1) I am not, in actual fact, 12. On the contrary, I am of rule-based age to use this website.
2) I am 12 and why exactly is Hegel supposed to be a major, unavoidable capstone in philosophy? Please explain the big ideas in language that a teenager could understand.
3) In particular, please expound the history of the "Master/Slave dialectic" idea, that I assume is Hegel's, and compare this both with the "Master/Slave morality" which I assume is Nietzsche's, and furthermore with the probable "Alpha/Kek" oversimplification meme which invokes the above phrase, and is currently popular on 4chan and elsewhere.
4) Finally, was it Foucault who had the quotation about Hegel waiting patiently at the end of the roads, or is that from elsewhere? Quotes are notoriously poorly misattributed.
>>7370906
>I am 12 and why exactly is Hegel supposed to be a major, unavoidable capstone in philosophy?
He's usually treated these days (at least in America and Britain) as avoidable, but large swathes of philosophy since his time has been either developed out of his philosophy (Marx, elements of Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Derrida, the critical theorists, existentialism, certain strains of feminism) or has developed in response to him (most of the rest of Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, analytic philosophy).
He's worth studying either for historical reasons (a solid understanding of the emergence of analytical philosophy is very much helped by understanding his dialectic, which Russell at least had been a big proponent of in his youth), or because of direct relevance to subsequent movements in philosophy that haven't even necessarily moved past him so much as altered elements of his work.
>Please explain the big ideas in language that a teenager could understand.
Absolutely not possible. Philosophy generally is hard, since the entire pretense of it is a movement away from common opinions to (hopefully) knowledge or wisdom, but Hegel's work is especially difficult to simplify since the actual content of it resists such simplification.
>In particular, please expound the history of the "Master/Slave dialectic" idea, that I assume is Hegel's, and compare this both with the "Master/Slave morality" which I assume is Nietzsche's, and furthermore with the probable "Alpha/Kek" oversimplification meme which invokes the above phrase, and is currently popular on 4chan and elsewhere.
The Master-Slave dialectic is laid out in the Phenomenology of Spirit, and is (at least in largest part) an account of consciousness. It seems to be in particular an account of what happens to a consciousness when it encounters another consciousness (two people encountering each other, concretely speaking). Hegel probably developed some of it out of one of his big sources for his understanding of dialectic, Plato's dialogue Parmenides, wherein there's a short passage that uses them as an example to refute a certain understanding of things. But as per above, it'd be too much damn work to 1) summarize it 2) in a simple way 3) that does justice to it. If you must, read a commentary on it, or take a look at it itself; parts will certainly confuse you, but it's pretty short.
Nietzsche's understanding of it seems to be based on his readings of ancient literature; as a trained philologist, he's detailing historical phenomenon. I'm not sure his Master-Slave thesis is related to Hegel's.
>>7371065
Thanks for the post I guess, but the "absolutely not possible" pronouncement is patently absurd.
We might step away from my "teenager" prompt, or point to Hegel's alleged difficulty and opacity, but there are scholars and historians whose job and personal interest it is to know and understand a person's life course and how their thought developed, how their formal training, where their analogies might have come from. There exist wiki articles, "Hegel in 90 minutes", and so on which although might not be accessible to Dustin, do reduce in length. You could of course take exception to any one of these as being of poor quality, but the point is that any long work of any kind is, in principle, amenable to summary - the real question being what quantities and qualities of loss of information are acceptable for such a purpose.
We are on a Balinese Puppet Show, so I put it to you that some degredation is acceptable-we all know to take what is done here with a grain of salt, but advice given can be useful as a pointer.
He's gonna do so-many cases and instances of whatever it is he's talking about, and these will be amenable to some degree of accurate, honest simplification. I get the whole not-wanting-to-pleb-it-up with appeals to common-sense-as-oracle impulse, but at some point this is dishonest.
Obviously the simplest thing for me to do would be to just actually read the guy and track down idea-provenance to help myself, but the absurdity of the (one part of the) reply still stands.
>>7370906
first thing's first: ignore this poser >>7371065
assume we use concepts, let's call them "categories" after kant, to understand the world. if you want to hear the full story read the first critique, but i think this idea is commonplace by now.
building upon this, hegel's idea is now very simple: those concepts, our categories, have a life of their own. in other words, they can be deduced. this is the work of logic, but don't think of frege here. yes, you are moving from one thing to another, but not via mechanical rules. you move from one thing to another because you desire it.
this is why, in reality, logic is really the work of history. every concept has a blind spot, you see, something missing, and this is what produces desire. every concept is itching to move on to the next thing. the trick is to clarify the concepts that we live by and to find their blind spots. then you can predict where they will go, and likewise will be able to predict all of history.
there, now you understand hegel.
