[ 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]
17841365 No.17841365 [Reply] [Original]

I don't get it.

>> No.17841373

No one does. The Phenomenology is peak ‘it’s profound because I don’t get it’, and all its fans are the biggest pretenders in all of philosophy

>> No.17841376
File: 219 KB, 590x885, E19E4BEA-3733-4EA5-9E44-77BB1A85644E.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17841376

>>17841365
That’s why you read Stirner

>> No.17841378

>>17841365
same :(

>> No.17841445

and everything is beautiful

>> No.17841597

basically it's just hegel getting really autistic about "bro what does it mean to KNOW stuff" and arguing that being able to "know" anything at all presupposes the entire historical development of human society up to that point - i.e. "knowing" is something that doesn't happen purely inside an isolated consciousness as in descartes but requires an entire social reality to be possible. when you "know" something you're drawing on an entire inherited 'register' of accumulated linguistic, social, etc. practices. to be able to "know absolutely" - which means basically being able to give a complete and rational explanation of what it is that you know, INCLUDING how it is that you know that you know it - is, according to hegel, not something that anyone could have done at any point in history if they were smart enough, but specifically something that's only possible now because human social reality has developed to a certain point. hegel's argument is that he (writing the phenomenology) has attained "absolute knowing" because he has given (in the phenomenology) the complete explanation of how it is that he, hegel, can know anything at all in general, by tracing the historical roots of the social reality which made him, hegel, possible

>> No.17841633

>>17841597
dude was a god

>> No.17841655
File: 81 KB, 411x666, IRH_ak.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17841655

>>17841633
that was kojeve's take in pic related, essentially

>> No.17841665

>>17841655
>>17841597 was Kojeve's take, or that Hegel was a god?
I'm not too fond of the 'materialistic' interpretations of Hegel. I'm planning on reading Magee's book about occult and Hegel as soon as I get the chance.

>> No.17841674

>>17841597
That's only one specific reading of Hegel though. I'm not competent enough to summarize others, but just for information.

>> No.17841686

>>17841597
Wait, did Hegel foretell mid-20th century Analytic epistemology like Quine?

>> No.17841696

>>17841674
there are basically two readings of hegel, proto-marxist [materialist] or neoplatonist emanationism. either the Concept realising itself through History is a metaphor or literal. everything else is academic masturbation

>> No.17841873

>>17841686
No idea, I don't read analytics
>>17841665
Kojeve's take was that hegel was a god. In a highly rarefied sense. Mainly just to substantiate the proposition that Kojeve, by virtue of understanding hegel, was also a god.