[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 26 KB, 327x499, 51sIPBiMS7L._SX325_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17663330 No.17663330 [Reply] [Original]

It's either a common-sensical response to Kantianism and is a lot less daunting(and grand)than it's made out to be OR 99% of what he's trying to say is just going over my head. Which is it?

>> No.17663332

>>17663330
Both. Your application of the logical or is incorrect here.

>> No.17663337

>>17663330
I guarantee you, it is the latter.

>> No.17663378

>>17663332
>>17663337
I doubt it bros I mean I'm impressed by his method and how pertinently he applies it; I would surely not claim that I would be able to replicate that. But I *get* what he's saying, what could still be going over my head? I get that his insights are very significant in coming to understand why historical processes have unfolded the way they have and how all of it relates to the individual and his direct perception. One can of course take these insights and view the world under a new lens with them. I'm not saying I've depleted all potential of this work, but I *still* haven't arrived at a type of liberating knowledge. An understanding which has truly allowed me to conceptualize beauty, love, life and our understanding.

>> No.17663398

>>17663378
>An understanding which has truly allowed me to conceptualize beauty, love, life and our understanding.
That's because Hegel never reaches these things. You're better off reading Kant's writings on the sublime if you wanted something like that.

>> No.17663413

>>17663398
>That's because Hegel never reaches these things.
what's he still good for then?

>> No.17663415

>>17663413
Modifying his philosophy to support your totalitarian regime.

>> No.17663430

>>17663378
It's a philosophical work, I don't know what you expect. It won't give you superpowers, it will give you a new and profound phenomenological framework to work with.
I think you're either underselling it by saying its a "common sensical" response to Kant, depending on what you mean by this, or you have read through the text too quickly. Did you use any secondary lit or maybe watched Gregory B. Sadler's series of videos on the phenomenology? It's very long and in depth, but is good for comprehension.

>> No.17663446

>>17663330
Hegel argues against Common Sense philosophy

>> No.17663459
File: 155 KB, 907x1360, 71CnZpZjzkL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17663459

>>17663430
>Sadler's
yes, mainly with observing reason and the Geist section. When I went through these I noticed that my reading was never very much of the mark with what Sadler was saying. I'll be going through picrel soon because I always find Heidegger's words fascinating.

>> No.17663661

>>17663459
Try watching this, Mladen Dolar is amazing. See if it gives any new insights, and after that, perhaps you're just not very captured by Hegel.
Which is fine, but I think Heidegger uses Hegel to some extent, not certain though.
What did you expect out of the Phenomenology and why are you disappointed by it?
https://youtu.be/UBlOABhRglo

>> No.17664064

99% of what he's trying to say is just going over your head. It's one of the best and most beautiful books ever written, don't worry if you don't understand everything.