Thoughts on Hegel / Dialectics? Been thinking of reading into him because the layman explanations I've seen about his stuff seems sensible enough, but I've seen people of the Hegel fandom say said layman explanations aren't accurate, but also that he's super hard to read / interpret.
- Has anyone here read his stuff?
- Are the prior mentioned warnings an Arch Linux situation where the difficulty is overblown?
- Have you used dialectics to come to your own ideas before?
- Also the undo and fill tools on your Oekaki applet is broken pls fix.
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
>>384215
To be honest that's one of those things that people talk about but I have never properly looked in to. What *is* Heleglian dialectic and how does it work?
To be honest that's one of those things that people talk about but I have never properly looked in to. What *is* Heleglian dialectic and how does it work?
I understand the concept to some degree. In the end it kinda all boils down to trying to mix oil and water. The result will only stay through continuous struggle, very stressful.
>>384215
Hegelian Dialectic is the most basic 3 part device for social control. Its so basic, spoonfeeding DENIED, look it up.
Hegelian Dialectic is the most basic 3 part device for social control. Its so basic, spoonfeeding DENIED, look it up.
>>384277
From what I've cobbled together from Wikipedia and tiktoks on various platforms on the subject, Immanent Critique:
>Immanent critique is a method of analyzing culture that identifies contradictions in society's rules and systems. Most importantly, it juxtaposes the ideals articulated by society against the inadequate realization of those ideals in society's institutions.
Is a big part of it, and I've seen some insist--though Hegel didn't like these terms, and it's actually Heinrich Moritz Chalybäus that thought of this part--that the process of:
>thesis
<antithesis (there can probably be more than one of these)
>synthesis
Where truth can be found by taking two or more flawed conceptions of the truth, and creating a synthesis that resolves the tension between them. This is the catchy part that made me interested in it and a method of thinking that I've found helpful, but since I hear often that Hegel never used that, and now from Wikipedia that he even did hear about it but opposed it, I'm considering actually reading the guy to see what he was actually on about.
I should probably give the wikipedia articles on the subject a more thorough reading first once I'm caffinated, just woke up.
From what I've cobbled together from Wikipedia and tiktoks on various platforms on the subject, Immanent Critique:
>Immanent critique is a method of analyzing culture that identifies contradictions in society's rules and systems. Most importantly, it juxtaposes the ideals articulated by society against the inadequate realization of those ideals in society's institutions.
Is a big part of it, and I've seen some insist--though Hegel didn't like these terms, and it's actually Heinrich Moritz Chalybäus that thought of this part--that the process of:
>thesis
<antithesis (there can probably be more than one of these)
>synthesis
Where truth can be found by taking two or more flawed conceptions of the truth, and creating a synthesis that resolves the tension between them. This is the catchy part that made me interested in it and a method of thinking that I've found helpful, but since I hear often that Hegel never used that, and now from Wikipedia that he even did hear about it but opposed it, I'm considering actually reading the guy to see what he was actually on about.
I should probably give the wikipedia articles on the subject a more thorough reading first once I'm caffinated, just woke up.
>>384343
What would be a real world example of thesis > antithesis > synthesis? Having something real to relate it to would help a lot with understanding.
What would be a real world example of thesis > antithesis > synthesis? Having something real to relate it to would help a lot with understanding.
>>384346
Sorry for taking a while, my dad needed tech support and gets pretty ritualistically minded so I kept having to tell him stuff like changing the search engine on firefox won't make a page load on chromium. (honestly I tend to get like that too on a smaller scale, Linux does that to ya.)
Using the episode "Over a barrel" and example:
The primary conflict of the episode was that the buffalo and the apple family had differing ideas about how to use the land:
>Thesis: The apple orchard needs to stay to maintain the dietary needs of the town
<Antithesis: The apple orchard was planted on the traditional stampeding grounds of the buffalo, and they demand the trees be removed from those grounds to maintain the sanctity of said tradition.
>Synthesis: The buffalo learn they enjoy apple pastries during the fight, so a path is carved through the orchard, where they can grab some apples on the way through, preserving the stampede tradition and the apple production.
Also of note:
The train in that episode has an engine, but they're pulling it manually. I should spend some time rewatching the show because it seems like they have access to at least steam power.
Sorry for taking a while, my dad needed tech support and gets pretty ritualistically minded so I kept having to tell him stuff like changing the search engine on firefox won't make a page load on chromium. (honestly I tend to get like that too on a smaller scale, Linux does that to ya.)
Using the episode "Over a barrel" and example:
The primary conflict of the episode was that the buffalo and the apple family had differing ideas about how to use the land:
>Thesis: The apple orchard needs to stay to maintain the dietary needs of the town
<Antithesis: The apple orchard was planted on the traditional stampeding grounds of the buffalo, and they demand the trees be removed from those grounds to maintain the sanctity of said tradition.
