/lit/ - Literature

>>23087743
>nibbana
niggana

>>23087743
Truth to power

>>23087743
The oscillation between the finite and determinate being and the infinite when applied to the varying degree of scope that Hegel attributes to being such as being for self and so on, if the being is capable to making the transitions within the proper socially recognized cues then the being would certainly appear to possess aspects of Nirvana as you see it in several eastern contexts.

>>23087811
I shidded and farded and came in my pants

>>23087813
Perhaps once you lose your erection you can add piss to the mixture.

>>23087811
wut?

>>23087824
Did you read Hegel?

>>23087829
no

It's crazy to me how a guy who wanted to be John Milton so fucking bad it turned him schizophrenic got misinterpreted by a guy who thought he could use Kantian memetics to circumvent literal human nature.

I don't want to nor will I probably ever read Hegel or Marx because they are fundamentally disgusting people. Read Kant, read Schopenhauer, read Stirner, read fucking Keynes instead of these charlatan wastrels.

Physiognomy doesn't apply to any medium more than philosophy.

Only ignorance on the mechanisms that lead to enlightenment can bring you to the path to enlightenment.

>>23087829
https://pervegalit.wordpress.com/2012/06/09/how-to-fake-your-way-through-hegel/

>>23087833
The process described is part of Hegel's explication on being for self in his quality section under determinateness. The post itself is likely to possess no real meaning unless you have read Hegel or stumbled across a similar determination on your own. I may as well be speaking a completely foreign language. If you are interested in attempting the process you can start with Phenomenology of Spirit.

>>23087851
I did see this posted recently in another thread and found it to be quite humorous.

>>23087857
penis wenis

>>23087857
wut?

>>23087862
>>23087870
Stick to Jewdon Penerston

>>23087893
who?

>>23087902
Exactly

>>23087904
ok

>>23087834
Keynes is compatible with Marx and Hegel.

>>23087743
Isn't this just a big roundabout way of saying "trust your gut feeling"?

>>23087911
Nta but I have seen compelling arguments Keynes was basically the integration of socialism for the west in such a way as to provide some means of prolonging that particular stage of societal development.

>>23087920
lol no

>>23087922
He’s more of a philosopher than he’s given credit for.

>>23087743
>in the sphere of coming-to-be and ceasing-to-be
Yeah so at that stage of the dialectic. Not as a Absolute truth. If you read the full paragraph, he contrasts it to the Trinity and how Eastern religions are inferior to Christianity.

>>23087978
>Eastern religions are inferior to Christianity.
based

>>23087933
I would agree with this. I was also a fan of his Treatise on Probability as well. Most of his works are still good reading, there are maybe one or 2 that are still too encapsulated in the older method of total monetary supply thinking that are no longer really applicable but otherwise he is still a very worthwhile read.

>>23087925
Then what's he even saying in layman's terms?

>>23088030
how tf am I supposed to know?

Set-sama didn't create us just to annihilate ourselves mkay.

>>23088030
The soul is indestructible yet impermanent.

The problem is Hegel cannot conceive of anything higher than consciousness, so he says "unconsciousness" where it should really be called superconsciousness. Westerners call Eastern philosophy nihilistic, when in reality the Westerners are only revealing their own deep-seated nihilism.

>>23088070
hmm yes sorry westerners aren't eusocial insects hooked up to le superconscious hivemind

>>23088070
They are soulless.

>>23088078
holy based

>>23087743
His interpretation of Nibbana is poor.

>>23088164
Elaborate?

>>23088176
no

>>23088178
Classic buddhism.

bump

>>23087743
What shocked me was realizing that the Greater Logic is not a short book. I had read excerpts and gathered it was incomparably more dense than even the Phenomenology, but I assumed it must also be far shorter because no one can keep up that sort of density for long.

But no, it's the better part of 1,000 pages. And there is still the Lesser Logic too.

>>23088784
Houlgate's commentary is at least somewhat accessible but he spends 500 pages to dissect the first 8th of the book.

>>23088836
Anything like Hegel's Ladder for the Logic?

>>23088078
>nirvana is when insects do stuff together

If you're completely lost while reading this thread you should check out these essays:
https://righthegelian.com/3p-concept-summary/
https://righthegelian.com/3p-being-summary/
https://righthegelian.com/3p-essence-summary/
https://righthegelian.com/logic-summary/
I know the dude who runs this site has been shilling it all over the place for a while but these are genuinely helpful and useful intros to what the fuck Hegel is actually getting at in his logic.

>>23089052
Kinda hot.

>>23087743
Fixed.

>>23090344
Actually fixed.

>>23088070
He could conceive of all kinds of waffle just fine but had higher standards in what he was prepared to put his name to. We should be grateful that he went as far as he did.

