>There are still Hegelians to this day after Schelling, Nietzsche, Marx, Heidegger, Bataille, Adorno, Althusser, Derrida, Deleuze and Land completely trashed him.Why won't he just die already? His cult is quite honestly unexplainable.
>>12189373Prove you’ve read him.
>>12189373marx and schelling are sophists though
>>12189373Loved Hegel. My uni recommended reading hegel every morning despite having Leibniz as its name. STEMfag btw.
>>12189373because ur mother's a whore
>>12189373You've never read any of them, especially Marx's wwritings on Hegel. OP is a faggot
>>1218937>t-t-t-they refuted hegel so he has no value!!1!imagine being this faggot
>Marx, Adorno, Althusser, Deleuze and Land completely trashing him>literally all Hegelianslul wut
>>12189476Just realised.>>12189373OP, you just outted yourself as a fucking pseud!
>>12189476>>12189633Marx completely ridicules Hegels position of idealist histoy in "Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right", Marx accepts Hegelian dialectics only conditionaly in that they start from a materialist conception of history and not from a transcedental abstraction from which truth is derived.Adorno wrote Negative Dialectics which is an entire reversion of Hegels philosophy, into the negative. Dialectics for him don't mean a positive construction but a negation used by way of critical philosophy.Althusser tried to purge Hegel entirely from Marxist thinking with his epistemic break, claiming there is nothing Hegelian in the late Marx, when Marx comes to the question of critique of ideology, the eraly Marx is still Hegelian because he is caught up in feuerbachian humanismAnd oh boy PLEASE read what Deleuze and Land write about Hegel, the sheer poison and mockery that comes from them to Hegels face is almost too brutal.
>>12189653Wikipedia-tier summaries. Try harder.
>>12189373Schopenhauer wiped the floor with Hegel.
>>12189418>Hegelis not even stem philosopher.
>>12189653>not from a transcedental abstraction from which truth is derivedThis is exactly what Hegel does not say. Also:>Deleuze>it's not that simple;
>>12189373only Heidegger is relevant there
>>12189373Can someone please explain Hegelian philosophy and what dialectics means in simple words
>>12189842The process of how being emerges into self-consciousness
>>12189842Dialectics is a process of change. An example would be a theory about reality that encounters errors it can't explain and a new theory must emerge that has corrected for the errors.Both Hegel and Marx, although through different mechanisms, thought that this is how society changes.It also carries with it a certain teleology, e.g that history has a goal. For Hegel this goal was a society that was perfectly free and rational, for Marx this was a Communist society.
>>12189873For Hegel it already happened tho. His philosophy is very much the awareness of this free society and individual and how it came to be
>>12189373Where can I find Land's critique of Hegel?
>>12189690Schopenhauer was Hegel's cuckboi. It is almost sad reading about all of Schopenhauer's schemes to become more popular then Hegel, all of which backfired horribly while Hegel was just doing his thing.
Why won't all of you continental n*ggers kill yourselves and read some real philosophy instead of wasting everyone's time.
>>12190465>read some real philosophyPhilosophy is a now unnecessary proto-science. Read it for fun maybe, all you will get is useless immanent schemes.
hegel is the opiate of the intellectual
>>12190548Prove to me you exist and I will drop philosophy forever.
>>12189373I’m listening to a Hegel book on audible, getting my dick sucked and browsing /lit/ all at the same time rn.
>>12190555What do you mean by ''you''?
>>12190555Why do you want to prove that though? My existence is as equally relevant and irrelevant to you, the point is that you are existing whatever that means, and you are interacting with me and everything else that is surrounding you.
>>12190548>Philosophy is only natural science and logic>just completely ignore ethics and moral philosophy, political philosophy etc.And you guys are surprised when religious people call you nihilists.
>>12190651But they are.I have real life friends like that and every time we have a real conversation their background lackings are showing.It is not bad or good, but only a proof of how everything is needed and usefull.
>>12190617>the point is that you are existing whatever that means, and you are interacting with me and everything else that is surrounding you.prove either of these
if there were no contradictions in Hegel's philosophy to sublate, Hegel would have been wrong -- since we have move passed him we have proven Hegel right
>>12190700The fact that you keep asking questions through something (machine) and you get answers from me are proofs of both things
>>12190758But I don't exist and I don't ask you questions. Proove you're not imagining this convo.