>Synthesis: The buffalo learn they enjoy apple pastries during the fight, so a path is carved through the orchard, where they can grab some apples on the way through, preserving the stampede tradition and the apple production.
Also of note:
The train in that episode has an engine, but they're pulling it manually. I should spend some time rewatching the show because it seems like they have access to at least steam power.
>>384368
Yeah, pretty much.
I plan to look into that immanent critique part of it after some yard work.
Yeah, pretty much.
I plan to look into that immanent critique part of it after some yard work.
>>384370
Okay took me a while to figure it out because everything but the first paragraph of the wikipedia plunked off my head, but once again short form video helped me out:
>Trancendental Critique:
Critiquing something using your own ideals or principals, as though those are universal or objective, when someone else may have differing ideals and principals. It ends up being the critics's own ideals vs the ideals of the other person.
>Immanent Critique:
Critiquing something using it's own logic, showing contradictions in it. The wikipedia also mentions that institutions can be immanently critiqued by contrasting them with the ideals they are supposed to actualize, but fail to.
I will dig around my IDW comics pile and watch some episodes to think of a good example. Perhaps the comic where Applejack goes to town hall, but I'll give it another reread with notes this time, but maybe I'll find a better example.
Okay took me a while to figure it out because everything but the first paragraph of the wikipedia plunked off my head, but once again short form video helped me out:
>Trancendental Critique:
Critiquing something using your own ideals or principals, as though those are universal or objective, when someone else may have differing ideals and principals. It ends up being the critics's own ideals vs the ideals of the other person.
>Immanent Critique:
Critiquing something using it's own logic, showing contradictions in it. The wikipedia also mentions that institutions can be immanently critiqued by contrasting them with the ideals they are supposed to actualize, but fail to.
I will dig around my IDW comics pile and watch some episodes to think of a good example. Perhaps the comic where Applejack goes to town hall, but I'll give it another reread with notes this time, but maybe I'll find a better example.
>>384215
I haven't actually read Hegel but I'll try. This board seems nice.
Hegel is considered the last German idealist, and it is important to understand the path that led to the questions Hegel intended to answer.
The essential problem is how to relate subject and object. We believe that the reality we observe contains patterns,regularities,laws. However, it seems the only basis of this belief can be our perceptions. If we do not confuse the content of our perceptions with our assumptions about them, it becomes clear there is no possible justification for believing in these regularities. There is no logical reason at all to believe that the sun will rise tomorrow, just because we remember it has in the past. The contents of perception are free variables, with no necessary relation to the true nature of objects.
Immanuel Kant began German idealism in his attempt to answer this problem as posed by Hume. What he attempted to show is that there are nontrivial necessary conditions of experience. These necessary conditions would then non-arbitrarily justify belief in a world of objects with knowable properties. Kant finds that space and time, cause and effect, and the division of the world into objects of experience are not properties of the world but inherent to the nature of our perception. But objects of experience are not the same as objects. Kant is left with a remainder of unknowable things-in-themselves (noumena) which remain the actual source of experience, even though all we have access to are the objects of experience (phenomena).
The idealists following Kant recognized that the noumenon could be made redundant. If the world was the phenomena, there would be no dualism of subject and object, or thought and being, and there would be no noumena remaining if all experience, and all thought, were found to be a necessary outcome of the reason of the Absolute Spirit containing both thought and being. Hegel's project was discovering the process by which Absolute Spirit generates the world through reason alone. This is his dialectical method. It works by rationally working out all the consequences of a system until a contradiction is reached. Then, a speculative moment occurs in which the contradiction forces Spirit (as a whole) to step out of the closed system to discover a new concept in which the self-contradiction is overcome (sublated). Initially this occurs with abstract conditions of experience, like the dialectic of Being and Nothing and the speculation of Becoming. Later, the process moves into historical time and here we get stuff like the master-slave dialectic and unhappy consciousness, finally leading towards the full self-realization of Spirit in absolute knowledge (which Hegel identifies with his own philosophy lol).
Some links:
https://empyreantrail.wordpress.com/2016/09/12/dialectics-an-introduction/
https://jonathanrexallen.wordpress.com/2013/06/30/hegels-unhappy-consciousness/
[YouTube] Great Minds - Part 4 - Hegel: The Phenomenology of Geist![]()
I haven't actually read Hegel but I'll try. This board seems nice.
Hegel is considered the last German idealist, and it is important to understand the path that led to the questions Hegel intended to answer.