>>23087851
Devious and Evil Sadler pilled.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcxNSF6C_0k

>>23088070
Theravadans are the ass end of post-schismatic syncretic buddha-isms. The Pali Canon has all of 470ish instances of "anatta" and less than a handful are nouns as in "NO SOUL". The Sage called it himself "the path to Brahman"-- and he was wont to name it. But there it is. Nirvana is noticing when the clouds part and not blinding yourself looking straight into the sun

>>23087981
This is kinda a main thing in Hegel (and where Zizek takes his anti eastern wisdom stance)

>>23090519
Treating theravada as singular is like treating a man as singular. Your statement is not wrong, your statement is not right. Like Hegel they recognise the problem.

>>23087743
Wagner follows on from Hegel here but corrects him.

>Nature engenders her myriad forms without caprice or arbitrary aim ("asichtlos und unwillkürlich"), according to her need ("Bedurfniss"), and therefore of Necessity ("Nothwendigkeit"). This same Necessity is the generative and formative force of human life. Only that which is un-capricious and un-arbitrary can spring from a real need; but on Need alone is based the very principle of Life.

>The end of Science is the justifying of the Unconscious, the giving of self−consciousness to Life, the re−instatement of the Senses in their perceptive rights, the sinking of Caprice in the Want of Necessity. Science is therefore the vehicle of Knowledge, her procedure mediate, her goal an intermediation; but Life is the great Ultimate, a law unto itself. As Science melts away into the recognition of the ultimate and self−determinate reality, of actual Life itself: so does this avowal win its frankest, most direct expression in Art, or rather in the Work of Art.

>If Mind has manufactured Nature, if Thought has made the Actual, if the Philosopher comes before the Man: then Nature, Actuality and Man are no more necessary, and their existence is not only superfluous but even harmful; for the greatest superfluity of all is the lagging of the Incomplete when once the Complete has come to being. In this wise Nature, Actuality and Man would only then have any meaning, or any pretext for their presence, when Mind—the unconditioned Spirit, the only cause and reason, and thus the only law unto itself—employed them for its absolute and sovereign pleasure.

>>23088176
Nirvana is realizing the aggregate nature of "most" things and how they condition behaviour whether in lower or higher reaches of nature, and how assumptions lead to conditioned mentality. Once you solve that you stop being spiritually retarded and assuming there is no "form-nature" in the western sense.

>read hegel threads and mostly understand what's going on
>read a short summary of the PoS and it seems to make sense
>read the preface, not amazingly clear but I can see what he's getting at
>read the work itself
>filtered immediately, have to reread passages over and over to kind of see what they're saying and immediately forget what I read after putting it down

>>23090809
Thanks for an answer.

>they condition behaviour whether in lower or higher reaches of nature
Here’s the crux. Nothing in nature allows this.

>>23091641
>Nothing in nature allows this.
Aggregation is literally all around you, not just of your mind but also in the molecules of your chair

>>23087743
"We stand for ever because we see that everything is Maya. The children of Maya live for ever, but the children of enjoyment die.

Here again is another great difference. Just as you find the attempts of Hegel and Schopenhauer in German philosophy, so you will find the very same ideas brought forward in ancient India. Fortunately for us, Hegelianism was nipped in the bud and not allowed to sprout and cast its baneful shoots over this motherland of ours. Hegel's one idea is that the one, the absolute, is only chaos, and that the individualized form is the greater. The world is greater than the non-world, Samsâra is greater than salvation. That is the one idea, and the more you plunge into this Samsara the more your soul is covered with theworkings of life, the better you are. They say, do you not see how we build houses, cleanse the streets, enjoy the senses? Ay, behind that they may hide rancour, misery, horror — behind every bit of that enjoyment."

- Swami Vivekananda in "Vedanta in all its phases"

>>23091666
>Hegel's one idea is that the one, the absolute, is only chaos, and that the individualized form is the greater
Damn, this dude got filtered.

>>23088839
Nta, but no, unfortunately. Almost each commentary on the Science of Logic ends up beating out each of the others on how a particular chapter is treated, but that means wading through a shitton of reading.

>>23091674
explain

>>23091651
Every aggregation is motion, substantially, hence the aggregate is by nature moved and not the other way around.

>>23090519
You're not looking so good these days, Ken. Maybe you should cut back on the snacking.

>>23091687
read these >>23089464

>>23087743
>unity with Brahma
sounds comfy

>>23087978
>[insert thing here] is inferior to Lutheran Christianity.
This is also the summation of Hegel's entire philosophical world view.

>>23090519
Is the brahmayana/path of brahma if you only practice the brahmaviras, but you can go beyond the brahmayana and achieve nibbana, what buddha is saying is that you can use the eightfold path to become one with brahma if you want, you don't need brahmins, this path is designed to lay people tho, if you wanna go all the way you can trascend brahma and achieve nibbana but thid is a path generally reserved for monks since lay people don't usually want to go that hard on the path