Please note: because you're not logged in, you may be viewing older cached versions of pages which are served up to reduce server load.
Print G. Hegel - RIP | |
|
DaveO
banned Usergroup: Members Joined: Nov 26, 2003 Location: New Jersey, USA Total Topics: 71 Total Posts: 318 |
 #1
Hegel's three-step development (thesis, antithesis, synthesis) led to two opposing ideologies. If you wanted to conserve the latest synthesis, as history's finest development, then you were a Hegelian of the Right. The present-day State and its order was the high point of human progress. This led to Naziism and it died in 1945. If you wanted to continue the three-step movement and overthrow the existing State, creating a new synthesis, then you were a revolutionary Hegelian of the Left. This led to Marxist-Leninist Communism and it died in 1989. Would anyone today seriously believe that history is moving forward in defined stages toward some final synthesis? Has the human race progressed? Are we basically the same as our ancestors? |
|
Tobias
Metaphysical exorcist  Usergroup: Moderators Joined: Feb 17, 2003 Location: Just rub the mirror Total Topics: 62 Total Posts: 6068 |
#2
DaveO, the synthesis is never final. The synthesis functions as a new thesis, which will in turn be opposed. I don't see why even right wing Hegeliansim led to nazism, given the 150 years bewteen Hegels writing and the rise of fascism. It is true Marx derived his dieas from Hegel, but be careful with equating them with Hegel's ideas. The language you use 'thesis antithesis and synthesis, is more Marxist than Hegelian. Besides isn't it a little early to proclaim the death of the dialectic movement on world scale? We are no where near the end, if there is one. Globalist capitalism overcame the struggle of state run militarism and corporate capitalism, but will not find this global capitalist movement its antithesis in global terrorsim? We can only say if Hegel was right about the end of history when we reach that end, ironically. Untill that I think his model as a model is valuable. Look for instance at the crisis of legal positivism. When postmodernism and analytical philosophy demolished oneanother thoroughly I predict a revival of Hegelianism, but of course in a slightly different guise /eternal recurrence of the same  regards Tobi "The Power of Kant compels you" "The Power of Kant compels you" "The Power of Kant compels you" |
|
darkcrow
Tenured Poster  Usergroup: Sponsors Joined: Feb 08, 2003 Location: San Diego Total Topics: 97 Total Posts: 4256 |
#3
Tobias wrote: DaveO, the synthesis is never final. The synthesis functions as a new thesis, which will in turn be opposed. I don't see why even right wing Hegeliansim led to nazism, given the 150 years bewteen Hegels writing and the rise of fascism. It is true Marx derived his dieas from Hegel, but be careful with equating them with Hegel's ideas. The language you use 'thesis antithesis and synthesis, is more Marxist than Hegelian. Besides isn't it a little early to proclaim the death of the dialectic movement on world scale? We are no where near the end, if there is one. Globalist capitalism overcame the struggle of state run militarism and corporate capitalism, but will not find this global capitalist movement its antithesis in global terrorsim? We can only say if Hegel was right about the end of history when we reach that end, ironically. Untill that I think his model as a model is valuable. Look for instance at the crisis of legal positivism. When postmodernism and analytical philosophy demolished oneanother thoroughly I predict a revival of Hegelianism, but of course in a slightly different guise /eternal recurrence of the same regards Tobi That’s all news to me, I thought postmodernism had already demolished analytical philosophy; at least the part of AP that places truth in one frame of reference. Has not everyone heard of Shakespeare? Literature and the Arts, receiving truth through Music and Painting? Meditation, insight, mysticism, inspiration, the coming of truth through love? Coming to knowledge through the experience of mercy, compassion, irrational insights? "To the success of our hopeless task." |
|
DaveO
banned Usergroup: Members Joined: Nov 26, 2003 Location: New Jersey, USA Total Topics: 71 Total Posts: 318 |
#4
