Isn't thesis-antithesis-synthesis basically an argument for centrism...

This thread is giving me cancer

red pandas xD

ITT: people saying "you're wrong" and "no u" with nobody giving any evidence whatsoever.
Yep, this sure is your average Veeky Forums thread.

what's different to the thesis is already present, it's just not explicitly posited as such, the antithesis constitutes the sphere posited in its differentiation from the thesis, this is where contradiction enters the picture, synthesis is the unity in which contradiction is '''resolved'''
e.g. on an idealist abstract level if you have noting you have something, being is noting without nothingness, nothingness contradicts being and is overcome in becoming
more concrete what is a boss without a worker to control? there's no boss without a worker and no worker without a boss, everyone is controlled here and in a material dialectic something is developing out of this
in reproducing the structure of the real ALL concepts overlap, penetrate, and presuppose each other, they are dialectically circular

Concept, judgement, syllogism

Why even bother writing a correct response, wasting your time explaining the intricate nuances of dialectics if OP didn't even bother reading the basics.

Here, indulge yourself and educate yourself:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelianism

plato.stanford.edu/entries/hegel-dialectics/

But seriously, the entirety Hegel's Phenomenology of the Spirit and Science of Logic, the former being an introduction to the latter, are indeed hard to squeeze into a Veeky Forums post.

Both Hegel and Fichte were suckers for the Prussian state, which was inherently revolutionary at the time. I mean, they were not anarchists, but they were almost there in terms of deviation from the norm.

This should immediatly show you that dialectics don't necessarily lead to centrism? And what should we say about Marx?

You're wrong, my friend.

how isn't centrist? didnt he argue that constitutional monarchy was the best, that it had the best combination of public and private

thats not centrist?

people argued against him using his own dialectic model. they said he wasn't being consistent by praising the monarchy because no form of organization is final so it is wrong to advocate for something that isn't final

>linking wikipedia
>not SEP
when will the plebbery end

so basically hegel wasnt centrist enough

it has nothing to do with centrism. hegel advocated the present system even though his dialectic said the present system isn't final. hegel only applied his dialectic to understanding the past and people faulted him for being inconsistent on that point. people inspired by hegel later applied his dialectic towards understanding the present because they thought it was the only way to make us consistent unlike how hegel used it. this led people to advocate changes in all aspects of society.

>people inspired by hegel later applied his dialectic towards understanding the present
understanding the future****

So is this essentially Zeno's paradox applied to history?
>you cannot get to the thesis because you must first get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis
>but you cannot get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis because you must first get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis
>but you cannot get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis because you must first get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis
>but you cannot get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis because you must first get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis
>but you cannot get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis because you must first get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis
>but you cannot get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis because you must first get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis
>but you cannot get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis because you must first get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis
>but you cannot get to the the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis because you must first get to the synthesis of the antithesis and the the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the synthesis of the antithesis and the thesis
How deep does this go? Fuck Hegel.

>it has nothing to do with centrism

we need hegel but not too much hegel! dont you know he was wrong about some things? lets get a healthy mix

i agree that it was retarded for hegel to claim the prussian state and his philosophy as the absolute but unlike you i trash hegel fully, you seek out a center position

hegel is only useful if you want to shill capitalist, fascist or communist states

if you want to understand history, states, public and private then read rousseau

You don't agree with that, though?

You actually think some extreme left or right orientation to life is the answer? Really?

>we need hegel but not too much hegel! dont you know he was wrong about some things? lets get a healthy mix
that isn't centrism either. geez define what you mean by centrism because I think we might be talking about completely different things

>but unlike you i trash hegel fully, you seek out a center position
centrism has nothing to do with salvaging part of a philosophical system and turning it into your own.

I mean... yes?

>but it can and thats why the prussian state was the best

Stop retard

ITT: people who never actually read Hegel

Not OP; where do I start with Hegel if I want to get a good grasp of his works?

His lectures.

READ HEGEL NORMIE

REEEEEEEEE

this

>if you want to understand history, states, public and private then read rousseau

I just vomited in my mouth.

>rousseau
are idealists the worst people on the planet?

No. Niggers are.

>OP is reading Fichte
>OP is reading
>OP is aware that Hegel did not coin the term "thesis-antithesis-synthesis"
>OP is not just spewing meme nonsense
>OP has not just chummed the water for retards like you and myself to respond to this inane thread
wew, those are some hot assumptions friend-o

>if you want to understand
>read rousseau

...

Niggers aren't people.

no, that is not at all what it does.

hegel wasn't the first. It's a method dating thousands of years

>replying to bait

The dialectic doesn't go right left center, it proceeds organically from ideas, in no particular direction.

Also it's an analysis of history, not a proscription. You can't reject an analysis because what you (wrongly) think it implies.

and some ideas happen to be left and right and center

but thats literally what hegel said

are hegelians this ignorant about their philosopher?

It's funny because that describes everyone ITT, including the people defending him.

Then Centrism becomes its own thesis. Centrist Neo-Liberalism isn't the end of history.

A trainwreck of a thread, like a bunch of blind people talking about a painting.

Yep. On one side, you have people thinking thesis-antithesis-synthesis is intended to be anything rather than an analysis. Actually, no, that's both sides.