>>12190651>Philosophy is only natural science and logicI can see how you misunderstood what I wrote.Ethics are fine, you can learn even more useful ethical methods in psychology. >moral philosophyCome on man. Baseless categories, redundant meta-theory about systems of restraint essentially. Maybe its fun for neurotic people to play around with or the religious to try to resolve cognitive dissonance, I don't know. >And you guys are surprised when religious people call you nihilists.I don't know who ''you guys'' are. the rest is a non sequitur.>>12190791>Proove you're not imagining this convo.He is, so are you, otherwise there would be no experience. And this experience depends on the condition of the organism. But going back to the initial question about proving ones existence. How about you try to disprove your existence? You are trapped in this tautology
>>12189712in Nietzsche and philosophy Deleuze literally says that dialectics is ideology of christianity.
>>12190872>I don't know who ''you guys'' are.The typical citizen-scientist that hasn't read any philosophy of science since Bertrand Russell and the logical positivists.People who claim that philosophy is "unnecessary proto-science" like you are the same people who use Reddit to discuss the ethics of animal eating and circlejerk about how it's immoral to deport illegal aliens from the country around a family dinner table.In other words, think before you speak you ignorant retard.
>>12190910You could respond to the rest of the contents in the post. This is just strawmanning
>>12190872>How about you try to disprove your existence? You are trapped in this tautologyWhy? I'm not the one claiming philosophy is useless
>>12190910>baseless categories>redundant>neurotic people>resolve cognitive dissonanceNo thanks. I've had enough pseudo-intellectual today.
>>12189653You're a pseud, and I've never used this term before.
Derrida would pretty much see Hegel just behind Heidegger and Husserl in terms of influence in his thought
The Analytics were right in just ignoring him. Wherever he rears his ugly head, philosophical discourse deteriorates.
>>12190791Are you schizoid? If that's the case then you exist inside this "imagining" thing you are talking about, that's the point I think you don't get and it goes back to my main question Why do you want to "prove" this things? All of these things are self evident, whats the point?
>>12190895This is irrelevant to my point.
>>12191065It's probably because Anglos speak English like a second language, thus Language itself is secondary to the Anglo. They find Hegel unassailable on grammatical grounds alone.
All philosophy post-1800 is absolutely worthless
>>12191093>then you exist inside this "imagining" thing you are talking aboutThat's not existance.>Why do you want to "prove" this things? I don't. I said if he can I can dismiss philosophy. >All of these things are self evidentExcept they are not.>whats the point?Why do you jump into discussions without reading what kicked those discussions off?
Since you're a bit slow: He said we don't need philosophy since we have science and I pointed out that science by itself can't even proove basic things like wether or not you exist. The fact that he was completely unable to tackled the point in question and took on faith that I exist shows you need philosophy to be equipped for these things. btw none of us exist.
>>12190560kek>>12190895I love Deleuze but Jesus Christ he has a bad reading of Hegel
>>12191158They were just following in Frege’s footsteps.
>>12191467Hegel would have agreed, for him Christ was a symbol of dialectics
>>12191492Still seems lazy to say that Dialectics is the ideology of Christianity
>>12191158That's existence because whatever you are, you are asking questions right now, that's self evident, and if you're not schizophrenic it doesn't matter if you are "imagining" it or not, again, whats the point with all this kind of reasoning? What is the purpose?
>>12189373Marx and Adorno? Derrida? Is "trashed" a translation of "aufhebung"?
>>12191504For Hegel is pretty much the other way around. Christianity is the highest of religion insofar as it has figured out dialectics and the movement of the geist, but it has no coscience of it. It is trapped in its form, in its figures. Hegel's system is its natural conclusion once it sheds its skin. That's pretty much the whole point of the last chapter of the Phenomenologie.
>>12189664hegel is the awkward guy who can't talk to girls at parties but is secretly packing an anaconda
>>12189418When you were in Hannover did you also read some Bulthaup?
>>12190555>prove to me you exist>prove to me>meyou already presupposed you
>>12189653>transcedental abstraction from which truth is derivedmarx was an atheist idiot.
>>12190555Probe to yourself you exist first
>>12189373>Why won't he just die already? His cult is quite honestly unexplainable.Because he solved the world. Words are words and arguments are arguments, and everything vanishes. Hegel understood the spirit of things: what's real, what's important. Whatever 'logical argument' you put against him is mere chatter unless you can create something of bigger meaning.
>>12191467>I love Deleuze but Jesus Christ he has a bad reading of Hegelyep, agree. deleuze thinks dialectics are necessary resentful in that it looks for the negative element in everything, whereas hegel, at least in philosophy of history introduction acknowledges this kind of problem