Basically Hegel came up with a philosophy that, in a very good way, explains how thinking about things could come to an end. So basically any "final project" of philosophy is rather Hegelian.
>>7371065
>please explain this philosopher's message in simple terms
>"Impossible!"
The biggest charlatan red flag. This is why Hegel and a large swath of continental philosophy is absolutely worthless. It is charlatanry hidden under a guise of mysticism and cult of personality. Chomsky is a faggot but at least he got one thing right in his skewering of Lacan and Derrida.
>>7371175
>>7371193
>>7371210
From the preface of Hegel's Phenomenology:
>>7371210
wow philosophers are actually just sophists!? what an original statement. thank you for your contribution to the world.
gb2reddit
lol op, the master/slave dialectic is literally the single easiest part of Hegel's project to understand. That's why so many people have investigated that tiny part of the Phenomenology of Spirit, because it's a stupidly simple dialectical opposition to make.
Engaging with Hegel is a lifetime project. Read Hegel by Frederick Beiser and/or Charles Taylor and then continue from there.
>>7371235
>>7371242
>>7371248
Etc. etc. Just fucking read him instead of asking people to baby you.
>>7371210
>The biggest charlatan red flag.
Ebin Trole M8y
hourly reminder that Hegel's main literary audience was composed of bankers, clerks, government officials, public servants and other middle class rabble with no background in philosophy
>>7371338
Hegel had no background in philosophy. Neither did Nietzsche.
>>7371365
>Neither did Nietzsche.
pft are you kidding the man was a philologist
he fapped to plato and aristotle for years before writing anything worthwhile
>>7371193
This sounds more like Hegel via Derrida.
>>7371381
i'm assuming you've read both. how so?
hegel is a degenerate
>>7371395
It seemed like the Spirit progression had a determined movement and it wasn't clear to me that the subject had a whole lot of potency in themselves on the path. I'm probably missing out on something if this is from Science of Logic or Philosophy of History though.
The desire and blind spot concepts are pretty big in Derrida, especially for the deconstructive method, but in that it was more a desire for coherence from incoherence, and the blind spots were things to be supplemented, but it's up for debate if there's progress in that form of filling blind spots.
>>7371410
Vorstellung or 'representation' is a physiological (more properly, an intellectual) process. you can't eschew it anymore than you can abandon sight or hearing
Hegel was a retard
>>7371426
if spirit is anything, it's the potency of the subject, because it is subjectivity that is human, lacking, and therefore on the move. the logic, on the other hand, is entirely independent of the subject, since it is the objective completion of the categories. spirit is the historical attainment of the logic.
deconstruction, whatever it is, isn't a dialectical movement. i just used those terms in their everyday sense. i do it for the kids.
>>7371467
>you can't eschew it anymore than you can abandon sight or hearing
you are right that intellect can be compared to other senses, but mediators say that you can eschew it during meditations, precisely because the intellect is a sense, like the other senses
>>7371481
>the objective completion of the categories.
what do you mean by this completion (and objective completion) ?
What the fuck even is 'dialectic'?
>>7370906
>Please explain the big ideas in language that a teenager could understand.
http://home.igc.org/~venceremos/whatheck.htm
>>7371589
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=define+dialectic
elements of kant, fichte and schelling combining - to make something not quite as good as either
>>7371592
Thanks for the link, it did a better job of illuminating what 'dialectic' is than wikipedia but isn't Hegel is reinventing the Buddhist wheel? The general idea of synthesis of opposites sounds like every Alan Watts lecture ever.
And where is this leading exactly? What is the endgame for Hegel?
>>7371467
Hegel's claim about Vorstellung is that it's too simplistic to deal with concepts, not that one should disregard it altogether.
You're a retard.
>>7372248
FUCKING READ HIM ALREADY YOU GODDAMN DILLETANTE
>>7371592
That "Red Scare" section is fucking comical
Literal propaganda
>>7371487
Is this image becoming a meme? Because this is just a pain to look at.
>>7371210
sorry your message had too big words, please rewrite it on the level of a two-year-olds understanding
>>7373442
got you FaM
>Hegel a shit
>>7372248
Pretty sure Hegel came before Alan Watts. The confusion you're having is that the Western reception of Buddhist thought has been largely shaped by Hegelian categories.
