Having a thread series going through Phenomenology of the Spirit.

I took a class on Hegel. It took a whole semester to read the Phenomenology. Wish you the best of luck. In class, we went through it line by line. Each of us imagining our own symbolic reference plane. Hegel has been dear to my heart ever since.

>>8595946
I'll draw up diagrams as we go, it should help.

Thanks for your support.

>>8595913
ΟΥΤΙΣ you don't know anything about Hegel, get lost you total wannabe, Hegel's incredibly poetic and constantly bashes on 'abstraction, like mathematics!!!'; loser elitist namefag trying to start some Platonic Academy on a Pynchon forum, get some perspective

>>8596488
What the hell are you talking about? Hegel is not poetic at all, he's completely technical, and he doesn't bash on mathematics being abstract, he just says philosophy shouldn't emulate mathematical methodology.

>>8596498
He claims in the system-program fragment that reason demands poetry and that art is the only mediator between abstract self-concentrated mind and externality - writing applies also to art as it's an externality in which the Idea is embodied, hence Hegel claims in the lectures that poetry is far closer to the Idea than abstract descriptions of the Understanding.

You're obviously taking his complaints about vorstellungen too close to heart if you think that Hegel's Phenomenology to begin with is anything like some abstract system because even Hegel himself claimed that the PhG is a psychology. If you ever get to the end of the PhG you'll be at a loss to understand the 'Schadelstatte' of absolute spirit.

Also Hegel claims that formal mathematics and logic has been overcome in his dialectical logic and is itself irrational in that it's the metaphysics of the abstract understanding and not yet reason.

I will fist fuck ΟΥΤΙΣ at this conclusion of reading Phenomenology of Spirit.

>>8596513
Could you please recommend some more stuff for junior Hegelios?

I still want to run through the Phenomenology with your threads, OP. Hopefully they pick up.

>>8596498
Hegel has been so often distorted by the hegemony of marxist interpretations of him --- you have to realise that at the time Hegel was the ultimate German romantic, and that German romantics themselves considered themselves to be the progressive modernisers; this being at a time before industrialisation --- industrialisation being the point at which Hegel is picked up by marxism; German romantics didn't consider themselves to be going back to nature like the English poets, hence German romantic philosophy is full of attempts at system and architectonics and constant references to rational order (considered as teleology) and the Greeks.

>>8596516
I would read a good overview of the Germany of Hegel's time --- and remember that Hegel himself is not the secret 'key' as in the 'rational core of the dialectic from its mystical shell' as Marx would claim; Hegel's intellectual scene in Germany and his background among people like Goethe, Schelling, Schiller, Novalis --- this is very much considered the golden age of German literature and thought, and all these authors had a strong sense of dramatism and poetry, reading Hegel's lectures is good because he makes continual reference to these authors and summarizes their approaches, whereas texts like the Phenomenology can be more opaque as they were clearly accessible to the people he was criticising, and Hegel wants to claim that he is criticising only the results of past attempts and not the people themselves who attempted them: for Hegel had all the respect in the world for the men themselves who he considered to be his fellows in the German revolution in philosophy.

>>8596516
>>8596517
>>8596527
(cont.)

Hegel comes at the crossroad of the birth of modernity and is really on the cusp of its development; which is really why he had such a massive influence --- this is not to historicize Hegel, and you should really give him all the benefit of the doubt, for often we cringe at some of his opaque and mystical claims; but these are meant to be shocking and to confuse you so that Hegel can break loose of the old static clichés (such as the bona fide opposition between subjective and objective reality) and force you to think on your feet alongside him, this is where Hegel often allows himself to be misunderstood by people who take the evidence of the text uncritically as a factum brutum of Hegel's actual beliefs ---- when it's obvious he rejects all personalism in philosophy and more than anything regards it more as something social and spiritual than something internal or personal.

>>8596513
No one with any brain would consider Hegel's writing poetic. His poetry is at most an unusual phrase that pops up after dozens of densely technical pages. Please, feel free to quote a poetic paragraph by Hegel.

