/lit/ - Literature

what would hegel say about him?

>How do I explain Hegelian Dialectics basically enough? It’s a philosophical theory, the kind you might encounter if you took the time to read some books. The fundamental premise is to envision history as a sequence of “dialectical” conflicts. Each dialectic begins with a proposition, a thesis… which inherently contains, or creates, its opposite – an antithesis. Thesis and anthesis. The conflict is inevitable. But the resolution of the conflict yields something new – a synthesis – eliminating the flaws in each, leaving behind common elements and ideas.

I just finished Book IV of Plato's Republic. Does it get harder to understand later on? It feels like it's too simple. I don't find myself disagreeing or having meaningful comments on a lot of it. It's almost like the book is just articulating things I already agree with. Is there something more? Also now that I've gotten this far, reading it seems more like a chore, rather than a treat which is what it started as. Would it be acceptable for me to either skip the rest of the book or move onto a different book for the time being?
Pic unrelated

>>17379032
>How do I put this basically enough? It's a philosophical theory, the kind you might encounter if you took time to read some books. The fundamental premise is to envision history as a sequence of "dialectical" conflicts. Each dialectic begins with a proposition, a thesis which inherently contains, or creates, its opposite - an antithesis. Thesis and antithesis. The conflict is inevitable. But the resolution of the conflict yields something new - a synthesis - eliminating the flaws in each, leaving behind common elements and ideas.

>>17216770
>>17216815
Real talk, can I pretend to read this book and then just go around quoting pic related when someone asks what it was about? I don't feel like reading such a long and complex book.

Political/Philosophical Reading Lists?
Pic unrelated