/lit/ - Literature

>>17217302
Because philosophy is gay and I only read genre fiction.

>>17217302
Cause I'm still reading Kant. Hagel's next.

>>17217302
What the Hegel, Op?

>>17217328
*Hegel fulk I can't type

I am not autistic

fixed

>>17217387
It's incredible how versatile these Wojak archetypes are - doomer Schop, boomer Hegel, soi Hegelbois - it all fits too perfectly.

>>17217302
I'm too much of a brainlet + I'm reading Plato rn

>>17217302
Is waste of time. Read secondary sources on Hegel if you must read Hegel.

>>17217312
Literally me

>>17217302
I tried but he is incomprehensible.

>>17217302
>I'M UNPOPULAR THIS MUST MEAN I'M +145IQ

>>17217510
Kojeve

>>17217401
>It's incredible how versatile these Wojak archetypes are
Almost as if... Jung was right... Take the Jungpill... Wojak and memes are just neo-representations of mythological archetypes.

>>17217755
which are which then. I assume pepe is the jester

>>17217797
Pepe would surely be the trickster, yes. Apu, the Child. Much to grasp at here.

>>17217302
The most interesting thing to get from Hegel is the Genesis of Thought and how thought condenses into Geist. Schopenhauer is already starting from Geist which makes him much more applicable. Most people can skip Hegel either or they'll be overwhlemed with him. I don't think they miss out. 99% of people only live in Geist and the foundation of it is nothing spectacular in Hegels terms. It's not the big metaphysical Enchilada. It's rather a form of logic.

>>17217312
fpbp
if I have to read another 50 word sentence I'm going to puke

>>17217755
If you are interested in this, I’d heavily recommend this channel https://youtube.com/c/MemeAnalysis

>>17218446
>meme analysis
>analysis of memes
>meme analysis of memes
>meme meme analysis

>>17218473
c'est la même chose ;)

>>17217755
Stop posting this image you stupid faggot, I don't even care about your post, you've just posted this image too many times.

Also there's a difference between the archetypal and archetypes.

because i understood him perfectly. AMA

>>17219773
What is it about, anon? Is he really a charlatan? Why people love him so much? Why historians dislike him?

>>17217302
How do I stop dialectics?

>>17217302
Im too busy reading lenin

>>17219861
By pointing out Hegel's dialectic only works if you believe in God. He literally believed the reason society progresses through dialectic is because it's being guided by the hand of God.

If you take away the benevolent force, you see history as it really is, a bunch of struggles where the good guy doesn't necessarily win (and often loses).

>>17219967
now I see why Schopenhauer hated him so much

>>17219780
>Why historians dislike him?
historians, by the nature of their job, like specifics. they like to think that its all the little specific things that led to where we are today. hegel was all about looking at history in a general manner, reducing it down to a formula.
>Is he really a charlatan?
i like to think hes either autistic or intentionally made it harder to gain academic status. theres definitely some truth to his ideas imo (though really its very similar to most mystical traditions) and he could have made it much simpler.
>What is it about, anon?
the idea is, opposites want balance, and opposites are really the same thing. like the string of a guitar that oscilates back and forth and produces sound as it oscilates and then dies out when the opposites cancel each other out. the opposites are really the same string that move in different directions and then finds balance. when he says something like "the negation of something being made neccesary by that thing", you can visualize it by thinking of pulling the string in one direction and then releasing it and it will go the other direction. in time they will cancel each other out and reach a balance (but then there is an imbalance between balance and imbalance and so it has to be imbalanced again)

thats how he responds to: "why is there something instead of nothing?" its because either one makes the other neccesary and either one being more than the other, creates an imbalance. he calls that oscilation of going back and forth "alteration"
>>17219967
hegels "god" isnt benevloant
>being guided by the hand of God
god in this sense is that force that tends towards balance. its used in a way like "the way that things are"
>>17219861
its unstoppable under this god

>>17220173
>the negation of something being made neccesary by that thing
to clarify, things are defined by what they ARENT as much as what they are, and so the existance of a thing neccesitates the existance of what it isnt. and so those opposites cancel each other out and thats the string analogy

>>17220173
>god in this sense is that force that tends towards balance. its used in a way like "the way that things are"
He is still attributing supernatural/theistic values to history. He might as well believe in a bearded tranny in the sky.

>imagine begin one of those basedjaks
Bros...

>>17220485
its not supernatural. he is personifying a tendency in all things in that context. like saying a gene wants to reproduce. his use of the word is interchangeable with "laws of nature"

>>17217302
I still need to get through Kant and whatever other shit I need to tackle before Hegel.

>>17217302
Too much work for a brainlet like me. I

>>17220880
>its not supernatural.
It is
>he is personifying a tendency in all things in that context
History is not a thing, and personifying it is completely irrational.
>like saying a gene wants to reproduce
A gene is not equivalent to the abstract concept of "history".

>>17217755
>Jung
Charlatan moron.

To busy reading fiction

I haven't gotten there yet

>>17217302
Its not YA

>>17220989
A gene might not be but evolution for sure is

>>17217302
honestly dont think i could understand it. i had to read society of the spectacle twice to get it and ive heard hegel is much more difficult

>>17217401
its amazing to me that there are people who dont understand why wojak and the frog not only caught on but endured