PhG is psychology, but not in any Freudian way. He discussion of the mechanics of psychology is extremely abstract. I've read the whole thing. The end discusses more concrete ideas, but even then it discusses their mechanics is extremely abstract terms.

>>8596517
I think anyone who has even faint knowledge of Hegel knows that much about his theory of history.

>>8596535
There is nothing really opaque or mystical in Phenomenology of the Spirit. Hegel was into the opaque and mystical, but that has zero to do with this particular work (which forms the foundation of the premise for his later work).

Best of luck OP, I'll join in over Christmas.

>>8596541
The way you understand Hegel's text as this clunky and 'technical' think just shows to what degree you're approaching Hegel as something external which you need to investigate and not as part of your own active thought.

Hegel defines the aesthetic as that by which the abstract Idea is embodied in the plastic form of external reality, and how this plastic form itself has its end in itself and concieves of itself as free (of having its particulars in unity with its universal), and hence as Ideal; this is very clearly shown in his style of writing which doesn't explicate a universal Notion from outside of the thought itself (so that the text would be just an explication of a doctrine) but is in identity in its phrasing and language so that Hegel's texts are not the explication of an Idea but a development of the Idea itself in the plasticity and freedom of thought, since the Idea is also determined by its medium.

>>8596557
(cont.)
It's a very naive and vague way to understand the German romantic conception of poetry to think poetry and poetic language is just something vague and out there and emotional as opposed to solid science, in fact much of Hegel's targets in the PhG are not philosophical theses but certain conceptions and moral & existential approaches to the world which he finds in other poets.

>>8596557
Just because I KNOW Hegel's text is technical (it absolutely is), doesn't mean I think it's "clunky". If it is surely, extremely technical.

It's aesthetic on the same sense other great highly technical works are, such as Aristotle's Organon or Euclid's Elements. Not in the sense that Thus Spoke Zarathustra is.

>>8596577

>It's aesthetic on the same sense other great highly technical works are, such as Aristotle's Organon or Euclid's Elements. Not in the sense that Thus Spoke Zarathustra is.

This is where I believe you're making an error, for those texts are texts of rules and axioms, and this is not what Hegel is after, crucial here is the distinction between Understanding as the faculty of rules and Reason proper, Hegel is more interested in the latter.

>>8596585
>and this is not what Hegel is after,
I know
>he just says philosophy shouldn't emulate mathematical methodology
>>8596498

Just stop. You know what I mean, you're off your rocker if you think Hegel is "poetic." I love him, but he's dense and technical.

Can you not be a namefag for the threads?

>Hegel
I really like his ontological reevaluation of perpetuating inelastic language forms of semiotic and lexical duplicity in terms of anarithmia. Reminds me of Kant's demarcation of hermeneutic interpretation, and the subjective dichotomy of metaphysical and structuralist deontology.
Well worth reading all of his works if you're a serious philosophy fan.

>>8596624
This is a Good Post.

>>8596591
>he isn't so familiar with Hegel that he pans across the pages in tune and rhythm with the bacchanalian stasimon of the dialectic

>>8596619
No. I will continued to be a namefag for the threads.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rk0xqDcHu04

>>8596624
Would have been funnier if it was about Hegel's actual writing.

>>8596657
Well then it's only going to go one way. You're going to try and lord over the discussion and push your reading. If you want to lecture rather than seminar then start a blog

>>8596689
Hegel isn't Nietzsche, there's not much flexibility as far as interpreting Phenomenology of the Spirit goes. It's like accusing of trying to push "my reading" of Hume.

>>8596699
I thought you would have at least argued against my accusation that you're going to dominate the conversation. Instead you just present evidence that you're not very good at reading philosophy. If you start the threads and try to present the work as rigidly as you think it is constructed, then you deserve to be ignored.

>>8596699
Again exactly what I was complaining about. You seem to think that Hegel is simply a matter of exposition, well, sorry but if there's nothing aporetic, indeterminate, and hence contentionable about you apparently orthodox Hegel then your little seminar is just a circlejerk for your namefag ego to preach to people.

