/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.7061959]

Alright, roundabout way to come here. I was listening to Karl Pilkington's Diary, thinking about comparing him to Andy Kaufman. I look the correlation up, and no one's said anything about it. Though, someone related Pilkington's consciousness to Hegel's master-slave dialectic.

So, I'm looking through it, and to an outsider with no background or build up to his beliefs, it makes absolutely no sense. Last time I saw Hegel on here, he was being praised for I presume logical and insightful content. But... I can't see how this dialectic would work in any context. Why would the first human drive be to kill to gain that consciousness? Why would a master/slave relationship be the first thing to fit, and not any other kind of relationship?

If anyone could explain to me the dialectic, or send me some quality material that doesn't over-simplify to the point where it's erroneous, it'd be greatly appreciated.

[Anonymous No.7062822]

I'm not well read in Hegel, but...

Two primitives fight
One is stronger
The weaker one loses, but has already somehow understood the imaginary idea of death (probably by seeing some other troglodyte die)
The losing one chooses submission rather than death
The slave works and learns, while the master grows fat (roughly speaking though, since culture is the product of the master's free time).
Somewhere in there, the slave that's alienated from his labour is distanced from his object-orientation and develops self-consciousness.

At least that's how I remember it. Although self-consciousness is inherited by all eventually since it is necessary for culture. The greeks, despite making 'objective statements' about being, had the notion of subject-substance (hypokeimenon or something).

I'm no hegelian so feel free to correct me anyone.

[Anonymous No.7065072]

>>7061959

>tfw Karl Pilkington will never be realized as the most profound and original conciousness of our times