>therefore offer myself up completely to the unchangeable, giving it thanks and credit for all that I do
>likewise the unchangeable reciprocates, and gives up itself by giving me abilities and by allowing me to work
>but this is not enough; I have in giving thanks retained my own existence, and thus consider myself essential
>therefore I bring in a priest to whom I give tithes and such, and this action proves my inessential nature
>but in so doing, I have negated myself, and found that the unchangeable has done the same, therefore I am the unchangeable
>the priest confirms this
>therefore I am certain of myself as the unchangeable, or all reality

Hegel's full of shit

tl;dr: Spirit (mind/thought/being) only exits through a process of "death" as negation. It is not merely a positing which negates something else to it as false, but rather is the power of negation which reveals the truth of falsehoods by penetrating mere appearances of knowledge. Spirit only exists in truly dealing with the negative and 'false', taking it seriously and engaging its own purported absoluteness by taking its own capacity to do and think to its limits. The negative (Nothing/death/falsehood) becomes Being (life/positive/truth) when Spirit (subject) runs content through itself and engages its self-movement (negativity) into concretized concepts. That last sentence is really impossible to explain if you have no idea wtf his 'method' is.

well no, that wasn't the wording of your question actually. Also I'm not going to share an insight here because all you'll say is "you think THAT's profound?!" and then you'll never explain what you find so impressive about the Hegel extract. Its a weird game you're trying to play.

Read them and find out. Or don't, and save that portion of your life (you'll never get it back).

t. @toldyaso

Hegel intended the Phenomenology to be an introduction to his system--this is widely done. Most of the content in the Philosophy of Right and his Philosophy of History rely on ideas developed in the Phenomenology, like spirit, negativity, concept, content, etc. You can look up the definitions for those things, but it won't help you in actually understanding their weight in Hegel's system. The Phenomenology is very challenging, but after you read it the rest of Hegel will make a lot more sense.

The Introduction is like all hegel introductions. The rest is very easy to read if you like grand civilizational naratives.

i really liked that thanks

i read that the ideas of jacobi (which attacked hegel) stimulated hegel to write the phenomenology of the spirit. no one here speaks of jacobi. Maybe all of you are just alpha bots programmed to annoy me

why?