Tobias wrote: >I don't see why even right wing Hegeliansim led to nazism Hegel wrote that the final goal of history had been attained in a state like the Prussian Germany of 1830. The development went from the Orient to Greece to Rome, ending in Germany. Conservative Right-wing Hegelians wanted to preserve this state as the final synthesis. Values became rigid. Further development ceased. The individual was subservient to this state, which was controlled by a World-historical individual. Hegel's three-step movement was evident in the 3 Reichs. The First Reich was Barbarossa's Holy Roman Empire. It unsuccessfully attempted to form a German nation. The Second Reich was Bismarck's Germany. It unsuccessfully attempted to solve burgeoning social problems. The synthesis was the Third Reich, National Socialism. Since the final goal was reached, it was claimed that it would last a thousand years. Conserving the Prussian militaristic German state was the goal of Naziism. Hegel's ideas supported and gave encouragement to their efforts. |
|
Nihilistic Locomotive
Coprophagic coprophobic  Usergroup: Members Joined: Nov 27, 2003 Total Topics: 69 Total Posts: 1809 |
#5
Continue with the facts DaveO, they are insightful and we need more of them. Though I'm not too sure as to what is meant by postmodern, the term being broad enough to describe philosophical means for considering political histories, art movements, and individual psychologies. Postmodernism goes hand in hand with the tendancy to view things within a dialectic; the postmodern perspective is less an attempt at destroying analytical thought, it has become a motive to reconcile, by synthesis, things which we consider at the outset antagonistic. Things eventually become their opposite. Thus postmodernisms, the pastiche's and doubts of the philosopher are in a sense products of the overworked analytic mind, perhaps giving us sense to regard our subconscious intent. One interesting Hegelian dialectic principle cites the elimination of the motivating factors for cultural change, ie. as soon as the revolution occurs we have forgotten what things were like before the revolution, thus the intent to become dies out in the becoming. The Hegelian dialectic is ground breaking in my view and I don't think it wrong to equate a sense of the postmodern condition of individuals in society as the latent will of the society itself to become other than what it is. There are scores of examples of how an entity 'becoming,' like you or me, finds a static condition of cicularity much more comfortable to human sensibilities. Thus stasis, or 'justification' in the name of a nameless good. We learn eveyday what is good by being told what images constitute a healthy lifestyle, consumerisms, a certain amount of capital, etc... Marxism does a neat example of postulating the psychology that arises from a static nominal democracy. It marks the subsumed and superseded 'alien' quality that elevates goods, redeems use value as concomittant with rarities. We have a glimpse of what art use to be, an attempt at motivating and changing. Marxism abounds in suitable, unescapable revelations of what motivates us, or what we motivate. The complexities are astounding, vague, and dip into the conditions of the modern person. How do we percieve without a sense of value? Where does this value originate, how has it changed? This stuff is very interesting. What was the state of man but the sensory overload of his own scatological con(fusion)s? Whoa man! |
|
Nihilistic Locomotive
Coprophagic coprophobic Usergroup: Members Joined: Nov 27, 2003 Total Topics: 69 Total Posts: 1809 |
#6
http://nord.twu.net/acl A: The [your nation goes here] System of Political Economy (List 1841)
B: state controlled world communism C: state controlled global communitarianism. What was the state of man but the sensory overload of his own scatological con(fusion)s? Whoa man! |
|
Tobias
Metaphysical exorcist Usergroup: Moderators Joined: Feb 17, 2003 Location: Just rub the mirror Total Topics: 62 Total Posts: 6068 |
#7
Well the only dialectic I could see leading to Nazism, is one that goes downwards. The modern but weak social democracy of the Weimar republic was obliterated by the conservatives on the right (the more or less Prussian elite of the old German army) and the communists on the left. The sinking of Weimar paved the way for the national socialists (nothing like Hegel's 'aufhebung' but a blatant contradictio in terminis). Prussia was an intellectualistic state Nazism is innimical to intellectualism, it was in fact highly mystical in outlook. The adherents of the NSDAP were not the conservatives, but the impoverished lumpenproletariat. Remember where Hitler and his Nazi party come from Austria and Bavaria, long term rivals of Prussia. It was a combination of the worst that created Nazism, Prussian old fashioned millitarism and Bavarian herd mentality. Dialectics, well might be, but the wrong way around. It is in fact a schoolbook example of the Nietzschean ideas of resentment and a warning about social marginalization, not I think a critical test of Hegels ideas. regards Tobi "The Power of Kant compels you" "The Power of Kant compels you" "The Power of Kant compels you" |
