How do I understand this retarded frick?

He writes everything in such a dry and complex way it's impossible to understand anything.
I just want a primary source where he describes class dialectic in an understandable manner.

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >class dialectic
    Back you go!

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You kant.

    Es mejor que lo descartes.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      que jodido mi colega

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      suicidate

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      clasico :-DDD

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Basado

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Poesía

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Never read him myself but how experienced are you in the history of philosophy?
    How much study have you done on the principles of hermeneutics?
    I imagine knowing about the efforts of previous philosophers, as well as being familiar with their train of thought, the style which developed among them, would greatly ease your understanding of Hegel since his main concept concern "history" and how the world is connected ("through time and space" by the spirit) - again, perhaps I'm all wrong since I haven't read him - but understanding someone revolves around more than just reading their words.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I have read a little bit of many philosophers, but my main interests are in Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Hegel, Marx, MacIntyre, Schmitt and Spengler

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      homie you have to read the entirety of the Western Canon (as it existed in Hegel's day) if you want to understand him that way. That's at least a decade or two of preparatory study

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This is the same for any and all philosophers.
        You want to REALLY get Nietzsche? Read Schopenhauer.
        You want to REALLY get Schopenhauer? Read Spinoza and Kant.
        You want to REALLY get...

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah, that used to be a part of the curriculum but we cut it out because you knowing Plato or Aristotle is useless to our capitalist overlords.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Ah yes, its the capitalist overlords who try to remove difficult material from secondary education and not marxists who think its racist to teach 15 year olds calculus and the classics.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >It's da gommunists
            Crazy how in my country they still teach latin (and in some cases ancient greek) in high school despite having the biggest communist party in western europe at one point. Crazy also how the founder of said gommunist party wrote extensively in favour of teaching classical culture in general (and of course, philosophy).
            >You don't learn Latin and Greek to speak these languages, to be a waiter or an interpreter or whatever. They are learnt to understand the civilization of those two peoples whose life is the basis of world culture. The Latin or Greek language is learned according to grammar, somewhat mechanically: but there is much exaggeration in the accusation of mechanicalness and aridity. We are dealing with children, who need to be taught certain habits of diligence, accuracy, physical composure, and psychic concentration on certain objects. Would a thirty-forty year old scholar be capable of sitting at his desk for sixteen hours straight, if as a child he had not forcefully, through mechanical coercion, assumed compliant psychophysical habits? If you also want to raise scholars, you have to start there and you have to push everyone in order to get those thousands, or hundreds, or even just dozens of scholars of great strength that every civilization needs.
            The man's name? Antonio Gramsci. Maybe the GOMMUNISTS in America are bit different from ours, but considering that every argument that I read today in favour of removing the teaching of latin and greek from our schools comes usually from pro-market neolibs and always in the form of "they are useless for getting a jerb" (which they are, to be completely fair) whereas marxists always defend them I find the idea that they aren't tought in other countries due to marxist meddling very hard to believe.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, that used to be a part of the curriculum but we cut it out because you knowing Plato or Aristotle is useless to our capitalist overlords.

            [...]
            arguing with people who love labels is almost pointless. They will not engage with actual texts, or if they do, it's to find some gotcha to win le debate.
            In this particular case: how could one possibly miss that "wokeness" is the best thing that could happen to capitalism? The creation of identity groups to whom you can sell tailored product, the dumbing down to create impulsive consoomers, the distraction from economic issues to race/gender/sexual preference culture wars which splits people with common economic interests into conveniently divided bubbles, companies getting away with hanging up a pride flag as their "social responsibility"...

            Irrelevent to teach primarily from a Gymnasium anyway. The teaching of Latin and Greek are to help the mind understand the political, scientific, philosophical, and deeper understanding of their languages. (Though funny that Hegelians/Marxists want Plato to be read and apprehended by the masses) Not to necessarily teach them the exact ways of the culture that brought these influences. Jefferson, a ‘Capitalist’, decreed that Latin and Greek be taught for better understanding and rumination in America and history at general. To quote monarch Kaiser Wilhelm II: “the Gymnasium and classics should have a secondary place to general education; we are raising a nation of proud Germans, not Romans and/or Greeks.”

