did this guy rip off from the gnostics?
>>335754
did the gnostics rip off from him?
>>335756
The Gnostics were from Antiquity
>>335762
then how did hegel approximate his views to theirs?
same with schopenhauer, though schopenhauer was influenced by eastern religions which influenced gnosticism in antiquity, so that sort of explains itself
>>335739
Well he didn't rip off their teachings, but his the occult concepts of his philosophy are present in paganism and ceremonial black magic all through history. It, along with the philosophers that champion these ideals, are the cancer killing the West. They are the source of the systemic moral infections that will likely strip us of self awareness and make us as beasts for thousands of years.
>>335785
>along with the philosophers that champion these ideals
who?
>>335739
Hegel was a fag. Dialectics are also gay.
>>335789
Per-uh-cleetus and the supreme fucking edgelord of darkness Crowley. Others.
>>335802
Are these guys really the source of moral infections? wasn't it cultural marxism combined with capitalism?
>>335769
Influenced by /=/ rip off
>>335807
>cultural marxism
Don't take /pol/ memes so seriously
>>335812
Well, I'm talking about feminism, forced acceptance of immigration, rampant sex industry, etc. or is that not a source of "moral decay"?
>>335814
Helping of those in need is a Christian moral. Feminism started before the Frankfurt school (which wasn't some Jew cult planning on destroying the West). Sex industry is from horny boys and the ease of access.
>>335836
so what does "systemic moral infections" mean to you?
>>335814
>moral decay
lmao
>>335785
>obscure occult teachings that nobody follows are cancer killing the west
come on
>>336022
>He doesn't know about Bömian theology's Marxo-Hegelian legacy
>He doesn't realize Hegelianism is an influential legal philosophy in the US and has been since the 1800s
>He doesn't get Hegel
>>335837
Nothing.
>>335756
did gnostics rip off from parmenides?
Gnostics literally misread Plato. Plotinus blew them the fuck out.
>>336263
No. Stop saying 'rip off' as well. It's like saying the Christians ripped off the Talmud.
![images[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Ilqwkkm.jpg "images[1].jpg")
>>335807
>>335807
You've described Hegelianism, actually.
>>335739
So is there any redeeming quality to his teachings, even if we include a "history of philosophy" perspective?
>>336294
If we include a history of philosophy perspective, he's pretty much top-tier. His pedagogical methods were also pretty based, from what I understand, and had more to do with his success than the content of his books did.
>>335807
Cultural Marxism is arguably Hegelianism since it would be Marxism without the materialism. Then again, the people using the term aren't exactly well versed in philosophy.
>>336328
Why not provide a proper exegesis of the Hegelian system, then?
>>336322
Cultural Marxism is not a thing. It's just a term that conspiracytards have made.
The real term is "critical theory", and has much more to do with criticizing institutions and society in general, to be called "cultural" anything, or for that matter "Marxism".
>>336344
Not relevant really, take your cultural marxism meme and leave.
>>336354
>>336356
>You used a name I dislike to describe a phenomenon, so that phenomenon must not exist
>The foudning members of the Frankfurt school are the only people whose intentions matter when deciding whether or not critical theory is connected to chaotic student movements on American college campuses
>>335739
https://mega.nz/#!hcQClJgY!X0liSwpaV4HDbVZedClJnb9Umxf8TjSTiRQcN8R9YVM
>Glenn Alexander Magee's pathbreaking book argues that Hegel was decisively influenced by the Hermetic tradition, a body of thought with roots in Greco-Roman Egypt. Magee traces the influence on Hegel of such Hermetic thinkers as Baader, Böhme, Bruno, and Paracelsus, and fascination with occult and paranormal phenomena. Hegel and the Hermetic Tradition covers Hegel's philosophical corpus and shows that his engagement with Hermeticism lasted throughout his career and intensified during his final years in Berlin. Viewing Hegel as a Hermetic thinker has implications for a more complete understanding of the modern philosophical tradition, and German idealism in particular.
>>336391
>You used a name I dislike to describe a phenomenon, so that phenomenon must not exist
But that's not what is meant when the average conspiritard says "Cultural Marxism".
He is clearly intending to spread disinfo by using that name instead of calling a spade for a spade and using it's right name.
Critical theory is the correct term, and it comes from a collection of people that can neither be claimed to be "cultural" anything, nor Marxists.
Moreover, a school of philosophers and sociologists, can hardly be blamed for "chaotic student movements on American college campuses".
>>336406
>Moreover, a school of philosophers and sociologists, can hardly be blamed for "chaotic student movements on American college campuses".