Hegel is extremely flexible, and pretty much all scholarship at the moment criticises and runs against the schematist and system-builder cliche of what Hegel writes, (e.g. Houlgate, Pippin, Harris, Brandom and Sellars in anglosaxon philosophy and Zizek, Nancy, Malabou and Rose in european philosophy).

>>8596743
You're the guy who said Hegel is "poetic" and not technical?

You're talking out of your ass. Houlgate has the same view of Hegel that I do.

Next time you want to tackle Hegel, try actually tackling him as he taught himself to his students (who just engaged him as agree/disagree/improve on certain points--new "interpretations" were the students altering his philosophy and creating their own work, NOT giving a different reading of Hegel as in a different way to understand Hegel's own writings), not as people hundreds of years later tried to muddy him. This constant effort to muddy is what gives Continental philosophy such a bad name. I sort of blame Nietzsche.

>>8596761
It's not dumb that you're trying to be purist and methodological about Hegel.
It's dumb that you're a namefag on 4chan trying to start a """"seminar"""" in which you'll just play this weird reincarnation of Hegel the teacher that you've made up

>>8596761

What a confused mess of a post, you really don't know how to read philosophy at all, and you constantly appeal to authorities, my god, you have some superiority complex. In your previous threads you've been constantly preaching about how 'technical' and 'specialist' Hegel is, and "Houlgate has the same view of Hegel that I do." --- funny also since Houlgate in particular has been criticized by other scholars for interpreting Hegel into a 'kantian schematism' that Hegel himself constantly criticised! You have some authority then, telling us what Hegel the teacher actually taught, when your confused idea of him is indebted to a Kant scholar!

>>8596784
It's not a seminar, it's a discussion thread. You're absolutely free to bring your expertise to the table. But don't expect me to not call you out on your bullshit if you have some idea of a new interpretation of Hegel that isn't over a hundred years old. Hegel's work is not meant to be interpreted in multiple ways, it's meant to be interpreted in one way. Phenomenology of the Spirit is an argument for a specific point, and Hegel makes it by illustrating the motions of the mind. If you think you can bring precision into understanding it, please do, I warmly implore you. If you want to muddy the waters and turn Hegel into some relativistic circlejerk, please do not even show up or post. There is plenty to talk about in the five hundred pages of the PhG without having to confound it through relativism and death of the author.

>>8596800
>'muddy the waters'
>'relativistic'

The only one with the muddy and opaque understanding here is you who seem to think you have the Ur-text of the hegelian doctrine

>he misses the di- in dialectic this much

>>8596798
Do you even read people like Hegel, or do you just read opinions on him? Scratch that, do you even read commentators on Hegel, or just opinions on them as well? Because if you'd read Houlgate, you'd know he stresses how Hegel tears don't Kantian assumptions and redefines terms, specifically to avoid Kant's schemes, which he sees based on idealized conception of how the mind *ought* to work, instead of examining how the mind actually works.

>>8596802
You're not giving me dialectic, your posts are what Zizek calls the "Hegelian shit" that's expunged after sublation.

File: tfw retards consider becoming religious.jpg (112KB, 795x960px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 795x960px

>Hegel

Useful only for one things: the apotheosis of the state. Have fun bending over for every Napoleon that comes your way, too.

/pol/ is here, time to abandon ship.

>namefag's """Seminar""" is raided

Hard not to see the justice here desu

>>8596866
Hard not to feel sorry for anyone trying to do anything serious on this board.

>>8596866

yeah fuck discussion bring on the memes, boiiiiiis!!!!

xD

>>8596816
>what Zizek calls the "Hegelian shit"
What kind of toilet is shit shat in to?

>>8596880
>>8596885
Hi ΟΥΤΙΣ make sure you take your medications :)

>>8596699

>there isn't much flexibility for reading...

What the fuck, and I was about to buy Phenomology for this. I'm still gonna, but if the object here is to lecture me, I'm going to get said lecture somewhere where I can make sure the lecturer is qualified.