Starting with Hegel

[@lupo-femme]

This video actually gives me the will to drown myself in Hegel's philosophy.

[@benjaminhoffman2424]

Man, you're killing it! Keep it up!

[@jeffheller642]

For me, Hegel hangs over the 19th century the way Freud (and for some Heidegger) does the 20th. But it may be that Hegel is the more essential therapeutic guide of our time. We need to return to him. This and the few other Hegel episodes I've listened to by Antonio are so lucid yet at the same time so welcoming and accessible, they each deserve at least 40k views.

[@emmanueloluga9770]

I'm sorry to exemplify something Hegel always commented on in observation, commendation, and criticism all in the same vein. However, here I go anyways. Taking a truly fanatical position here, Hegel in actuality hangs over the 19th century through today, the same way Aristotle hung over the atmosphere for 2000years after his death. Aristotle's oeuvre in the atmosphere has always just been more explicit and readily engaged in good faith. They both explicated a form of logic to view, observe, and engage all things (this is what I believe Antonio is referring to here when he states "Hegel's methodology"). The oeuvre of Hegel has not been fully embraced and let to permeate the air like Aristotle's was, and we are still paying for it to this day. We don't need to return to Hegel, because in actuality we never left, we just never fully explicitly embraced and engaged with him....for posterity, we could say we have failed in our attempt to be alienated from his method. His method is a form of reconciliation of shock and disappointment as one and the same. Hegel like many others before and after him realized the "modern's" tendency to turn to either absolute indifference (pure nihilism) or complete opposition (tyranny), due to the emergence of a new kind of thinking in the world as a result of scientific and socio-cultural paradigm shifts, all bolstered by the reformulation and realization of various representations and actualities of 'true freedom. It is on this point we observe the world's intentional (yet unconscious/unaware) attempt to be alienated from his method.

[@brandonmiles8174]

Best tips I've heard so far.

[@domwren]

I'm 50 years old, educated as a scientist and spent most of my working life in computer systems. I don't know why I have started this detour, this journey into different ways of thinking about the world. I know I only have limited free time, and Hegel is going to take much of it. I hope it's worth it.

[@AntonioWolfphilosophy]

You're not the only one. I believe I have a contact or two that are also computer scientists interested in Hegel, particularly the method. This black2.fri.uni-lj.si/humbug/files/doktorat-vaupotic/zotero/storage/ISCV4BPV/DavidLink_WhileTrue_EN.pdf may interest you. There is also the (I question it to be honest) link to programming as such with category theory. There seems to be a significant link to the theory of cybernetics with Gotthard Gunther's work, most not in English unfortunately. Whatever one does in life I think that working through Hegel is definitely worth it. It can undo one's world, but also rebuilds it on a foundation that is unshakeable yet amazingly maleable and inherently self-correcting and developing. Everything from theoretical, individual and socially practical, and personal changes are consequent for the project as a whole. If I can assist in any understanding, you can also ask me (preferably over email).

[@domwren]

@@AntonioWolfphilosophy Thank you for your message. Other things have been distracting me lately, but this gives me motivation to continue reading Hegel.

[@emmanueloluga9770]

@@domwren You would be pleased and do well to know quite a lot of computer scientists and the likes are really interested in Hegel and many times dispute with him as well. It probably has a lot to do with the kinds of abstractions that the domain requires itself

[@pietromoresco1988]

thank you for your videos, they are really helpful

[@dubbelkastrull]

10:50 book recommendations

[@aniketdeb5264]

What do you think of Terry Pinkard's work on Hegel?

[@EVGU96]

What do you think about Kojève's Introduction to the reading of Hegel which deals with Phenomenogy of Spirit?

[@Philopantheon82]

Eva, kojeve provides some good psychoanalytic perspectives on master slave dialectic, but eventually he goes on and on about that sounds more and more superfluous plus Kojeve announcing him(Hegel) as an atheist is not satisfying at all to someone who grasps Hegel by soul and heart.. all in all I(and indeed many great trustworthy Hegelian scholars) dont take everything Kojeve says for granted, why i say this? Well because kojeve sounds a bit overconfident about whatever he says about Hegel, also he is trying to direct Hegelian thoughts into Maexist and ultimate revolutionary path(something) the left Hegelian love tp hear.. those are not cups of tea for anyone who read him seriously

[@itsvoskalper3693]

Kojeve exposes his thinking there, not Hegel's ( even though he uses Hegel)

[@MrGi254]

Could someone link me the Richard Crowner paper, I hope i spelled that correctly :)

[@AntonioWolfphilosophy]

www.docdroid.net/Wmw7kOF/hegels-philosophical-development-kroner-richard-pdf

[@francispersona4186]

Mr. Wolf, I understand that you generally prefer to focus on reading primary texts if and when possible to best exercise the development of your thinking. I just wanted to know this; is it feasible for someone to read Kant's first Critique with cursory knowledge of the background of philosophy in the same way that one would be able to read Hegel just from the Science of Logic/ parts of the PhoS (and an overview )? As a beginner, I want to start my first "head on" experience of reading philosophy by reading Kant, since I was told that I myself was capable of doing so by a professor of philosophy who knows me well. However, I understand you to be a competent reader of philosophical texts based on your videos and blog posts on Hegel- thus I desire your input.

[@AntonioWolfphilosophy]

I haven't read Kant directly (read the Prolegomena, which I think is terrible to start with), and from what I hear the Critique is pretty thorough in itself without much appeal to others. As with Hegel, I think background simply expands our awareness of how far of a horizon moment these philosophies are in relation to what they are responding to, as well as deepening our appreciation of how thorough these responses really are and how much they take into consideration. I assume Kant is a bit difficult with his terminology, just as Hegel was, if one is not aware of his philosophical milieu such as the Leibniz/Wolff/Hume influence on Kant. Other than that... the little I know directly seems to definitely make it possible to read Kant alone if one is ready to grapple with the arguments. I'd also like to do this sometime, I just need to get through one Hegel book before I move on ha ha.

[@UnconsciousQualms]

to see my profile picture here is just straight up weird :/

[@francispersona4186]

Mr. Wolf, I remember that you mentioned in another video that the system of German Idealism is incomplete, and that no one has completed it yet. Out of sheer curiosity, what would it mean for the system to be complete?

[@AntonioWolfphilosophy]

Francis Persona It actually wouldn't mean much. The only significant thing would be that we have certified that we live in a most rational world, and we grasp its rationality. The best examples of incompleteness are the philosophy of Nature and the philosophy of Right, where we either lack real logical links or we lack logical concretion. The system is, for the most part, already generally complete. What is incomplete is the inner concretion which lags behind what we have come to discover today. This update is actually something that should be quite simple (though not easy) for anyone that has mastered the logical method and made the proper study of the system up to the necessary starting point.

[@freedomclub6969]

This video very much confuses me. Very Hegelian.

Hegel was an idealist. This is a school of philosophy which rejects the objective world as that which is primary, and places primacy on the mind. Totally absurd of course, and no real surprise that kids like this one speaking in this video follow him. He is loved by leftists, and pretentious cunts a like. People who like to spout nonsense like "Perception is reality." Students and so called intellectuals a like love this freaken guy. He's was a moron, who spoke in such a way that most lay people could not understand, which should tell you a bit right there, as anyone who understands what they're talking about should be able to explain things in terms everyone can understand. Not Hegel though. Oh no. He loved idealism, which is where you get even more God awful ideas like relativism, and solipsism, both hard and soft. That this kid likes this guy is no surprise. Probably a goofy student, or some "artist." Artists also love Hegel. They love to memorize his pontifications, and spout them off verbatim. Makes them think they sound smart, even as they say "nothing" original. Nothing that is their own. They simply think they understand "Hegelspeak," and that they sound so brilliant because they can speak, and understand this guys nonsense. Hegel is perhaps one of the worst philosophers who is lauded as one of the best. Idealism, relativism, solipsism, we have this cunt to thank to a large degree for such nonsense. See kiddo, this is how you get specific. Kid. You don't know anything about truth or finding truth. If you think that relativism, solipsism, and idealism are the way to go, and are actual paths to truth then you have a long, long way to go in your studies. Shame you study old books when you should be studying reality, and not through the lens of a camera either. Art is not a way to see or understand life. I would suggest you don't attack others in the future. You dopey kid. It might lead to something like this. Someone taking a look at your dopey monologues about this pretentious old fart who went on and on about things like "Spirit," and who in no small part influenced Marx, who himself was scum that can be blamed, at least in part for 100 million deaths due to his death cult ideology. Kid, you think because you know some history about philosophical figure, (something we actually don't know to be the case) and have memorized some lines from a book, and pretend to interpret them in your long dialogues that you're a philosopher? Yet, you can't form an argument, a rebuttal, and you can only perform acts of critical theory. No doubt your a Marxist, or an idealist, or both. Marxists are usually idealists as well. This fellow Hegel was evil. Kant was evil. Marx was evil. The ideas they pushed in the form of idealism, and relativism have led to horrible evil in the world. You fancy yourself a philosopher, but you know none of this. It's all intellectual masturbation to you, which is the only sex you're ever gonna get, I do not doubt. That said you're really just a modern day intellectual, and that's no compliment. Wake up, and get a clue. You are no philosopher. You're just a dogmatic parrot. Bye ;)

[@marekvodicka]

You obivously don't know what you're talking about. Politics-wise, from today's perspective, Hegel was a hardcore conservativist, so it's very unlikely that he would be liked by today's leftists. Hegel wasn't the "official Prussian state philosopher" for no reason. His idea of freedom, for example, was that it could only be fully realised in state, family and property, not the usual "I can do what I think I want" idea. Freedom for him basically was "pick a career, get married, and get a house and work and be decent citizen". As for epistemology, it's also very rash to automatically categorize him as an idealist (which, again, shows you don't know what you're talking about). One of his main goals was to somehow do away with the gap between us and the real world that Kant set up before him. Although I can't really speak much about his epistemology, as I've only read the Philosophy of Right so far, I think he had a unique epistemologic position, a mixture of idealism and empiricism/realism (possible knowledge of objects independent of us), similar to 20th century phenomenology which was heavily inspired by him.

[@Trotskisty]

@@marekvodicka: Marx (and Engels) got Hegel _exactly_ right, AFAIK. This kid indeed makes a whopper of an arrogant mistake in taking Marx to be a (failed) 'hegelian'. It is *precisely* Marx' throwing over of Hegel's 'materialist' Idealism -- by 'righting' Hegel's inverted materialism, heads up, and then applying the resulting dialectical-materialist method to an immanent critique of present-day capitalist society -- which not only made Marx famous for all time (for non-future-communist-society Humans, anyway); but has in fact provided a 'New & Improved' Method for all Humanity to aspire to mastery of. And of our [non-kantian] Universe, for that matter.

[@maybepriyansh9193]

too salty about someone you clearly dont understand a word of given the parts of your comment