how could one man get Hegel so wrong? his ignorance is almost impressive in its expanse.

how could one man get Hegel so wrong? his ignorance is almost impressive in its expanse. never before have i beheld a man so blind as to the unfolding subjectivity of the absolute Spirit in its self determination, and the freedom which necessarily constitutes it as an essence, through history

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    That's a blurb of one of his books you got from Wikipedia.

  2. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Plopper is a tard
    t. scientist

  3. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    he understood nobody he mentioned in the book
    i like the style tho and use it to make marxoids seethe

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      For me, it's The Poverty of Historicism.
      Guaranteed seethe from Hegelians and Marxists alike, and you can usually rope a Spenglerian too

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      He understood everyone he wrote about perfectly.

  4. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    > Popper is philosophically so uncultured, so fully a primitive ideological brawler, that he is not able to even approximately to reproduce correctly the contents of one page of Plato. Reading is of no use to him; he is too lacking in knowledge to understand what the author says.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/559MJ4h.jpeg

      https://i.imgur.com/v58Ka5a.jpeg

      https://i.imgur.com/WzRENDv.jpeg

      >t. Popper

      You should almost always discredit morons that get quoted out of context by reddit intellectuals to feign and play pretend smart. You should only read it to have a better understanding of the thing they babble about than they do. In the case of Popper you can just ignore his work entirely considering the only thing morons have heard of him is “the paradox of tolerance.” Which they firstly get incorrect but more importantly is only mentioned briefly in a footnote for less than a paragraph.

      >communism and fascism? historicism!
      >my version of whig history? not historicism!

      The sheer cope. How do you troons manage it?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >guys it's not historicism when I make predictions about how societies should be

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Holy shit, you don't even understand what you're reacting to. If you don't know what Popper's stance on teleology is, maybe read a bit.

  5. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/v58Ka5a.jpeg

      thank you.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Envious became he wasn't has smart and well read. Popper knew and read more in the subjects he wrote and even on many more. Its like people who hate Bloom because he could read so damn fast.

  6. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/559MJ4h.jpeg

      https://i.imgur.com/26Hq7J9.jpeg

      > Popper is philosophically so uncultured, so fully a primitive ideological brawler, that he is not able to even approximately to reproduce correctly the contents of one page of Plato. Reading is of no use to him; he is too lacking in knowledge to understand what the author says.

      The only time this dude is ever brought up on this board is when someone is seething about Popper.
      >yeah...but this dude...who I've never read...and you've never read...and none of us care about...he didn't like Popper...so historicism is heckin' real and valid...

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        funniest self-own i've seen in a while

  7. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Popper had a real life, he could work on quantum physics because he knew math to that level, was a carpenter, he wrote as a man who dealed with the world. He wrote politics because he lived in the shithole that was nazism, not like some evola homosexual who only dreamed about it, wrote philosophy of science because he was habilitated to teach physics and math. He wasn't a pseudointellectual like voguelin

  8. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >t. Popper

  9. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    You should almost always discredit morons that get quoted out of context by reddit intellectuals to feign and play pretend smart. You should only read it to have a better understanding of the thing they babble about than they do. In the case of Popper you can just ignore his work entirely considering the only thing morons have heard of him is “the paradox of tolerance.” Which they firstly get incorrect but more importantly is only mentioned briefly in a footnote for less than a paragraph.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >if he's so smart how could morons incorrectly interpret a footnote?

  10. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >communism and fascism? historicism!
    >my version of whig history? not historicism!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *