>>80314779
Its funny its gotten to the point where on Wikipedia if I am researching the ideas of someone who is celebrated but long-term had an evil/negative effect I immediately look to the bottom of their page to see if they were/are a jew, even as a jew myself, and if they aren't if any jews inspired them.

Looks like Hegel/Marxism-lite. History isn't a straight line progress.

>>80314887
Tempting.

I think William James had a (questionable) belief that beliefs in themselves should be long term positive, which imo is fine if the belief is grounded in reason or well justified.

But Jews are hungry for thinkers that are pure Jewish, so they're hesitant to question Jews, their effects and even tolerate non-Jews from questioning them. It's actually a tribalism thing, which is funny because by this guy's same theory that puts them before folk, state and moral law.

BTW ours is moral law. Few act intuitively moral, which was actually the goal of Jesus. Instead they're currently shamed into morality which is why so few people recognise the shamers as immoral.

>>80316030
I should have read Hegel in college but I deliberately didn't because he seemed boring and long-winded and I wanted to read sociology and Durkheim instead. So my minimal understanding of Hegel is that he proposed an update to Englishtenment theory that people manage to construe as both left and right, so therefore he was a template for anyone who wanted to present subversive ideas and try to have them accepted by both sides, Stalin, Hitler, Soros

>>80316030
Yeah but I'm a half jew so I'm always in the middle and questioning both sides, maybe?

>>80316633
No, honestly, you should not read Hegel. You should read books influenced or directly about Hegel, you should watch videos and read articles on Hegel, but you will not read Hegel itself. The same effect is found with Heidegger.

You'll have the same problem I have with actually reading philosophers, they end up not making real sense and you end up interpreting what you want to interpret or the simplest interpretation.

Hell, you should even read Marx on Hegel but not even Marx on Marxism!

>so therefore he was a template for anyone who wanted to present subversive ideas
My thoughts here is that Hegel was so hard to understand that this effect was unlikely to be deliberate. When this is done deliberately it's post structualism and JacquesDerrida was a vicious troll.

>>80316712
I'll destroy the rest of your life.

If you become mediocre, you'll be considered white, but if you achieve greatness you'll suddenly be welcomed as a complete Jew. There are many Jews out there who didn't identify as Jewish, didn't feel Jewish... Until they achieved greatness.

>>80317521
That's what I did. I read Marx instead of Hegel. Hegel just seemed like a genuine schizophrenic to me from Wikipedia who basically said everything and therefor you could get anything out of it that you wanted, rather than that he was making some grander point that people just failed to mostly understand. I'm saying I think he's deliberate and a troll, and I fucking LOVE Derrida how DARE YOU!!!!!

Oh no my dad converted and my mom is a jew so I fully count,and I still am religious but I am so outside of their mainstream socially that I have nothing to lose from questioning them in hopes of a brighter future.

>>80314779
I'm only familiar with his idea of "The Stranger"
>The stranger will thus not be considered here in the usual sense of the term, as the wanderer who comes today and goes tomorrow, but rather as the man who comes today and stays tomorrow – the potential wanderer, so the speak, who , although he has gone no further, has not quite got over the freedom of coming and going. He is fixed within a certain spatial circle – or within a group whose boundaries are analogous to spatial boundaries – but his position within it is fundamentally affected by the fact that he does not belong in it initially and that be brings qualities into it that are not, and cannot be, indigenous to it. In the whole of economic activity the stranger makes his appearance everywhere as a trader, and the trader makes his as a stranger. As long as production for one’s own needs is the general rule, or products are exchanged within a relatively small circle, there is no need for a middleman within the group. A trader is required only for goods produced outside the group.
He was pretty much writing about Jews during the 19th century.

>>80317749
He was making a grander point, I believe he may have been proving God via proving human group consciousness. When you introduce God into your philosophy, it almost always leads you to insanity and I say this as a theist. In this world, it might even be preferable just to tell everyone you're an atheist and leave God out of it.

Derrida pioneered post structuralism which is what makes feminism extremely hard to debate because they've used Derrida to redefine everything. If you follow their common ground, you lose by default. If you follow the structural common grounds they'll insult your position and basically ad hominem you, even pointing out the ad hominem leads them to yell about buzzwords or how it's not an ad hominem because their opinions are expert opinions because vagina.

I digress, my issue with post structuralism is that it's made debate and argument with post structuralists absolutely impossible.

I thought Soros got it from Karl Popper.

>>80319074
Yes but the specific concept of an Open Society was a goy who was inspired by a jew, the rabbit hole is always deeper than you think and darker than you would expect, but exactly what you would imagine, is what I have learned from my jewish upbringing. I think it helps that my dad converted and so had an essentially non-religious but nominally Christian upbringing so I can see how a non-jew views and interacts with jews as one of them very closely.