The essential problem is how to relate subject and object. We believe that the reality we observe contains patterns,regularities,laws. However, it seems the only basis of this belief can be our perceptions. If we do not confuse the content of our perceptions with our assumptions about them, it becomes clear there is no possible justification for believing in these regularities. There is no logical reason at all to believe that the sun will rise tomorrow, just because we remember it has in the past. The contents of perception are free variables, with no necessary relation to the true nature of objects.
Immanuel Kant began German idealism in his attempt to answer this problem as posed by Hume. What he attempted to show is that there are nontrivial necessary conditions of experience. These necessary conditions would then non-arbitrarily justify belief in a world of objects with knowable properties. Kant finds that space and time, cause and effect, and the division of the world into objects of experience are not properties of the world but inherent to the nature of our perception. But objects of experience are not the same as objects. Kant is left with a remainder of unknowable things-in-themselves (noumena) which remain the actual source of experience, even though all we have access to are the objects of experience (phenomena).
The idealists following Kant recognized that the noumenon could be made redundant. If the world was the phenomena, there would be no dualism of subject and object, or thought and being, and there would be no noumena remaining if all experience, and all thought, were found to be a necessary outcome of the reason of the Absolute Spirit containing both thought and being. Hegel's project was discovering the process by which Absolute Spirit generates the world through reason alone. This is his dialectical method. It works by rationally working out all the consequences of a system until a contradiction is reached. Then, a speculative moment occurs in which the contradiction forces Spirit (as a whole) to step out of the closed system to discover a new concept in which the self-contradiction is overcome (sublated). Initially this occurs with abstract conditions of experience, like the dialectic of Being and Nothing and the speculation of Becoming. Later, the process moves into historical time and here we get stuff like the master-slave dialectic and unhappy consciousness, finally leading towards the full self-realization of Spirit in absolute knowledge (which Hegel identifies with his own philosophy lol).
Some links:
https://empyreantrail.wordpress.com/2016/09/12/dialectics-an-introduction/
https://jonathanrexallen.wordpress.com/2013/06/30/hegels-unhappy-consciousness/
[YouTube] Great Minds - Part 4 - Hegel: The Phenomenology of Geist
>>384277
It's Jewish in origin. Edward Bernays based his theories on it, and he's the father of modern propaganda/manipulation.
https://www.cooperpointjournal.com/2022/02/23/i-think-you-should-know-about-edward-bernays/
https://archive.is/MzUlJ
Make two fake problems that cause the solution you want. Sam Hyde did the perfect demonstration, so let me explain it.
Sam Hyde is publicly an "alt right nazi" or something. Privately he's a zionist who pays to suck trannies. In his Fishtank show he accidentally had a pederast on. 4th time in a row, oops.
Anyways. Sam scammed him out of $50k prize money. Now you the viewer, who is a "alt right nazi" are defending a gay black pederast on moral grounds, against Sam.
>I like Sam, he's right wing
>Sam accidentally had a pedo on
>Sam scammed the pedo, but he still owes him money
>Sam is in the wrong and the pedo is in the right
See how two fake ideas made a "alt right nazi" viewer defend a gay black pederast?
Sam then made a bunch of sockpuppet accounts, donated $X,XXX to him, and now the guy thinks he owes Sam for "making him a streaming success, without Sam's help."
>>384582
This is Curtis Yarvin tier schizobabble.
It's Jewish in origin. Edward Bernays based his theories on it, and he's the father of modern propaganda/manipulation.
https://www.cooperpointjournal.com/2022/02/23/i-think-you-should-know-about-edward-bernays/
https://archive.is/MzUlJ
Make two fake problems that cause the solution you want. Sam Hyde did the perfect demonstration, so let me explain it.
Sam Hyde is publicly an "alt right nazi" or something. Privately he's a zionist who pays to suck trannies. In his Fishtank show he accidentally had a pederast on. 4th time in a row, oops.
Anyways. Sam scammed him out of $50k prize money. Now you the viewer, who is a "alt right nazi" are defending a gay black pederast on moral grounds, against Sam.
>I like Sam, he's right wing
>Sam accidentally had a pedo on
>Sam scammed the pedo, but he still owes him money
>Sam is in the wrong and the pedo is in the right
See how two fake ideas made a "alt right nazi" viewer defend a gay black pederast?
Sam then made a bunch of sockpuppet accounts, donated $X,XXX to him, and now the guy thinks he owes Sam for "making him a streaming success, without Sam's help."
>>384582
This is Curtis Yarvin tier schizobabble.
>Bernays was the nephew of Sigmund Freud
>>384215
He was based for calling women plants but otherwise meh
19th and 18th century German metaphysics are just too autistic
He was based for calling women plants but otherwise meh
19th and 18th century German metaphysics are just too autistic
16 replies | 3 files | 9 UUIDs | Archived