ITT: terrifying philosophy books

[Anonymous No.19191371]

>In order better to understand the meaning of and the reason for this truly revolutionary transposition, one must be willing to make the philosophical experiment which Hegel proposes to the reader of the Phenomenology in its first Chapter. Look at your watch, he says, and note that it is, let us say, noon. Say it, and you will have enunciated a truth. Now write this truth on a piece of paper: "It is now noon." At this point Hegel remarks that a truth cannot cease to be true because of being formulated in writing. And now look at your watch again and reread the sentence you have written. You will see that the truth has been transformed into error, for it is now five minutes past noon.
>What can be said, except that real being can transform a human truth into an error - at least in so far as the real is temporal, and Time has a reality.
>This observation was made a long time ago: since Plato or, rather, since Parmenides, and perhaps even earlier. But one aspecr of the question was neglected until Hegel; namely, the fact that, through his discourse, through his written discourse in particular, man succeeds in preserving error in the very heart of reality. If Nature happens to commit an error (the malformation of an animal, for example), it eliminates it immediately (the animal dies, or at least does not propagate). Only the errors committed by man endure indefinitely and are propagated at a distance, thanks to language. And man could be defined as an error that is preserved in existence, that endures within reality. Now, since error means disagreement with the real; since what is other than what is, is false, one can also say that the man who errs is a Nothingness that nihilates in Being, or an "ideal" that is present in the real.

Schopenhauer argues that man is an error, who would be better off not existing. Man 'ought' not to exist. Pessimism of this kind was old even when he articulated it. But only Kojeve, interpreting Hegel, can show you how man is an error, who IS nothing other than the correction of this error. Absolute knowledge is human history overflowing and returning to zero (i.e. Nature i.e. Inanimacy.) The most radical atheism conceivable. If this doesn't terrify you, you haven't understood it.

[Anonymous No.19191379]

>>19191371
i read kojeve and passed out and woke up in a black site. what do

[Anonymous No.19191391]

>>19191379
Potlatch every glowie you find as a form of sacrifice

[Anonymous No.19191397]

>>19191391
This. Bataille is the only possible way out of Kojeve's circle, and even then I'm not sure it works in the end

[Anonymous No.19191567]

>whoa bro this sounds 2 me liek all those munchausen trilemmas and stuff, depressin shit!

[Anonymous No.19191617]

[Anonymous No.19191659]

>>19191371
Read this instead

[Anonymous No.19191716]

>>19191659
I don't want to read more hegel, every time I do it just makes me paranoid and suicidal

[Anonymous No.19192283]

grug say sky blue. this is so.
but when night it is not so.
but "sky is blue" is so.
grug confuse

[Anonymous No.19192371]

>>19191371
Denial of Death and I Am A Strange Loop both fucked me up pretty hard
Positive Disintegration by Dabrowski puts the intersection of these two books to practice, so I recommend them as a terrorpill trinity

[Anonymous No.19192582]

>>19191371
>If Nature happens to commit an error (the malformation of an animal, for example), it eliminates it immediately (the animal dies, or at least does not propagate).
Nigga doesn’t understand evolution which through trial and error keeps perfecting the object.
This criticism makes sense if you keep referring to someone’s books long after they were written without due scepticism. Which, ironically, applies primarily to the field of philosophy and Hegel himself in particular.
> And man could be defined as an error that is preserved in existence, that endures within reality. Now, since error means disagreement with the real; since what is other than what is, is false, one can also say that the man who errs is a Nothingness that nihilates in Being, or an "ideal" that is present in the real.
We can define man and his creation however we want. We can define man as shit factory and everything he produces as shit, but if you start deriving moral guidance from these word games, you are a moron.
As a materialist, I don’t believe in distinction between man and nature at all, so the existence of man is natural in my eyes and does not contradict anything. If I had believed in God, then I’d treat Him as authority over nature, and man as His agent or creation.

[Anonymous No.19192640]

baby's first gnosis

[Anonymous No.19192786]

>>19191371
>Absolute knowledge is human history overflowing and returning to zero (i.e. Nature i.e. Inanimacy.) The most radical atheism conceivable. If this doesn't terrify you, you haven't understood it.
Is this what Kojeve says? Brcause it is a bonker interpretation.
Absolute Knowledge is NOT human knowledge overflowing an returning the zero, quite the opposite in fact. Hegel is quite clear about it: with Absolute Knowledge begins philosophical science, which will take form in his Encyclopedia.

In fact I would say, what you have described (the return to nature/inanimacy) is literally the opposite of what Hegel envisioned: if this were to be the case that book could not be called "Phenomenology of Spirit", and he could have not have said that nothing, not on earth and not in the heavens, is non-mediated. One of the goals of Hegel's philosophy is not to return to Nature, but to develop the figure of Spirit without placing it in an opposition to nature: Spirit must integrate Nature as one of its moments (and conversely, Nature is ideal, insofar as it is rral knly as a moment of somrthing higher).

Also regarding the "atheism" part, Hegel wasn't one. Quite the opposite in fact: he thinks that only God is absolutely true, and that He is the only object of philosophy (which, in turn, is the highest expression of Absolute Spirit). People tend to dismiss this side of Hegel's philosophy, mostly because it seems incompatible with contemporary anti-religious/scientistic common sense, but it still remains a fact that Hegel thought that God exists, that He can be known, and that the content of the Christian religion is true (including the parts that look weird to contemporaries, like thr doctrine of Trinity, and the doctrines of Incarnation, Death of God and Resurrection).

[Anonymous No.19193954]

time doesn't exist though

[v_v !!+e0M0fBMYzt No.19193967]

>>19193954
this. don’t fall for the protestants’ lies

[Anonymous No.19193987]

>>19191371
>Hegel literally took FIVE MINUTES to write four words

[Anonymous No.19194053]

>>19191371
>If this doesn't terrify you, you haven't understood it.
I understand it and it doesn't terrify me.

[Anonymous No.19194314]

>>19192371
>Positive Disintegration
Hey thanks, this is fascinating.

[Anonymous No.19194405]

woooow doesnt this nigga know Hegel is a spinozan

[Anonymous No.19194435]

>>19194053
Then you din't un'stand it nigga