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            arguing with people who love labels is almost pointless. They will not engage with actual texts, or if they do, it's to find some gotcha to win le debate.
            In this particular case: how could one possibly miss that "wokeness" is the best thing that could happen to capitalism? The creation of identity groups to whom you can sell tailored product, the dumbing down to create impulsive consoomers, the distraction from economic issues to race/gender/sexual preference culture wars which splits people with common economic interests into conveniently divided bubbles, companies getting away with hanging up a pride flag as their "social responsibility"...

            nobody cares if "real old school Marxists" care about the classics. all of you people are minorities among Marxists today to the point where you have no control over the label. all of you are just a couple micro-aggressions away from being labeled a fascist by the New Left (and they already suspect you of being one because you're what they call a "class reductionist"). it's time to stop living in the past and give up the charade.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >give up because you're outnumbered
            So are you. Conservatives hate you and they're 90% of the right.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not a "real old school" marxist myself, I'm saying that I've never seen a Marxist in my country argue against teaching classical languages in school, even today.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            See if you spot the pattern.
            https://eidolon.pub/why-students-of-color-dont-take-latin-4ddee3144934
            What unites these people conceptually.
            https://languagehealing.tumblr.com/post/678177979706261504/im-whitea-settler-can-i-learn-a-native-american
            Is it the implicit postcolonial (Marxist), perhaps?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            not that anon, but the first guy is a black Latin teacher who advocates a more modern way of teaching latin, which is exactly the point of pic related that is always shilled here.
            His anti-colonial points are pretty harmless, and theres nothing admirable about Roman conquests and slavery. Fyi, they all but holocausted white people, in particular the tradlarper's favorite ancestor choice, the Celts.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Latin and Celtic are related although. Gaulish was mutually intelligeable with Latin more than Insular Celtic. Italo-Celtic has many more grounds beset with its theory which lacks for Greek and Latin except for general Indo-European connection and Hellenic influence. When one looks at Celtic peoples, they would come to the conclusion that they were environmentalist, egalitarian, anarchistic Romans.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >It's da gommunists
            Crazy how in my country they still teach latin (and in some cases ancient greek) in high school despite having the biggest communist party in western europe at one point. Crazy also how the founder of said gommunist party wrote extensively in favour of teaching classical culture in general (and of course, philosophy).
            >You don't learn Latin and Greek to speak these languages, to be a waiter or an interpreter or whatever. They are learnt to understand the civilization of those two peoples whose life is the basis of world culture. The Latin or Greek language is learned according to grammar, somewhat mechanically: but there is much exaggeration in the accusation of mechanicalness and aridity. We are dealing with children, who need to be taught certain habits of diligence, accuracy, physical composure, and psychic concentration on certain objects. Would a thirty-forty year old scholar be capable of sitting at his desk for sixteen hours straight, if as a child he had not forcefully, through mechanical coercion, assumed compliant psychophysical habits? If you also want to raise scholars, you have to start there and you have to push everyone in order to get those thousands, or hundreds, or even just dozens of scholars of great strength that every civilization needs.
            The man's name? Antonio Gramsci. Maybe the GOMMUNISTS in America are bit different from ours, but considering that every argument that I read today in favour of removing the teaching of latin and greek from our schools comes usually from pro-market neolibs and always in the form of "they are useless for getting a jerb" (which they are, to be completely fair) whereas marxists always defend them I find the idea that they aren't tought in other countries due to marxist meddling very hard to believe.

            arguing with people who love labels is almost pointless. They will not engage with actual texts, or if they do, it's to find some gotcha to win le debate.
            In this particular case: how could one possibly miss that "wokeness" is the best thing that could happen to capitalism? The creation of identity groups to whom you can sell tailored product, the dumbing down to create impulsive consoomers, the distraction from economic issues to race/gender/sexual preference culture wars which splits people with common economic interests into conveniently divided bubbles, companies getting away with hanging up a pride flag as their "social responsibility"...

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Having to read most of thousands of other people’s work throughout milleniums to comprehend one guy is insanity, and defiles and demonizes human comprehension in general of the understanding of concepts it can achieve.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Don't worry, AI can do that now

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No, no it can't. The algorithm can quote Hegel and quote an academic quoting Hegel, usually without attribution. That's all.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    That's a fur coat, right?
    Pimpin aint easy.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Michael Sugrue told me to read some of his earlier works, which are more comprehensible, to understand how his writing works.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Michael Sugrue

      Based. His lectures are great.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Have you read the prior material?

    https://righthegelian.com/reading-list/

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Click on here https://empyreantrail.wordpress.com/beginning-with-hegel/

    Scroll down to ‘A.W’s. Suggested Reading Order’, if you don’t care about reading the entire western canon to understand him specifically.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >burying the lead

    Read the last section first. And have Greek philosophical terminology in mind to compare against.

