This is not the Hegelian Dialectic. This is Hegelian Phenomenology, which is dialectical, but condensing dialectics into this single paranoid conclusion is not educational.
It can be. I used it as a starting point for research. I found an interesting article that explores Hegelian dialectics and freedom.
Hegelian phenomenology is dialectics but dialectics isn’t phenomenology.
Thanks for the article, It does a good job of describing Hegelian historical analysis, via Marx’s materialist dialectics, but isn’t more than a superficial understanding of either. I’m no Hegel scholar, but “thesis, antithesis, synthesis” isn’t Hegel, its Ficte’s description of Hegel’s dialectic, and its an over simplification. The author isnt an expert but superficially on Marx and Hegel. Read Karl Marx and Human Self Creation by Cyril Smith you can skip to the bit about Hegel and Marx, but the pre history is interesting.
Marxist historical materialism is scientific, but most importantly, and what the author doesn’t seem to get, probably due to my superficial reading of the article, is that in historical materialist analysis, the subject and object are united into a single system. His dualist presuppositions in the Implications section (and likely those of his readers) are exactly what prevent access to understanding dialectics.
the appearance of pairs of diametric opposites, united by their contradictions toward one another isn’t too difficult to grapple with as an abstract concept. But in order to apply this consistently we have to radically alter our perspective, we have to unite the subject and object, the ego and the other, the body and the mind. Uniting subject and object is actually extremely difficult within even an abstract conception of post enlightenment rationality. But its one of the only way to connect understanding to truth, humanity to justice and production.
Also a better quick primer on Marxist Hegelianism might be Thesis on Feuerbach by the man himself. Also Plekhanov’s the Materialist Conception of History but that’s way out of the scope of what we are discussing.
Say more stuff.
I did on another thread!
Awesome! I only understood a tiny bit of it!
I’m still learning so I’m a student myself!
Then the little one at the bottom rolls their eyes and says “OK Dad”.
In my case it’s a teenager who thinks JREG is a political genius.
I’ve lucked out with that so far, mine are just smart assess. But they get it honest so I can’t complain.
Philosophy is not a science.
Invalidating anything that might conflict with your favorite epistemology? Certainly there’s no problem here, as long as you avoid philosophy
No.
The “rational enlightenment” and its consequences
And yet Philosophy of Science exists.
That’s just more philosophy.
Crazy ain’t it.
Philosopher aggrandizes philosophy. Film at 11.
Bioethics isn’t a science either.
Economics isn’t a science either, but for some strange reason it persists.