Hegel is similar to madhyamaka in his repudiation of Aristotelian logic. The moving concepts of Hegel obviate the three laws of identity, contradiction, and excluded middle, much like prajnaparamita. But beyond that the resemblance is basically nill.
Hegel refuses any practice and prefer to explore his deliriums. this is why he chooses to not understand stoicism, empiricism, buddhism.
his critic of what he think is buddhism is appalling.
>>7374256
>this is why he chooses to not understand stoicism, empiricism, buddhism
You've still never stated what you think is wrong precisely with his analysis of Stoicism, when asked in other threads. Wanna maybe bother to actually put your foot where your mouth is and show us you read more than maybe a page or a summary of his work?
bumpe
>>7371487
What stops Buddhism, then, of becoming just another charisma cult, where there is no external means of evaluating the degree of enlightenment?
>>7370906
Newsflash: Hegel's a moron and it's all bullshit. It took me a while to conclude this simple thing. Save your time and read better stuff instead.
>>7376063
Prove it.
>>7376078
Disprove it. He claims. He has to prove it. You defend it. Prove it to me.
>>7376086
>Disprove it. He claims. He has to prove it. You defend it. Prove it to me.
Uh, you came in here to share your "massive insight". You can prove it, since you understand Hegel so well that you know he's "a moron" and that his philosophy is "all bullshit".
This is a summary of Hegel's Philosophy of Mind:
http://philosophy.eserver.org/hegel-summary.html
Hegel uses some weird philosophical terminology so this might help you to understand Hegelianist talk:
http://www.london.ac.uk/fileadmin/documents/students/philosophy/ba_course_materials/ba_19thc_hegel_glossary_01.pdf
If you want to "get" Hegel it's best to read Hegelians, work your way backwards to Hegel
The concluding chapter of Marx's 1844 Manuscripts [Marxist humanism]
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/preface.htm
Moses Hess's The Essence of Money [humanism]
https://www.marxists.org/archive/hess/1845/essence-money.htm
The opening chapter of Feuerbach's The Essence of Christianity [humanism]
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/feuerbach/works/essence/index.htm
Max Stirner's The Ego and His Own [anti-humanism, what really ends Hegelianism]
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-the-ego-and-his-own
Nietzsche didn't like dialectic. Probably because of Schopenhauers influence on him. Read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right
To Nietzsche the slave just eventually kills the master, there is no synthesis like in Hegels thesis-antithesis-synthesis
>>7371175
>the "absolutely not possible" pronouncement is patently absurd.
It isn't. Unless you're familiar with the philosophers before Hegel, why he arrives to the conclusions he arrived, why he chose such method instead of other, etc. will make no sense.
And if you were familiar with philosophy, you wouldn't be asking this.
Anyway, Singer's Intro to Hegel (Oxford Short Intros) is okay overall.
>>7376136
I'm well read in Stirner but haven't studied a lot of Hegel. Can you explain further how Stirner's antihumanism negates or ends Hegelianism?
>>7376415
Download 'The Nihilistic Egoist: Max Stirner' and jump to pg. 39 and read from there
>Whereas for Hegel the terminus and consummation of history is signified by the self fulfillment of sovereign Spirit in absolute freedom, for Stirner it is the self-realization of The Unique One in and through his property which constitutes the natural denouement of philosophical thought.
>>7370906
Judging from your affected language and age, I think that you just need to spend more time reading.
>>7371197
>Any "final project of philosophy is Hegelian"
>Wittgenstein
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel goes up to the counter and gives a tremendously long custom order in German, specifying exactly how much of each sort of syrup he wants, various espresso shots, cream in exactly the right pattern, and a bunch of toppings, all added in a specific order at a specific temperature. The barista can’t follow him, so just gives up and hands him a small plain coffee. He walks away. The people behind him in line are very impressed with his apparent expertise, and they all order the same thing Hegel got. The barista gives each of them a small plain coffee, and they all remark on how delicious it tastes and what a remarkable coffee connoisseur that Hegel is. “The Hegel” becomes a new Starbucks special and is wildly popular for the next seventy years.
>>7371210
>2015
>uses the word "Charlatan" unironically
>>7376727
>DO YOU GET IT GUYS THE EMPEROR IS NAKED
>No I've never read Hegel. Why do you ask?
>>7376366
Meanwhile I actually minored in philosophy, others in this thread also called bullshit on the same thing, and finally, multiple summaries of Hegel (including the one that you yourself just suggested) have been provided throughout the thread, all of which put together B's TFO of your assertion.
