Does obscurantism show true mastery of a language or a cowardice

not necessarily. Literature can be art, and as such conveying it's underlying purpose can be secondary to that.

/thread.

>>8659979
Reduction is good

I understand the world in terms of
Chad
Stacy
SJW
Jews
Shills
Normie
Redpill
Cuck
White genocide

Basically the only words you need

>>8659979
Any examples of something particularly obscure about hegels writing? any common famous ones, or people just say most of his writing is? I mean there are some redeeming things he wrote right?

The entire point of philosophy is to elucidate obscurity, it just so happens, it seems, the reason some philosophical works are complex, is because apparently, the totality of reality is potentially complex, potentially obscure, potentially difficult to embark on the task of approaching some semi full elucidation

>>8659985

Fair enough. I posted this as a genuine question btw since I'm not as acquainted with literature (esp fiction) as I'd like to be, so sorry if this was obvious and not provocative enough of a thread

>>8660004

I'm actually taking a political philosophy class exclusively on Hegel this semester because I had those same questions. As a 20 year old undergrad (aka unqualified) I don't really know how anyone could get through something like Philosophy of Right without quite a bit of hand-holding, and even then every qualified hand-holder I've talked Hegel with seems to have very different understandings of the text

>>8660018
Can you mention one central, or powerful, or confusing idea of hegels that we can discuss?

>>8660078
Aufhebung

>>8660090

"In philosophy, aufheben is used by Hegel to explain what happens when a thesis and antithesis interact, and in this sense is translated mainly as "sublate""

"In Hegel, the term Aufhebung has the apparently contradictory implications of both preserving and changing, and eventually advancement (the German verb aufheben means "to cancel", "to keep" and "to pick up"). The tension between these senses suits what Hegel is trying to talk about. In sublation, a term or concept is both preserved and changed through its dialectical interplay with another term or concept. Sublation is the motor by which the dialectic functions."

"Hegel stated that Aufheben is uniquely exempt from the historical process in that it is supposed to be true for all time and never changes or develops further as in das absolute Wissen ("absolute knowledge")."

Yeah, I dont really know. At first, the first thing that came to mind reading about that term, was just the concept of -1, 0, 1.

-1 is a thing, 1 is a thing, when they are added together it forms 0, as the kind of dialectic, the antithesis and the thesis are both real and necessary for the real reaction between them to take place which is also its own realness (trancendent, or sublimated realness)... this is all me vaguely speculating.

What do you think it means?

It also seems like the term might refer to the concept of 'ideal', that which is lifted up, or elevated,

Is there a particular example of where he uses it you are not sure of, or at all? And any other examples of your interest?

>>8660123

OP here, not >>8660090 although he brings up a decent example.

My quips with Hegel are less about complicated ideas and more about his structure and style. In Philosophy of Right specifically, there are many themes and ideas that make sense (in textual isolation that is, not when compared to Hegel's actual beliefs or other works). These ideas aren't even necessarily complicated, they're just made a deciphering clusterfuck through arbitrarily interchangeable terminology (see anything related to the intersection of abstract/concrete, particular/universal, and subject/object; this is one example of something relatively simple that he stretches out almost exclusively in indirect ways) and a structure that can only be understood in a specific, nonlinear order that reads like a stream-of-conscious piece when it often shouldn't

>>8660169
I understand what you mean, as what you are saying, the essence of this op, is a common critique of his. I guess he thought what he was saying, or attempting to approach was very profound and lofty, and he didnt feel like he fully got to it well enough? Or, you think he just stream of consciousness rambled and was a shite editor?

Now I am curious about this:

>intersection of abstract/concrete, particular/universal, and subject/object

Any particular thing you can say about that, any of those, and what he thought of them? Any examples he gave we can discuss, any points of contention you think he is incorrect or, any profound points he makes regarding those? Any precise way you can put it?

Abstract:
concrete:

Particular:
Universal:

>>8660123
>thesis and antithesis
>used by Hegel

>>8660353
I am such a non-pseud-pleb, thanks for contributing

>>8660353
What do you think Hegels most profound idea was? (would love if you could present more than one)

Anything you staunchly agree or disagree with him on? Anything controversial?

>>8659979
Declaring things said and done by others to be cowardly for retarded reasons is the rallying cry of actual cowards with nothing to say and no real convictions.

>>8660380
Your welcome
>>8660395
I find it interesting to do a materialist reading of why the man portraited in the op belived that sculptures of people should be beautiful rather than lifelike.

>>8660408

Hm, (why cant they be both, some aim for beauty, some aim for lifelike, some relative mixtures of both, can argue such life like figures are beautiful, so dont really get what hes getting at any way, is that the dialectical process at work?.. though maybe his point is that he prefers, sculptures trying to portray an idealized human form, over life like? I mean this is not a very earth shattering contention)
Any other interesting points of contentison

>>8660123
Holy fuck I'm glad I chose to become an engineer. Philosophy is insufferable to me. But I do respect people who can get into it.

>>8659979
obscurantism is used by faggots who
1. don't really know what they're saying and so spews rhetoric diarrhoea that operates on their own schizophrenic logic and gets other pseud-crazies to worship them
2. intentionally clouds things to serve masturbatory stylistic purposes
3. hates people and wants to fuck with them
4. is subconsciously aware that what they're saying is completely retarded and thus hides it behind a veil of "i'm aware you might think i'm saying this ridiculous bullshit so here's a disclaimer that if you do you're just an idiot who can't understand it."
4th is the worst and 3rd is somewhat amusing though ultimately fuck all of it.

>>8659979
How is spreading information the goal of philosophy?

The goal of philosophy is finding the truth of things and our place in it. If a philosopher has to use and invent words to get us away from our prejudices and closer to the "truth" so be it.

Picking through Heidegger is one of the only ways a westerner could approach understanding Taoism because his crazy ass way of using German and Greek is essentially the only way to take in his thought without attaching all sorts of post-modern stupid to it.

File: 1437198798449.gif (3MB, 340x255px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 340x255px

>>8660123

think of anything (a self-consciousness) relating to something other or being-as-object. when relating to the concept/notion, the meaning of the two individuals are preserved as moments as they move forward in the dialectic, as something else.

an example of this is the final movement of the phenomenology when spirit finally becomes science. when things become objects for others, they still preserve their sense of their own. the positive/negative relation are two sides of the same coin.

i think my inability to explain this clearly shows that my understanding of hegel is pretty impoverished, but im excited and i want to know more.

>>8660380

Schiller was thesis -> antithesis -> synthesis.

Hegel was abstract -> negative -> concrete.