|
DaveO
banned Usergroup: Members Joined: Nov 26, 2003 Location: New Jersey, USA Total Topics: 71 Total Posts: 318 |
#8
Tobias wrote: >the national socialists ... a blatant contradictio in terminis Isn't a Hegelian synthesis supposed to be a union of contradictory opposites? Hegel's simplistic 3-step waltz of history is quite a creation. I understand that it was borrowed from Fichte. If every event is part of such a phase, why bother to try to change anything? E.g., if islamic terrorism is some kind of antithesis to western "culture," why endanger yourself to try to stop it. It is just a Hegelian phase that will eventually be incorporated into some synthesis. Time synthesizes all. To say "...the synthesis is never final..." is surely to say more than anyone could know. Kant fought against such dogmatic statements with his transcendental idealism. But, of course, he is so old-fashioned, having been part of some phase that was synthesized long ago. How does the 3-step development work? Is it directed from within? Does every particle of matter contain instructions, like a kind of genetic code? Is it directed from outside? If so, by whom? Absolute Spirit? God? Allah? Zeus? Keeping track of every event in order to make sure that it conforms to the triad must be a wearisome full-time job requiring a large data processing department. Would it be worth the trouble, just to have every movement conform to such a 3-part development? |
|
Tobias
Metaphysical exorcist Usergroup: Moderators Joined: Feb 17, 2003 Location: Just rub the mirror Total Topics: 62 Total Posts: 6068 |
#9
yes a union of contradictory opposites that overcomes itself and becomes something in which the originals aren't forgotten but kept, while the union is at the same time more meaningful than the combination of the two premisses. Nationalism and socialism might be overcome in their conflict, but not in Nazism. Nazism is a form of mysticism innimical to any criticism. Nazism is a dogmatic position and therefore unfit to have a place in a Hegelianm dialectic. Of course Nazism is the result of a dialectic movement, an impoverished humiliated state rising up against the powers that humiliated it. Nazism cannot be seen as an end-state at all, not by any Hegelian. The three step development is a movement of reality, yes. Reality however is far to big to grasp totally, therefore we design models and that is what dialectic in the very crude form you display it here is. Does every particle of matter holds instructions? No of course not, but our thinking does and so we perceive a reaction to every action. Absolute spirit is the movement itself. It states that the reactions on every action is predictable and itself following a rational, understandable path. We don't bother to change this three step waltz as you call it, we are forced to join it. So from our fight (or the US's fight) against terrorism a new kind of order will arise, yes. Kants transcendental philosophy is itself a synthesis between idealism and empiricism. It however is static. What Hegel showed was that this proces was not static but dynamic. That the sythesis is never final is not that difficult to know, it follows from the system. Every synthesis is itself a thesis, which will inspire an antithesis. Well if you think Hegel is symplistic try reading him. Either you are a genius or your reading of Hegel is itself simplistic. I assure you there is little simplicity in Hegel. regards Tobi "The Power of Kant compels you" "The Power of Kant compels you" "The Power of Kant compels you" |
|
DaveO
banned Usergroup: Members Joined: Nov 26, 2003 Location: New Jersey, USA Total Topics: 71 Total Posts: 318 |
#10
This Hegel won't RIP. That, in itself, is worthy of study. I understand that almost everything that we know about his ideas comes from lecture notes by his students. That's very unusual, if not suspicious. |
Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.