    >where he describes class dialectic in an understandable manner

    He doesn't. 'Master-Slave' is really Beholder-Beholden. If you want aberrant literalist exegesis read Kojeve's 'Hegel' and be done with it.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >read Kierkegaard
    >he spends the first 50 pages constantly namedropping Hegel
    >oh yeah to understand Hegel you'll need to read like 60 books worth of prerequisites then read his books in this exact order
    Maybe I don't like philosophy anymore

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >oh yeah to understand Hegel you'll need to read like 60 books worth of prerequisites then read his books in this exact order
      Not true at all. He makes some subtle references to other philosophers but his work doesn't depend any anything else

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Kojeve

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's an intellectual experience. He's trying to convey a way of thinking. You just have to roll with it.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ze rationalism and empiricism failed followed by kant's poor attempt at merging the two. Behold, ze dialectic will resolve this issue. mein new form of induction is ze best way of explaining ze metaphysik of ze world. Ze history is a dialectical process of progress and other idealistic bullshit for hundreds of pages.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Posting about a book you haven't read should be a bannable offense.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nobody asked about a book homosexual, they asked to summarize his philosophy.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Which you completely failed at because you never read any of his books.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you don't need to read their books to understand their philosophy

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            If you don't read Hegel's whole oeuvre you'll never be equipped to refute the following:

            Me: "Is everything wrong or is everything right?"
            Hegel: "Yes"

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Can't refute self referential statements because they are meaningless. Why do you midwit homosexuals get entangled into these sorts of fruitless endeavours? Something either makes sense logically or it doesn't. there is no magical or mystical meaning behind it and if there was, it wouldn't be something that would make sense using language, which means discussing it on this forum is futile, simple as. But no, you have to stake your life on some meaningless drivel some german autist made 300 yrs ago because he didn't like what another german midget wrote 50 yrs prior, its so le mysterious dood!

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Start with his Philosophy of History, it's tied to real events and isn't as dry as the theoretical works, and the preface explains the whole world spirit thing pretty well.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Read Hegels Ladder.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >it's not thesis antithesis synthesis like most people say
    >it's not even abstract negative concrete like IQfy says
    No one understands him.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Then what is it, if hegel says that history is progress, how the frick do you think this progress plays out if not through dialectic?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's not that there isn't a dialectic, it's just no one knows what it actually entails. It may be hard to put into a single formula but that didn't stop all Hegel interpreters, including all scholars and every one here, trying and failing.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Lmao its not that hard to understand, hegel the rebellious gay that he is was trying to move away from kant and hume so he creates some special term for what is essentially inductive logic applied to appear deductively, take some concept-which is really a proposition, combine it with some different concept, another proposition and derive some agreement--an inductive conclusion that may change in time. A nice neologism to make humanities/social science gays think they are doing philosophy different from science and mathgays. He never invented anything new, he just reconfigured it to make history amenable to analysis.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah you have no idea what you're talking about at all.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Lmao, i am shook anon, at the obvious superiority you display in your understanding of herr hegel. You truly blow us out of the water with you brief, no-explanation, 'no-idea what you are talking about' polemic hooks.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Alright can that anon explain the inverted world from the phenomenology? No? Has he even read any Hegel book? Also no.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Seems like folly to make assumptions about objective phenomena;inversion of subject to object relationship requires this, when kant already showed its futile. Its like trying a child trying to convince an adult that santa is real.

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    90% of philosophers should get the rope. Zero editorial work was done on their shit, you have to not read, but chew through pages mentally to understand them. Clear sign of deranged mind. Look at math textbooks for example, clear as frick and more valuable to humanity.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Mostly true of continental gays who relish swimming in the murky self referential slop they call prose.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        it's true for all philosophers, ever since the bourgeois revolutions

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >class dialectic
    you need to read Marx for that. Hegel doesn't care about that.

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