|
im reading his book but it's confusing and i think he might be a racist....help???
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 19:18 |
|
|
"i dont understand kegels" free thread title for whoever
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
just sprinkle the words "hegelian" and "dialectic" into your sentences and people will think you're smart
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
im expected to understand this book by tomorrow and all i know is that indians don't hav History, but they have history.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
gul dukat did nothing wrong
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
hm - well, off the top of my head, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (/ˈheɪɡəl/;[2] German: [ˈɡeɔɐ̯k ˈvɪlhɛlm ˈfʁiːdʁɪç ˈheːɡəl]; August 27, 1770 – November 14, 1831) was a German philosopher of the late Enlightenment. He achieved wide renown in his day and, while primarily influential within the Continental tradition of philosophy, has become increasingly influential in the Analytic tradition as well.[3] Although he remains a divisive figure, his canonical stature within Western philosophy is universally recognized.[4] hope that helps!
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
throw that aside and read Animal Farm
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Frog Act posted:im expected hegelian to understand this book by tomorrow and dialectic all i know is that indians don't hav hegelian History, but they dialectic have history. see look at how much smarter people will think this post is now
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
wow....i think ive got this seminar in teh bag now thanks m8
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
please keep me updated if you understand hegel. thank you in advance, god bless
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
Are you reading it for school? Why would you do this to yourself?
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
I think the word was that Katherine Heigl was perceived as difficult to work with which is why you haven't seen her in much lately. She was in an NBC show earlier this year called State of Affairs but it was cancelled after one season. Hope this helps.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
hes wrong about indians
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:07
|
|
- hi
|
personally i like butter on my bagels, but a lot of people seem to like cream cheese. but really i dont remember the last time i ate a bagel because they aren't very good so i would get why you dont understand bagels. Hope this helps.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
Pohl posted:Are you reading it for school? Why would you do this to yourself? yeah im a dumb history major Ocean Book posted:hes wrong about indians not very gbs of u to say this honestly
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
my god it is full of zizek
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Let us ask, does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
To the Chinese their moral laws are just like natural laws - external, positive commands - claims established by force - compulsory duties fuckin chinese lmao
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
i've condensed his work into meme form. you're welcome.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
“But the height of audacity in serving up pure nonsense, in stringing together senseless and extravagant mazes of words, such as had previously been known only in madhouses, was finally reached in Hegel, and became the instrument of the most barefaced general mystification that has ever taken place, with a result which will appear fabulous to posterity, and will remain as a monument to German stupidity.” —Schopenhauer
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
every writer in the 19th century was a racist, except for a couple super radical anarchists hth
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
being / nothing \\\\\ becoming gotta have that sublation. hegel is poo poo though for real. poststructuralists are a lot better and more applicable to our post-industrial 21st century neo-liberal world. gently caress transcendence; it's all about the plane of immanence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
I stopped at Kant
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
Let's talk about Geist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
(I didn't actually stop at Kant)
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
something something dialectic, therefore america deserved 9/11, hope this helps
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
Thesis->Antithesis->Synthesis
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
Form some specific questions about at you are reading
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
Which of his books or works? Are you also reading a commentator with him? There are some pretty different ways to read the Phenomenology of Spirit and The Science of Logic for instance. The big differences tend to be on what he means by absolute spirit and whether the movement in the logic is a claim about the mind or if it is about metaphysics. The general big claims in the Science of Logic is that logic has three divisions, A doctrine of being, the doctrine of essence and the doctrine of the concept. Each of those is a type of predicate that claims participate in. It further breaks down into other categories for each type. It is sorta tied to the Phenomenology of Spirit. They are predicates of spirit/mind. Depending on how we read it may also be a predicate of some absolute mind besides our particular minds. The phenomenology of spirit is about how mind arises through recognition. This occurs at multiple levels, including the individual, social , and political levels. This is where a dialectic forms that ends with mutual comprehension of the objects disclosed. The idea is that a thing first posits itself and then that positing is critiqued and in that critique elements of it are refined and comprehension is developed of it. The middle conflict stage involves strong identity claims that are self-realizing by the conflicting parties. HIs claims in his Philosophy of Right are a good example of this to develop claims. The mutual recognition stage there involves an ethical life that overcomes the objectification of the earlier stages. His History and Aesthetics works also express a similar idea. . The idea in those works though is that they are examples of development of consciousness and individuality that begins with the recognition of the self, then epistemic certainty, and then a shared community of love and reason that express both epistemic certainty and the individual. In the case of societies a similar development happens. Although, history develops for the whole world and leads to larger historical movements that exemplify progress. He felt that Asia was the thesis of things in his teleological view and necessary for us to develop the way we did. Edit: Fixed
Ogodei_Khan fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Sep 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
I spent two months at school studying The Phenomenology of Spirit and I understood none of it. Nobody else did, either.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Frog Act posted:yeah im a dumb history major here's a triad for ya: thesis: burger antithesis: fries synthesis: value meal remember that, you'll need it
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Horniest Manticore posted:here's a triad for ya: lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
Horniest Manticore posted:here's a triad for ya: i used this example and got an A. d oit OP
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
Cacator posted:I think the word was that Katherine Heigl was perceived as difficult to work with which is why you haven't seen her in much lately. She was in an NBC show earlier this year called State of Affairs but it was cancelled after one season. Hope this helps. She did well considering she was a fish/human hybrid hatched in a laboratory (her eyes being on the side of her head gave this away). Pressures of assimilating into human society proved to be too much unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
Ogodei_Khan posted:Which of his books or works? Are you also reading a commentator with him? There are some pretty different ways to read the Phenomenology of Spirit and The Science of Logic for instance. The big differences tend to be on what he means by absolute spirit and whether the movement in the logic is a claim about the mind or if it is about metaphysics. The general big claims in the Science of Logic is that logic has three divisions, A doctrine of being, the doctrine of essence and the doctrine of the concept. Each of those is a type of predicate that claims participate in. It further breaks down into other categories for each type. It is sorta tied to the Phenomenology of Spirit. They are predicates of spirit/mind. Depending on how we read it may also be a predicate of some absolute mind besides our particular minds. The phenomenology of spirit is about how mind arises through recognition. This occurs at multiple levels, including the individual, social , and political levels. This is where a dialectic forms that ends with mutual comprehension of the objects disclosed. The idea is that a thing first posits itself and then that positing is critiqued and in that critique elements of it are refined and comprehension is developed of it. The middle conflict stage involves strong identity claims that are self-realizing by the conflicting parties. HIs claims in his Philosophy of Right are a good example of this to develop claims. The mutual recognition stage there involves an ethical life that overcomes the objectification of the earlier stages. His History and Aesthetics works also express a similar idea. . The idea in those works though is that they are examples of development of consciousness and individuality that begins with the recognition of the self, then epistemic certainty, and then a shared community of love and reason that express both epistemic certainty and the individual. In the case of societies a similar development happens. Although, history develops for the whole world and leads to larger historical movements that exemplify progress. He felt that Asia was the thesis of things in his teleological view and necessary for us to develop the way we did. Edit: Fixed im reading his philosophy of history and thogh i may not be able to articulate it right now i appreciate this p[ost in an earnest and real way
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
Horniest Manticore posted:here's a triad for ya: so in this sitaution the burger is the geist and the combo meal is theoutside force propelling it towards development/????
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
His history work was a set of lectures this is important to keep in mind. It is similar to his lectures on art because they are an example of his larger system at work. The general gist of it is that there is a universal idea expressed by the absolute spirit that manifests itself in the form of human history. (H,83:71) This idea that all history develops is freedom. This universal idea is the object of certainty that we observe though studying history. It has range over all particular historical events. This is an example of a concrete universal. This means the whole preexists its parts. The idea determines itself , posits determinations in itself and then sublates itself. (H,167:138) What this means is that history is the development and ironing out of the concept of freedom. Concepts will even develop that seemingly go agents the idea in general but this is to lead to the expression of the particular in a better way. Philosophy understands history through the form of reason. The relevance of this is that his history proves his philosophy and is an expression if it. History also involves us looking at the concept as it unfolds and in it that moment positing ourselves. We see previous states of consciousness and posit ourselves in relation to them. He states that in his Science of Logic 48-50. This means that thinking of history also is necessary of individuals to develop and society to develop. If they don't then the idea that history expresses. Coextensive normative teleological elements and the focus on the individual seperate his view of history from that of Gadamer or Charles Malik.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
those who Khan, do (like genghis khan who killed lots of people and banged lots of ladies) those who Kant, teach (like immanuel kant who wrote some boring books) adjunct profs feel free to use this to break in your introductory class
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 19:18 |
|
|
The Negro, as already observed, exhibits the natural man in his completely wild and untamed state. We must lay aside all thought of reverence and morality - all that we call feeling - if we would rightly comprehend him; there is nothing harmonious with humanity to be found in this type of character. ...and viewed in the light of such facts, we may conclude slavery to have been the occasion of the increase of human feeling among the Negroes. - George F  Hegel
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 01:40
|
|