Shut up you fucking Jew.
>>336406
You're an idiot. Cultural Marxism doesn't just refer to critical theory. It's actually something you'd argue against if you weren't so blinded by ideology. It's a form of thought that involves criticism of the superstructure of society and not the base. No, it isn't in keeping with Marxist thought so the name is inaccurate (again, see my criticism of your knee-jerk reactions: the name some have used in this thread is inaccurate, so you just cry about how there can't be anything called 'cultural Marxism' since Marxism is a critique primsrily of the base rather than the superstructure), but the superstructure is precisely the cultural sphere of any society. There are people who act in accordance with the principles associated with this bastardized form of academic Marxism, which is a product not a malice on the part of the Frankfurt school but of unpreparedness on the part of conservative American university faculties for the explosion of countercultural energy that followed university reforms in the late 60's and 70's. Americans were not theoretically prepared for European leftist thought when it came here, but it came to our shores anyway, and now those who could rectify things and help us make sense of what we don't understand get angry when we say we don't understand it. You're the problem with the left.
>>336427
*tips stahlhelm*
>>336429
Blah Blah Blah: the post.
>>336446
Nice response, buddy. Keep being a fool.
>>336458
That's an interesting book, but how significant do you think its argument is? The author talks about Goethe being an even more involved alchemist and hermeticist than Hegel and how it was pretty much in fashion in Germany at that time. Aside from providing an interesting background about an overlooked part of philosophical history, is that book really good? And how many people have cited it? I'm not contesting the argument at all, just asking how significant you think it is for Hegel scholarship.
>>336494
Partially. It's not like it's an open and shut case. There's supporting evidence in "Rose Cross and the Age of Reason", though the specific assertions about Hegel get really conjectural in bits. From what I got out of the text it's probably just as likely that he was well traveled in the circles that explored these topics; not a full blown follower of them himself but conversant enough to lift some concepts and expand on them.
>Goethe
Was a confirmed initiated of the Bavarian Illuminati and wrote back and forth to Schiller on the topic of beauty in VERY Kabbalistic terms, and the letters were turned into "Aesthetic Education of Man".
I've not a run a citation check, I'm not an academic philosopher, I got my degree in stiffer material and don't really care if dude's book is going to overturn a lot of scholarship.
Even if the case for Hegel was airtight, I doubt it'd have been cited a whole hell of a lot, I could be wrong though, just haven't checked.
And the book was good enough to keep me engaged through (the majority) of it.
>>336512
I feel pretty much the same about 2/3 of the way through. As someone who's looked into those branches of philosophical esotericism a little bit, I found it kind of an illuminating read, since it made Hegel less spooky by showing his contact with discourses that aren't usually associated with philosophy. The information about those traditions was interesting, too.
I've never actually read Goethe but I find his Illuminati connection really interesting. It's fascinating how the German idealists and their friends were so connected to important stuff happening in their time. Romanticism must have been a hell of a drug.
>>336494
in "romantic school" heinrich heine already mentioned jacob böhme and paracelsus as shibboleths of german romantic movement. it's not a big discovery, nor is it THE determining influence of german romanticism or idealism.
this here >>336402 sounds like a book written for people who don't have endurance or courage to read the authors directly and instead need some "bogeyman" narrative like they do with everything complex and sophisticated.
>>336548
He's a little less objective about the material than a good history would warrant. It also isn't clear what angle the author wants to make his argument from. It could be a historical or philosophical one, but it ends up coming off like a conspiracy theory because of the content (Illuminati, alchemy, hermeticism, and Prussian philosophers associated with totalitarianism) every time he tries to actually puts a premise forward.
>>336546
If you're interested in Weishaupt's Perfectibilists, there's a new book out called "Secret School of Wisdom" that's the first mostly complete translation of the entire ritual corpus. With some elbow grease it can be used to reactivate the order.
I've read Goethe but not in much detail. Schiller, though, is great:
https://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/schiller-education.asp
Introduction to Secret School, just gives some history and context, and is missing some pages:
https://mega.nz/#!lQgz1JrC!4n7_K-YCkJxDFbqTF09O3CcbS4Nuj5PwkksQMnrvVjc
>>336548
Well I did critique the thing about being shaky and conjectural, I just thought it was interesting and have a copy on hand.
>>336556
I think that might be a bit more of your own understanding and exposure to the concepts than a real conspiratorial bent in the book. People get up to these things all the time without being sinister or conspiratorial.
>>336576
>I think that might be a bit more of your own understanding and exposure to the concepts than a real conspiratorial bent in the book
Probably.
