/lit/ - Literature

>>17115788
chekced

>>17115798
now check mine bitch

>>17115788
He is beyond our comprehension

Thesis: Marx, in his early years, was heavily influenced by Hegelian dialectics.

Antithesis: As time went on, he developed and refined his own theories of dialectical materialism and non idealist historical process.

Synthesis: The synthesis between these two opposed views created a set of ideas which are both powerful and relevant to the human experience.
Hegelian dialectics is a philosophical process which can be used to explain the development of ideas. In Hegel's view, every idea has an opposite, called its antithesis. When these two opposites come together they form a synthesis.
When ideas and concepts come together, they create a third idea which is through compromise between the two. This synthesis becomes an antithesis to the original thesis. Hegel believed that history is a continuous process which requires human actions and thoughts, rather than divine intervention.

Hegel's version of the dialectic process involved a thesis (one point of view), an antithesis (the opposite point of view), and a synthesis (a resolution between the thesis and the antithesis).
-When a cycle is completed, the previous synthesis becomes the thesis for the next cycle, and the process repeats itself continually. ----> the way human history and the human intellect evolve toward the Absolute.

>>17115816
Unironically learn German.

>>17115831
Confirmed never read Hegel

>>17115788
He’s a hack. I know because Schopenhauer said so. And, in case you’re wondering, I’m not being ironic.

>>17116069

>>17115831
>uses fichte's terminology instead of abstract, negative and concrete
>doesn't know about the master-slave dialectic
>hasn't even read the wikipedia page
This is below the already embarassing standards of this board

>>17115831
Thesis antithesis synthesis is schelling - hegels dialectic is an immanent critique: every system of thought has in it its self-negation a contradiction: which calls for and brings forward a resolution to this contradiction which, again, has immanent contradictions.

The real question is what they think of Pinkard’s Hegel.

>>17115831

>bringing up the thesis-antithesis-synthesis model in a Hegel thread

found the pseud

>>17115788
Incomprehensible nonsense.

>>17115788
he was a wizard and not a philosopher, once you realizee this his works makes sense

>>17116332
>>17116248
maybe it's fichte and i'm wrong about it being schelling

>>17115788
All other work either agrees with Hegel so is redundant, or disagrees with Hegel and is wrong.

>>17115831
ultrabased.

>>17115788
He is more right than Marx, and that is saying something.

>>17115788
We like the hypothetical idea of reading it.

>>17115788
Ah! But perhapsh what you really meant was "what doesh Hegel think about /lit?"

>>17115831
fuck off actuAlly read hegel u pseud marxist fuck

>>17118239
this guy gets Hegel

Since you posted an image of PoS: It's literally the greatest book ever written.

>>17118239
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHP1OwivAL0&t=1093s

Completely irrelevant but do I have to read part one of the ego and its own to understand part two? I got the general idea of part one but am not really interested in it

bump

>>17115788
He's got some strong points and some weak ones; overall he's ok.

>>17120328
Care to elaborate?

>>17115788
Mentally ill autist.

Should I start with PoS

Read Inwoods translation.

>>17115788
I haven't read much of him, only the first sections of the Phenomenology and the Philosophy of History, but he's changed how I think in ways no one else has with just so much text.

>>17115788
It's an essential book. Very easy to read with Gregory Sadler's lectures. And when I say very easy, I only mean it can make you physically overwhelmed, but that doesn't prevent you from a relatively deep understanding of it. If you can't understand Hegel philosophy isn't for you. You're just not initiated enough to engage with philosophy.

>>17115831
just admit to yourselves that you're wasting your time trying to play influencers on /lit/ and start re-allocating the marxist shill resources you're sinking into a counterproductive venture to reddit - that way you can upvote eachother and downvote people who disagree with you, go through the post history of people who disagree with you to look for easy opportunities to discredit them, and make use of many other powerful persuasion techniques that aren't available to you here. much better chances of leaving a favourable impression and recruiting new useful idiots into your ranks with empty political jargon in that kind of environment.

>>17115788
im reading the whole thing on twitter and commenting on every sentence.. i'm on paragraph 17 now. its really not too bad if you take it slow

>>17115788
Wrong about everything. Read Kant instead.

Literally 19th century Jordan Peterson. Schopenhauer was right, and most people just read whatever confirms their point of view, no matter how utterly retarded it is

>>17121018
I'm not the guy you responded to.
This board has always had a major socialist representation, lurk more you dipshit or just go back.

>>17121366
why do ideologues never stop lying?

>>17121366
I was just giving you solid advice.
face it, You're practically performing a public service by immunizing anons against your ideology, which falls apart the moment you get dragged into a serious discussion in an environment where people don't censor themselves - as opposed to marxist seminars where you're able to control the overton window, say. Even if you seem to do well in one replychain of one thread for a little while, you make fools of yourselves in the vast majority of encounters.

>>17121479
>he said hegel who i know inspired marx
>reeeeeeeee
>you make fools of yourselves in the vast majority of encounters.
ok bud

>>17115788
Hegel and Kant caused more damage to philosophy than anyone else

>>17121180
What's your Twitter

>>17121651
he's just parodying the social media mentality... I hope

>>17121651
>>17121664

@hegeltakes

>>17122363
Nice

>>17121261
>Schopenhauer was right
>and most people just read whatever confirms their point of view, no matter how utterly retarded it is
Oh, boy, do I have news for you!

I didn't read much for him but he's definitely a great mind

>>17115788
tragically misunderstood

>>17115788
I've been wanting to read Hegel for awhile now, but I've heard conflicting things about getting into his work. Is it true that Hegel's works don't translate to english well and that a lot of his points are lost in translation? I've seen a lot of people post the A.V. Miller translation but is it actually good?

>>17115788
I try not to