>>7376828
No one said summaries weren't possible, but OP's retarded demand that anons "explain the big ideas in language that a teenager could understand" is a fucking stupid demand to make on an image board, the posters of which can barely motivate themselves to even refer concretely to the texts of the philosophers they discuss.
Also:
>I MINORED IN PHILOSOPHY GUYS I TOTALLY KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT COMPARED TO PEOPLE WHO BOTHERED TO STUDY HEGEL IN-DEPTH
>>7376734
Why not use the word? Does it trigger your charlatanism?
>>7376875
Because those who use it is are displaying exactly what they accuse others of with the word.
>>7376894
I'll play. First I will confess I've never read any Hegel because I was warned not to as his work was never meant to be understood, an apt description and I'll paraphrase Nietzsche, stare into the abyss and the abyss stares into you...Hegel wrote gibberish obfuscating the rehashed theme of the Janus head, not even very original. Hegel along with Marx and Engels were coadjutors of National Roman Catholic Communism invented and perfected in South America starting with the reductions of Paraguay and ending in the expulsion of Jesuits starting about 1767.
It all had to be obfuscated of course to protect the mother church but Hegel primarily pushes the Hegelian' dialect. The thesis, an anti-thesis and synthesis. The most obvious example would be WW2, national Catholic communism under Jesuit Stalin meets national Catholic socialism under Jesuit Himmler and Catholic dictators Hitler, Franco, Mussolini et al. The synthesis we live under today in the west is global catholic socialism - global fascism. This is but one very large example however the west now revolves around dialects, the US elections, the gun, abortion, terrorism, global warming and many other dialects form up the entire spectrum of debate in the media today - no third options only synthesis of two often bad choices. By removing any third option a future can be decided upon - global totalitarianism for example and as Hegel said, history unfolded through the dialect to meet that end. A means to an end was Hegel and his propagandized popularity, why university students who are forced to study his work could be classified as mentally ill in some cases.
>>7376873
>No one said summaries weren't possible
Leaving pedantry between "teenagers" and "summary" aside, the above poster's blunt language amounts to exactly that, which I already correctly addressed >>7371175 . The rest of his post sounds reasonable, though.
>but OP's retarded etc is fucking stupid gnash-garbl-fargl
That various posters >>7371065 seem >>7371193 to have managed >>7371197>>7371241 to do >>7376136 exactly that, in various coherent ways, puts the lie to your idea that my thing was stupid or unreasonable. Where you see a childish demand, there was instead a prompt for simple language, which has been provided.
So now that you've doubled-down getting mad and being wrong, you just couldn't resist predictably going for the ad-hom that I set you up for (hm, should I include that? Oh sure, let's see if he rages, I bet he'll rage along with being wrong. Oh shit, he went for it!) The rage is even disingenuous since the OP makes it clear that I don't know from Hegel (and you know this already), but you seem to be too mad about being wrong by this point and having been called out on it.
>>7376966
>and I'll paraphrase Nietzsche, stare into the abyss and the abyss stares into you...
Stopped reading there
>>7376966
>The thesis, an anti-thesis and synthesis.
That's not a thing in Hegel. It used to get used more often in describing Hegel's philosophy, but scholars now recognize it as a mischaracterization of his work.
>>7377017
Fucking kill yourself.
I even agree with the content of what you're saying, but the way you've said it is so cringeworthy that you should go fucking kill yourself.
>>7377038
>That's not a thing in Hegel. It used to get used more often in describing Hegel's philosophy, but scholars now recognize it as a mischaracterization of his work.
I trust frederick engels a little more than contemporary liebral scholars
>>7376966
>I've never read Hegel
>I don't understand Nietzche
I can't get past the second sentence
>>7377047
>someone else hates my writing style but is forced, /forced/ to agree with my position in the retard fight
muahmwahaamwah oh god it's so delicious. I get the concession (all that matters, not from the above guy but still), but...
Surely even you can see that he upped the cunt ante >>7376873 once I called him out the first time, so I was simply matching his cuntitude with the added benefit of being in the right.
Of course it's all a pointless tard fight since it's not discussing Hegel in simple language, which has been helpfully done by several other higher-minded anons.
>>7377080
Wow. You should still go fucking kill yourself. What, are you actually 12?
bum
>>7371490
total, absolute self-consciousness
>>7371175
>Balinese Puppet Show
I hope when I'm old something rekindles the memory of this meme in me and I laugh. maybe I'll send myself an email in years
>>7371487
>abrahamic relgions
>not eternally irreconcilable with dharmic religions
niga...............
